studies of the Pueblo Escultor - San Agustin Statues - Estatuas de ...

PUEBLO ESCULTOR
Stone Statues from San Agustín and the Macizo
Colombiano
drawings and text by
Davíd Dellenback

inspiración--inspiration
"Sería bien interesante recoger y diseñar todas las piezas
que se hallan esparcidas en los alrededores de San Agustín.
Ellas nos harían conocer el punto a que llevaron la escultura
los habitantes de estas regiones, y nos manifestarían algunos
rasgos de su culto y de su policía."
["It would be very interesting to gather together and
illustrate all the statues that are found dispersed in the San
Agustín area. They would give us knowledge of the point to
which sculpture was developed by the inhabitants of these
regions, and would manifest some traces of their religion and of
their politics."]
––Francisco José de Caldas, "Estado de la Geografía del
Virreinato de Santa Fe de Bogotá" in Semanario del Nuevo Reino
de Granada, 1808.
*************************
"Ojalá que mi esploración...despierte la voluntad de
nuestros anticuarios i los determine a esculcar, auxiliados por
trabajadores, los rincones de aquel valle misterioso i las
ruinas que no me fue posible [destapar]. La arqueolojía i la
historia antigua de este país ganaría mucho en ello, porque en
mi concepto no tienen número las preciosidades que podrían
desenterrarse...i que juntas como las pájinas de un libro, ahora
desencuadernado, referirían hechos que los cronistas de la
conquista no pudieron ver o no supieron transmitir."
["I hope that my exploration awakens the will of our
students of ancient culture and stimulates them to search, with
the aid of local workers, the corners of that mysterious valley,
and the ruins which I was not able to uncover. The archaeology
and ancient history of this country would gain much by it,
because in my opinion there are innumerable objects of value and
beauty which could be unearthed and which, gathered together
like the pages of a book, as yet unbound, would tell us of
realities that the chroniclers of the conquest could not see or
did not know how to relate."]
––Agustín Codazzi, "Antiguedades Indíjenas––Ruinas de San
Agustín" in Jeografía Física y Política de los Estados Unidos de
Colombia (Volume II), p 92, by Dr. Felipe Pérez, 1857.

table of contents
Inspiration: Caldas and Codazzi…………………………………… 5
Introduction ………………………………………………………… 9
1. The Macizo Colombiano and the Pueblo Escultor………………. 15
2. Studies of the Pueblo Escultor…………………………………… 41
Santa Gertrudis; Caldas; de Rivero & von Tschudi; Codazzi; Stübel; André;
Chaffanjon; Gutiérrez de Alba; Cuervo Márquez; Stöpel; Preuss; Trujillo &
Montealegre; Lunardi; Wavrin; Walde-Waldegg; Hernández de Alba; Pérez
de Barradas; Silva Célis; Rivet; Duque Gómez; Reichel-Dolmatoff; Cháves &
Puerta; Llanos Vargas; Drennan.
3. The Pueblo Escultor and American Traditions………………….. 67
Introduction to this study; Introduction to our chosen image; Six doublings;
Cristóbal de Molina; Introduction to the survey; Olmec; Mesoamerica; Aztec;
Central America; Chavín; Titicaca Basin; Tiwanaku; Northern Perú.
4. Categories………………………………………………………... 137
One: The Serpent; Two: Woman; Three: Male Signs; Four: Sacrifice Figures;
Five: Doble Yo; Six: The Feline; Seven: Cayman/Rana/Lagarto; Eight: Bird
Figures; Nine: Other Animals; Ten: Coqueros; Eleven: Masked Figures;
Twelve: Lengua/Cinta/Cabeza; Thirteen: Other Implements in Hands;
Fourteen: Death Posture; Fifteen: Several Other Categories; followed by Lists of
Categories.
5. The Creation of This Catalogue………………………………….. 237
6. Footnotes to Text…………………………………………………. 251
7. Bibliographies…………………………………………………….. 257
Key Bibliography; General Bibliography; Tierradentro Area Bibliography;
Other Pueblo Escultor Areas Bibliography; French Bibliography; German
Bibliography; English Bibliography.

drawing by Henk van der Eerden 1978

INTRODUCTION
This is the book of the Pueblo Escultor; the name (which is spanish for ‘The
Sculpting People’ or ‘The Sculptors’) refers to the Statue-Makers who many
centuries ago inhabited the flanks and valleys of the Macizo Colombiano, the great
massif or mountainous knot in the southwest of what is now Colombia, and buried
their monoliths in subterranean tomb-complexes. The statue-makers of the Pueblo
Escultor were the authors of the greatest and most extensive library of stone
images ever created in precolumbian America, and the book before you represents
the presentation, the revelation, of the imagery of this fabulous stone library.
So, to delve into the heart of this study, turn to the pages of images, the
drawings of the stone statues of the Pueblo Escultor. Make of them what you will.
The rest of the information in this book is subsidiary and concomitant; perusal of
the drawings and meditation on these ancient images will facilitate a glimpse into a
vanished (and yet not completely dispelled) realm essentially forgotten by today’s
modern world, and basically unknown even to most experts in the field of
precolumbian archaeology.
The name ‘Pueblo Escultor’ will fail to ring a bell with the great majority of
readers and students, some of whom at least will associate the label ‘San Agustín’
with the statues and images here displayed. But this latter appellation is
misconceived for two principal reasons. First: while it is true that the valley
surrounding the town of San Agustín is home to a great number of statues—more
than ⅔ of the total considered in this survey were found in the San Agustín area—
nonetheless, the considerable remainder were elaborated and buried elsewhere in
the lands of the Macizo Colombiano. Important nuclei of statues such as
Tierradentro, Moscopan, Platavieja and others are located far from San Agustín,
and yet clearly and unmistakably—in style, in substance, and in spirit—represent
the world of the Pueblo Escultor.
And second, it is reasonable—and accords with the method ruling the
application of nomenclature to archaeological sites and cultures—that the names of
living, present-day towns and peoples are not to be given to archaeological vestiges
and locations. In other words, the ‘culture of San Agustín’ is not a historical relic
that once existed in the past, but rather the living entity that inhabits the valley of
San Agustín today, and is comprised of campesinos, coffee farmers, shopkeepers,
dayworkers, auto mechanics, city employees, housewives, schoolchildren and
teachers, dentists and doctors, soccer players, huaqueros, expatriate foreigners,
and so on. The ancient culture, on the other hand, the makers of the statues, the
authors of the earthworks and tomb-structures and ceramics and other vestiges that
we can still perceive today, who lived and wrought in this and other Macizo

valleys many centuries before the establishment of the town of San Agustín—these
ancient statue-makers must have their own handle. I call them the Pueblo Escultor.
And I am not alone in so doing, nor did this name originate with my studies.
Carlos Cuervo Márquez, the first colombian to publish a detailed description of
these antiquities, coined the term ‘Pueblo Escultor’ to refer to the statue-makers in
1892, and K. Th. Preuss, the eminent german archaeologist who first brought these
tremendous monoliths to the wider world’s notice, used the name in his classic
1929 volume whose title translates as Prehistoric Monumental Art (later published
in spanish, but never in english). Given that Agustín Codazzi’s groundbreaking
study was the only published monograph preceding Cuervo Márquez to deal with
these statues in any detail, it is fair to say that our title has been in the literature
virtually since the beginning of our awareness of these people and their art.
Pueblo Escultor it is, then.
As I say, look first, and principally, at the drawings of the monoliths. This
book is above all a catalogue, as complete as possible, of the Pueblo Escultor
statues. Secondly, be aware that each statue is accompanied by a ‘card,’ which is a
page of basic data; the ‘card number’ referenced is printed at the foot of each
drawing. By referring to the given card, the reader will add, to the visual image,
associated knowledge: dimensions, original location, present location (though it’s
been 15 years and more since that “present”), bibliographical trail, a brief
descriptive title. And in a more subjective manner, the card also lists the
categories (examined in chapter four) into which the particular statue falls, and the
specific analogs to the given statue: the other images which may be fruitfully
compared and associated. The observer unfamiliar with the Pueblo Escultor who
makes use of this ‘category’ and ‘analog’ information will hopefully find it useful
in providing a general orientation and method of study.
This project was carried out some significant time ago, and the term ‘cards’
is a nostalgic nod to an anachronistic method—but one that, nonetheless, teaches a
good bit, however tedious and repetitive the act of writing and erasing and then
reflecting and rewriting on a little paper card may be—in the same way that
drawing a picture rather than snapping a photo may not always produce a superior
image on paper, but it will surely do so in the mind, and one that may be richer and
deeper in experience, too.
To turn, now, to a glance at the text of this book: the first chapter begins
with an attempt to place the Pueblo Escultor within a description of their natural
environment, that of the Macizo Colombiano and the reaches of the andean
cordilleras that surround the Macizo. With this vision in place, there follows a
detailing of the different nuclei or site-areas of the Pueblo Escultor within that
world, the emerald, tropical, many-rivered world of the Macizo. The reader will

find, at the end of this section, the assertion that “The statues may have been
created over a period of up to, or even more than, one thousand years.” Take this
statement, please, as an admission of what will not be found in this book.
What will not be found here—what would indeed be appropriate at this
point—is a wide-ranging, learned discourse on this archaeological entity, the
Pueblo Escultor, authored by a well-trained and very acute professional
archaeologist, who would be able to dig into the documented remains of the
ancient statue-makers and artfully present them for us against a background of
mastery of the context, the precolumbian world. Believe me, I would love to read
such a study myself; it is sadly lacking. The fact that it simply doesn’t exist stands
as one of the major prompts which led me into the labyrinth of my own studies, a
maze that I hope now to be exiting with the presentation of this effort. But the fact
remains, that I am not that person; no resumo los requisitos, as the phrase runs in
spanish. I am not the master of that knowledge. My life in Colombia and in the
Macizo Colombiano has led me to conclude that a lifetime is remarkably short, that
one can spend the years and enmesh oneself in the web that leads to graduate
degrees and professional attributes and knowledge (assuming one has the skills to
do so), or one can live and breathe, and laugh and curse, the life of an adopted
culture, and make it full-time one’s own; but it is little likely that one will do both.
The published literature on the Pueblo Escultor (by whatever name) simply
isn’t satisfying enough or up-to-date, at this point. The classic work—that of
Preuss—dates, unfortunately, from 1929, and its author saw less than one-fourth of
the lithic statues available in the present survey. In addition, while Preuss gives us
much raw data that remains valuable, his context and his analysis are somewhat
laughable, and not of much use, and in addition, the book never appeared in
english. The two major ‘modern’ works both date from the 1960’s, and thus are
nearing the half-century mark in age without having been notably bettered by any
other updated publication. One is by Duque Gómez, who was virtually an
archaeological caudillo in Colombia, and remains an icon to today’s colombian
elite in his field, but frankly, his research, while again proportioning reams of
useful raw data, is confusing and mostly useless (and in addition, of course, quite
unavailable in spanish, and nonexistent in english). The best book in the field,
then, is Reichel-Dolmatoff’s San Agustín: A Culture of Colombia, published in
1966, in english; the reader who seeks the best archaeological study of the Pueblo
Escultor must still search out this excellent, if outdated, volume.
Chapter one closes with a brief glimpse of the lands of the Pueblo Escultor
after their demise, between their disappearance and the 16 th -century european
invasion of America. The second chapter presents a history of the study of the
Pueblo Escultor, from the first mention of the antiquities in print, penned by the
wandering franciscan friar Juan de Santa Gertrudis in 1757, up through the
publications of the 1980’s. The quina boom of the late 19 th century, we will see,

provided the trigger that led to the unearthing of the flood of monoliths we are now
able to observe and analyze. The contributions of such authors as Codazzi, Cuervo
Márquez, Preuss, Pérez de Barradas, Hernández de Alba, Duque Gómez and
Reichel Dolmatoff are covered, as well as those of many other students.
This chapter attempts to throw light on the process that led to the progressive
discovery of all of the different Pueblo Escultor statue-nuclei, and not just the
statues near the town of San Agustín; and on the developments that saw the
marvelous statue complexes in Tierradentro, Platavieja, Moscopan, Aguabonita,
Saladoblanco, Nariño and Popayán progressively marginalized and ignored, while
the focus intensified on the San Agustín monoliths. The present catalogue of
Pueblo Escultor images is an attempt to redress that skewed balance.
With chapter three, we dig in to my own analyses of the statues that I have
studied for so many years. The background is the entire tableaux of the creation of
lithic sculpture in precolumbian America—in Mesoamerica, in the Andes, and in
the intermediate zone between them, which includes the Macizo Colombiano—and
against this tapestry I attempt to point the way to valid comparisons, in style, in
substance and in function, that allow us to glimpse the meanings behind the wealth
of iconography that teems in this remarkable statuary. The alphabet of this
incredible stone library, the language of its revelations, has been only imperfectly
approached up until now, its depths only very casually plumbed; and since the
curtain came down on our protagonists, the makers of the statues, five centuries
before the coming of the european invasion, an understanding of this iconography
depends to a large degree on a grasp of the background context. Hopefully this
look at the possible relationships between these Macizo statues and the stonecarvings
created elsewhere across the breadth of the american continent throughout
the sweep of the history of high culture will aid in the decipherment of this
passionate communication from the ancient past.
In chapter four, I attempt to group the different statues in categories that
allow us to try and take them in and penetrate them. Hopefully, a consideration of
my category groupings will assist future students in arranging their own ways of
comparing and contrasting the statues. The point is, there are more than 460
images at play here, which translates into a huge, confusing welter for any
observer, especially the principiante. Some method of classification and
codification is necessary for considered observation not to become a blur.
I have attempted to approach this task as rigidly and mathematically as
possible. It is fine to note that there are many serpents portrayed in the stones of
the Pueblo Escultor; but are there, really? How many is many? Can we be sure we
are seeing serpents, or is the identification merely apparent, or likely? And in what
contexts do we see them? Do they always appear in the same context, alongside
the same companion symbols? Do we see more, or less, birds in the lithic

imagery? In what contexts? Felines? Monkeys? Frogs? After we have asked and
answered some of these questions, we may be able to put ourselves in the position
of asking the deeper questions: What are we being told here? Why do we think
so? How sure can we be?
How many of the statues are anthropomorphic? Can we tell which are
female and which male? How many represent each gender, and why can we feel
confident in saying so? In what contexts do we find male and female? What
iconography accompanies each? [We will learn that, surprisingly, there are
virtually no stone images of females in all the rest of South America, and that the
tremendous set of stone females created by the Pueblo Escultor stands as one of its
most striking and important features.] The question of items held in the hands of
human-shaped personages will take on great importance in our attempt to group
and analyze the statues. What do they hold? What is the meaning? How sure can
we be?
The important series of coca-chewers with their coca appurtenances are a
vivid and peerless glance at the great, timeless sacrament of andean
spirituality………and there are figures holding what appear to be
weapons……..the little childlike ‘horned’ figures held in the hands of
adults……..the ‘staff-and-mask’ figures who hide their true faces behind
masks……..the famed ‘Doble-Yo’ or ‘Double-I’ figure, long considered iconic of
the Pueblo Escultor people………the ‘lodges’ that appear to represent
buildings………the ‘feline procreator’ and his human female partner…………. the
bird grasping a serpent in its talons and beak……….the mysterious figure that
holds its own protruding tongue, which in turn seems to transform into something
else……..
The images are legion. Some method of analysis is necessary to even begin
to make any sense of this great stone library. The systematic groupings in chapter
four, when used in concert with the information ‘cards’ and while searching the
images, may prove to be of great value. There is, in addition, at the end of the text
chapters, an extensive bibliography; when I finished compiling it, I would have
considered it definitive. Almost two decades have passed since that date, however,
so it is could no longer be called so; for the time period it covers, however, it is
certainly close to complete. Appended sections fine-tune the bibliography, too,
into french, german and english sources, and listings detailing sources for the
Pueblo Escultor sites not found in the valley of San Agustín.
Davíd Dellenback
April, 2008

the macizo colombiano
In order to focus our attention on the Pueblo Escultor, the
Statue-Making People who were the creators and sculptors of the
vast tableaux of stone statues that form the axis of the present
study, we must look closely at the world in which they were
born. It is the world of the Macizo Colombiano—the Colombian
Massif—the great mountainous knot in the southernmost reaches of
the colombian Andes, not far from Colombia’s border with
Ecuador. Today, the states (or departamentos) of Huila, Cauca
and Nariño divide, on paper, the unity of the Macizo. With or
without an overlay of theoretical divisions, however, the Macizo
sits astride the vast mountainous spine of the southern
continent like a huge knot in the warp of the andean system, and
is called, because of this, the ‘Nudo Andino,’ or Andean Knot.
It is a defining point of articulation between two very
different worlds.
To the south is the land of Tahuantinsuyu, the ‘Four
Quarters’ into which the Incas (and doubtlessly other, earlier
rulers/patrones) would conceptually divide their world, and
which ended where the southern reaches of the Macizo began. It
is the northernmost sector of what we today call the Central
Andes, in which the massive range has a unitary aspect, with few
wide lowland valleys to divide it into separate cordilleras,
running southward through Ecuador and Perú, toward Bolivia and
the altiplano. The Macizo Colombiano (and lands northward) lay
outside of the borders of the ‘Four Quarters.’
The Andes to the north of the Macizo are distinct from
the mountains to the south in the sense that northward the
andean chain breaks up into three separate cordilleras which no

longer form one cohesive barrier, but rather fragment a much
broader area of mountains into innumerable different micro-
systems, countless valleys and slopes and plains, river-valley
deserts and tropical jungles and high-mountain páramos. The
mountain systems in Colombia are lower than those to the south,
and in addition the Northern Andes are fully within the tropical
zone, so that the nature of these mountains is florescent and
green, with only isolated instances of extremely high snow-
covered ridges and peaks. These colombian Andes “…unfold like a
splendid multicolored fan, spreading out its mountains and
valleys from the evergreen tropics to the bleak and cold
highlands, from arid, wind-blown deserts to the lush, temperate
slopes of the subtropical zone.” 1
The Macizo Colombiano, which conjoins the Northern and
Central Andes, also forms the point of union, the zone in which
the three separate cordilleras, running nearly parallel to each
other north-south the length of the Colombia, converge to form
the great mountain knot. These tripartite Andes (known as the
Cordillera Occidental, the Cordillera Central and the Cordillera
Oriental) gave birth to the many and variegated andean worlds
whose extreme physical diversity would be reflected in the
diverse precolombian peoples of Colombia. The Andes here are
flanked on both sides by tropical lowlands. On the west are the
low, impenetrable jungles of the Pacific coast. To the east of
the Cordillera Oriental lie the plains of the Orinoco
headwaters, known to colombians today as the llanos, and further
south the beginnings of the Amazon basin in the form of the
headwaters of the Caquetá and Putumayo Rivers. Within this
tropical frame, the three cordilleras of the andean world are
divided by two extremely long river valleys, those of the Cauca

and the Magdalena, which take their waters south-to-north the
length of the country.
The life of the Macizo, whose numerous high places are over
4000 meters in altitude, is determined by its equatorial
position, less than two degrees north of the equator. Altitudes
this extreme in the peruvian cordillera might commonly be snow-
covered, while ranges of even half that height in the north of
the North American continent are often wild, snow-blown and
uninhabited. In the south of Colombia, though, given this
proximity to the equatorial line, the situation is different,
and the majority of the Macizo receives snow, if at all, only
briefly during periods of storm. A number of great volcanic
cones in the area, raised up above the surrounding heights of
the cordillera, are snow-covered peaks, such as the Puracé
Volcano, just where the Cordillera Central is subsumed into the
Macizo. But the greater part of the highest land in the Macizo
conforms features known as páramos: exceedingly cold and wet
wildernesses at extremely high altitudes which are at the same
time bleak, in that they are solitary, forbidding and often
shrouded in mist, and yet luxuriant, covered with a flourishing
and uniquely strange vegetation particular to these islands of
relatively flat, very high land.
A string of such páramos is situated in the heights of the
Andean Knot and along the apices of the different cordilleras
which extend northward from this point of junction. Colombia’s
latitude is such that there are many separate páramos in the
country, and more than 20 examples of this peculiar high
ecosystem in the southwest of Colombia alone; often they form
solitary islands set among higher mountains and lower habitable
zones, while other páramos border on each other and form long

stretches of interlocked and adjacent wilderness. Near the
convergence of the Cordillera Central and the mass of the Macizo
are located the Páramo de las Papas, the Páramo del Letrero, the
Páramo de Cutanga and the Páramo de la Soledad, forming nearly a
contiguous chain; along with the Páramo de Coconuco and the
Páramo de las Delicias not far away to the north-east, they echo
the present-day border between the departamentos of Huila and
Cauca.
All páramos are extremely wet, and being at the tops of the
cordilleras, function naturally as sources of water. But the
páramos near this Macizo junction are such extraordinary water
sources that there can be few places on the planet where such a
fantastic volume of water is born in such a limited space of
land. Colombia’s longest and principal river, the Magdalena,
begins on the northern edge of the Macizo, issuing forth from
two small lakes named La Magdalena and Santiago, first running
west precipitously down the Macizo slopes to the valley or
meseta of San Agustín—by which time it is a thundering and
dangerous wild-mountain river carrying a great volume of water—
and then continuing on west to near the town of Pitalito where,
having left the cordillera behind and entered the broad central
valley, the Magdalena curves to the north and begins its
successively hotter and more leisurely course to the distant
Caribbean, some 1800 kilometers away.
The San Agustín native and scholar Don Tiberio López,
writing, as he tells us, “…because I know these places inch by
inch…” 2 goes on to describe the birth of Colombia’s other great
rivers on the páramos of the Macizo: only two kilometers to the
south-east of the Magdalena’s birthplace, five small lakes join
their waters to give birth to the Caquetá River. This major

affluent of the Amazon bursts forth from the earth and flows
south off the slopes of the Macizo before eventually curving to
the east and continuing on to traverse the entire breadth of
Colombia, then entering Brazil, and flowing eastward through
South America’s vast lowland basin. When it finally enters the
Amazon River, it has covered more than 1800 kilometers in its
course from its birthplace on the Macizo Colombiano.
Only five kilometers from the birthplace of the Magdalena a
small river, the Pancitará, is born, and mingling its waters
with a series of other small rivers flowing off the western
slopes of this same chain of páramos gives birth to the Patía
River which, running west and then south, passes through the
states of Cauca and Nariño, and on to the Pacific Ocean, having
journeyed some 400 kilometers. So we see that these three
rivers, born with a handful of kilometers of each other, flow in
three separate directions, the Magdalena north to the Caribbean,
the Caquetá east to joint the Amazon from whence on to the
Atlantic, and the Patía west to the Pacific.
And only some 75 kilometers to the north a fourth major
river, the Cauca, is born on the Páramo del Buey, on the upper
slopes of the Puracé Volcano near the Huila-Cauca border. This
river runs off the flanks of the Cordillera Central toward the
north-east, and then assumes the northbound course it will
maintain for 1000 kilometers before joining its waters with the
Caribbean-bound Magdalena. These two rivers, forming one river-
system, constitute the single major watercourse in the country.
The Macizo Colombiano is the hub and central spoke of this
web of rivers which spirals outward immense distances toward the
eastern, northern and western quarters, and the consequences of
this web in terms of interregional and inter-pueblo

communication must always have been very important: the river-
valleys were in a sense a series of highways leading outward
from the massif and its peoples. And the rivers were only the
beginning, as we can appreciate from an attentive reading of
pertinent early documents which speak of ancient roads re-opened
in post-conquest times. In other sections of the Andes the
cordillera may have been an effective barrier to travel and
communication; in the case of Colombia’s Macizo, the opposite
was true. In precolumbian times the páramos that ring and crown
the Macizo functioned as crossroads, as the pathways of
communication. Precisely because they are not snowbound wastes,
but rather are relatively flat plains whose low, stunted
vegetation in these equatorial latitudes, however wild and lush,
approaches open land, the páramos have been not the home, but
rather the highway, for innumerable prehistoric peoples.
“Today the Massif is a wild, solitary mountain country,
remote and inhospitable, sparsely inhabited…..But it was not so
in ancient times. Long before the arrival of the spaniards,
generations of aboriginal peoples had occupied these mountain-
folds…..” i writes Reichel-Dolmatoff. The road which from San
Agustín ascends the uppermost courses of the Magdalena River
through the village of Quinchana and on up to the river’s
birthplace lakes was certainly an important one in ancient
times; the descent from the Páramo de las Papas, down the far
(eastern) side, brings today’s traveler to the town of Valencia
and then on down to the city of Popayán, capital of the
departamento of Cauca. Once up on the páramo, however, the
traveler is in a position to descend the Cauca side not only
toward the northwest and Popayán, but as well toward the
southwest, across the Páramo del Letrero and then down to the

town of Almaguer, there joining the road heading south to Pasto,
capital of the state of Nariño, which puts one on the high road—
both in ancient times, and on today’s Panamerican Highway—to the
south, towards Ecuador.
Leaving the meseta of San Agustín not in ascent toward the
páramo upriver to the west, but rather downriver into the valley
and then on towards the southeast, the traveler leaving the
Macizo will find the lowest pass in the eastern cordillera
leading across to Mocoa and the headwaters of the Putumayo and
Caquetá Rivers. The Franciscan friar who gives us our first
historical glimpse of the stone statues of the Pueblo Escultor,
in 1756, reached San Agustín by this road, up from the Putumayo
lowlands.
There is, in addition, another way to cross the Macizo
between San Agustín on the eastern slopes of the Cordillera
Central and Popayán in Cauca, by a road certainly in use since
pre-columbian times, whose terminus lies close to San Agustín,
on the northern side of the Magdalena River in the municipality
of San José de Isnos. This road leaves Popayán up across the
southwestern flanks of the Puracé Volcano, crosses near the
Páramo del Buey, and descends the deep cleft of the Mazamorras
River down into San José. The first spanish conquistador to
enter Colombia from the south, Sebastián de Belalcázar, probably
made use of this road in 1538, and the men riding in his
vanguard became the first europeans to travel through the valley
of San Agustín, and the first to cross the Macizo and the lands
of the Pueblo Escultor.
The area of the Macizo Colombiano is today shared by three
different states or departamentos. That of Huila composes the
northeastern side of the Macizo, and includes the principal and

est-known sites of the Pueblo Escultor near the town of San
Agustín, up on the eastern flank the mountainous Knot. The
northwestern and western sides of the Macizo form part of the
state of Cauca, and this state as well runs across the top of
the massif and down the eastern side, so that the southeastern
section of the Andean Knot is also in the state of Cauca. The
southern and southwest slopes of the Macizo are included within
the boundaries of the state of Nariño, whose southern edge runs
along the border with the nation of Ecuador. Evidence of
enclaves and vestiges of the ancient Sculpting People are found
in all three states.
The Cordillera Central at its southern extremity, before
joining the Macizo, forms the irregular border between Huila and
Cauca with its chain of water-soaked páramos. If we except the
statues from a handful of very little-known sites south of the
Macizo in the state of Nariño, and those from the few sites we
know in the Popayán area to the west of the Macizo in Cauca
state—and these two statue-areas are certainly those which most
diverge stylistically from what we might call the ‘norm’—we
could then say that all of the presently-known sites of the
Pueblo Escultor are found in this area comprising the two sides
of the Cordillera Central as it approaches and joins the Macizo.
The different Pueblo Escultor nuclei, though widely
separated in distance among the folds of the Macizo, are all
much alike in terms of environment, and this similarity—the fact
that these different statue-making peoples lived in such
strikingly similar locations—helps us to see them, in a certain
way, as a unit. The ‘alternative’ areas—as opposed to the
valley of San Agustín—may have been colonies of the center, or
unrelated co-religionists, or blood-related groups, or unrelated

political allies, or something quite different from all of the
above. But all of the Pueblo Escultor centers are found in the
zone between 1500 and 2000 meters in altitude above sea level,
with temperature in the 18-to-20 degree centigrade range; the
rainfall is “abundant but intermittent,” there is a wealth of
creeks, rivers and water in general, and the clothing of the
land is verdant and vibrant. The soil is fertile though perhaps
not exceptional: the black cap of humus above sterile red clay
is usually less than 50 cm. deep, but combined with the
otherwise positive environmental factors and the warm and
moderate equatorial climate, the land produces thick tropical
vegetation.
Another characteristic which unites the different Pueblo
Escultor zones, and which helps to explain why these lands would
have been settled and populated, is this: these middle-altitude
zones are all very close to, and have easy access to, both the
higher-altitude areas toward the páramos, and the lower, hotter
regions downriver in the valleys. This easy access to vertical
cultivation and vertical exploitation must have been a great
factor in the lives of the ancient people and their economy, in
many ways: different foodstuffs and other materials, different
types of wood, fish, fruits, medicinal plants, different
elements to work and construct and make tools with, and so on,
are found in each altitude zone, and many of those up above and
down below are not produced in the central-altitude zone. In
addition, simply as example, the pineapples from the hot lower
valleys are different in quality from those in the mid-levels,
the cane and wood used to build with or the thatch to roof with
will always differ in use depending on the production-zone, the
honey from each zone will differ because the wild-flowers will

e distinct, and so on, and these types of values will always be
factors in the use that people have for their products.
With few exceptions the statues and other material vestiges
of the ancient sculptors are only found in these analogous
pockets in the mountains, with altitudes and landforms and
environmental conditions that vary but little. When one is in
the statue-areas, this fact can be surprising, because the other
altitude zones are so close. Both the upper zones, and the
regions down-river below, are often but a few hours walk away,
and visible, and yet in those other altitude-zones there is no
evidence of the villages, statues, ceramics, tombs and
earthworks of the ancient stone-sculpting people.
the Pueblo Escultor
The first-known and principal sites of the Pueblo Escultor,
ranged about the town of San Agustín, are located in an isolated
valley near the headwaters of the Magdalena River on the eastern
side of the Cordillera Central. San Agustín’s valley is unique
among the mid-level zones inhabited by the ancient sculptors in
the sense that it is very large, some 1300 square kilometers in
size—the other statue-areas are relatively small pockets of
valley—and thus allowed for the development of a much larger
center than would or could develop elsewhere. As the Magdalena
rushes from the páramo down the steep mountain heights heading
east, it comes quite suddenly to this plateau-like meseta or
valley, 1700-to-1800 meters above sea level, triangular in
shape, and while not flat, yet less precipitous than in the
upper course of the river. San Agustín’s valley, embracing all

the main statue sites, is an intermediate step in the river’s
descent to the main valley floor, and just as it arrives
coursing off the Macizo slopes to the valley of the statues, so
at the western edge of the irregular triangle the river once
again drops off steeply and wildly, and continues westward
toward the valley below. The meseta is cut in half by the deep
canyon of the turbulent river rushing from northwest to
southeast, with the town of San Agustín on the southwest side
and the town of San José de Isnos on the northeast.
A handful of numbers will help us appreciate the extent to
which the lithic works in the San Agustín statue-area
predominate in the study of the monuments of the Pueblo
Escultor. The present survey includes some 460 total statues
from all the statue-areas. About 310 of these are from the
valley of San Agustín, which makes for some 67% or 2/3 of the
total. However, as mentioned, the statues from the Nariño zone
and the Popayán zone can be grouped as often rougher and/or less
nuanced than the others, and these two areas are in addition the
two most distant statue-areas from the ‘core’ valley. If we
take away the 31 pieces in the present study which were found in
those two areas—and such a judgment may well be a valid one—we
then have a total of some 310 San Agustín-area statues out of a
total of 426, and the percentage in the core area then jumps to
73%, very close to ¾ of the total. These stone sculptures in
the valley of San Agustín have been found in perhaps 50 separate
sites—without mentioning the innumerable tomb-sites and other
ancient vestiges which did not produce statues—and are located
on both sides of the Magdalena river, in the lands of both
municipalities.

Past the northern edge of the San Agustín zone another
river, the Bordones, flows down from the cordillera heights,
eventually to join the Magdalena. Before this union, the
Bordones is augmented by the waters of the Granates River at an
altitude commensurate with those of the various other Pueblo
Escultor areas. Near the banks of the Granates is the statue
site called Morelia, which is also known as Saladoblanco,
although this latter name more correctly is that of the small
town nearby, some 10 kilometers to the southeast of the statue
site and north of the Bordones, nearer to the Magdalena. At
least one other statue site is known nearby; the Saladoblanco
area is about 25 kilometers to the northeast of San Agustín.
Some 7 statues in the present survey were discovered in this
zone.
A number of Pueblo Escultor centers are located further
north, in the foothills of the eastern slopes of the Cordillera
Central; the waters of these sites all flow down to join the
Magdalena. Two river-systems in particular are key. One is
that of the La Plata River which is born from the conjunction of
a number of upper-course rivers descending from the slopes of
the Puracé Volcano, atop the cordillera and astride the Huila-
Cauca border. The La Plata River valley contains several
important sites of the Pueblo Escultor, located some 50 or 60
kilometers from San Agustín toward the north and northeast. The
Páez River, flowing south off the slopes of the Páramo de Santo
Domingo on the western edge of the Nevado (or Snow-Peak) del
Huila, turns eastward and then meets the La Plata River very
near the town of La Plata; the united river, carrying the name
of Páez, then continues toward the east and eventually issues
into the Magdalena in the main valley below. In the valley of

the Páez, too, statues and other traces of the Pueblo Escultor
are evident in quantity.
The La Plata valley sites of the Pueblo Escultor have yet
to be adequately studied, but at least three important statue
areas have been identified. The westernmost of the three, known
as Moscopán, includes a number of different sites on the banks
of the Bedón or Aguacatal River as it descends toward the La
Plata. This series of sites is relatively close to the present-
day town of Santa Leticia, and while the town is in a slightly
higher zone, closer to the conditions of the páramo, the various
statue-sites are well below the town, down under the canyon
walls and located in small vegas or pockets by the shores of the
dark, wildly rushing river, where ecological and climatological
conditions are closer to those in the other statue areas. At
least 25 statues have been reported from the Moscopán sites, of
which 20 were available for inclusion in the present survey.
Not far to the north of Moscopán and still on the western
or cordillera side of the La Plata River is another nucleus of
the Pueblo Escultor, located on the banks of the Moscopán River
before its union with the La Plata. In 1918 this site, known as
Aguabonita, became the first ‘alternative’ statue-area—that is,
outside of the San Agustín valley—to be detailed in print; since
that time, however, very little investigative work has been
carried out, and virtually nothing published on this ancient
site. There are only four statues to be seen at Aguabonita, but
in addition to the obvious similarities in style and iconography
that link these statues to the other Pueblo Escultor work, the
location once again shares altitude and environmental conditions
with the other statue areas.

The third statue nucleus in the La Plata valley, named
Platavieja and located in the vicinity of the town of La
Argentina, Huila, is on the eastern side of the river—still
known there as the Loro, but very soon to become the La Plata—
and slightly to the south of the Moscopán and Aguabonita areas.
Platavieja lies some 40 kilometers or so northeast of San
Agustín, which puts it only some 20 kilometers or so north of
Saladoblanco and Oporapa (a nearby petroglyph site), separated
from these two centers of lithic sculpture by a single narrow
branch running off the main cordillera, known as the Cuchilla de
las Minas. Platavieja, so-named because it was the original
seat in the 1600’s of the town of La Plata, was in a position
for easy communication both with Moscopán area not far away to
the northwest and with the Saladoblanco area (en route to San
Agustín’s valley) over this single, thickly jungle-covered range
to the south. Some 20 statues may be seen today in the
Platavieja region, in addition to a good number of petroglyph
designs carved on large live-rock boulders.
The other important river in this part of the Pueblo
Escultor region, the Páez, rolls down from the slopes of the
Nevado del Huila and continues on north-to-south, traversing
nearly the entire territory of the Páez Indians before joining
waters with the La Plata River not far from its eventual
juncture with the Madgalena. Within the extensive Páez lands a
good number of sites—probably at least a score—have produced
statues and other remains of the Pueblo Escultor, the principal
such group of sites near the Páez Indian aldea (or village) of
San Andrés de Pisimbalá having taken to itself the name of
Tierradentro. Almost 80 statues from Tierradentro have, over
the years, been published, and 67 of them appear in this survey;

the area is some 80 kilometers from San Agustín toward the
northeast.
Many of the total of Tierradentro statues were found in a
series of sites near the aldea of San Andrés, but in addition
another set of cultural remains, consisting of painted dome-
shaped subterranean tombs supported by square pillars and cut
down into the solid rock, are to be seen in the same small
valley, and in fact have proven to be of greater interest, both
to visitors and to students, than the Tierradentro statues and
their makers. These tombs—called hipogeos—were apparently
created by a people who came some time after the statue-makers,
although certain iconographical and other types of relationships
will have to be more carefully studied, and eventually may bring
new revelations. As well, the question of relationship and
descent in the vector ‘Pueblo Escultor--makers of hipogeos-—
present-day Páez Indians’ has yet to be fully addressed.
The last two statue-area included in this study are those
of Popayán northwest of the Macizo between the Cordilleras
Central and Occidental and pertaining to the state of Cauca, and
those of the state of Nariño to the south. The case for
including these two groups of sculptures in our denominated
Pueblo Escultor—a speculative grouping, in some ways—is weaker
than in the cases of all the other statue-areas just detailed.
Little study has been afforded these ‘marginal’ groups of
statues, and the numbers are in any case fairly limited: 17
pieces from Popayán and 14 from Nariño will be found in this
survey. And the statues are rougher and simpler, in the latter
case, and less nuanced and often damaged, if not disappeared, in
both cases. Nonetheless, they seem to me to be of interest, and
display sufficient diagnostic connections to make their

inclusion worthwhile. Both statue areas are about 100
kilometers distant from San Agustín, in the case of the Cauca
stones toward the northwest and in that of Nariño, to the
southwest.
There is much reason to believe that the most
congenial and useful parts of the Macizo Colombiano were
utilized and inhabited by human groups from a very early period,
that the Pueblo Escultor enclaves were active and flourishing
early on in the pre-classic epoch, and that these enclaves
experienced a remarkably long-lasting continuity of culture and
tradition which may have endured for two thousand years, or even
more. For the first of these assertions—if we are not already
convinced by the well-documented evidence of human groups in
many places along the andean cordilleras for many thousands of
years before the present era, and the appealing living
conditions of these middle-range altitudes of the Macizo
Colombiano—we have a C-14 date of 3300 B.C., the initial date of
the San Agustín sequence, and referent not to sedentary
sculptors and agriculturalists but more likely to small nomadic
groups searching out their needed resources.
The second point, that the Pueblo Escultor were
established in their lands and were creating their art from
early pre-classic times, is generally accepted today—the first
C-14 date from this sequence, 555 B.C., was taken from the
shards of a wooden sarcophagus found in the central tomb areas
of San Agustín’s Parque Arqueológico--and is supported as well
by a careful study of this catalogue whose drawings, I believe,
can be used to illustrate the development from roots both of the
Olmec and Mesoamerica to the north, and of Chavín de Huántar and
its sequels to the south. And the suggestion that we view the

Pueblo Escultor as remarkably undisturbed in their dominion over
their lands and their cultural and artistic continuity is made
by most modern students in the field; the statues may have been
created over a period of up to, or even more than, one thousand
years.
post-Pueblo Escultor
It may not be simply historical chance, then, that the
Incas in the path of their wars of conquest to the north, came
just to the Ancasmayo River in the land of the Quillasingas,
near Pasto in southern Colombia, which is to say just as far as
the southernmost reaches of the Macizo Colombiano, but no
further. It may be that they recognized that they had indeed
come to the end of the ‘Four Quarters’ and that beyond lay a
land which did not form part of their world, would not be under
their dominion. However the case, the lands of the Macizo were
never directly touched by the conquests of the Incas, nor
apparently were they invaded by the purveyors of earlier
horizons of andean history, during Chavín or Tiwanaku/Wari
periods. Neither at the time of the Inca, nor in the earlier
age of the Pueblo Escultor, did Tawantinsuyu extend this far
north.
By the time of the arrival of the europeans, the Pueblo
Escultor were long gone, had faded into the distant past: at a
guess, it may by then have been five centuries, or more, since
statues were being designed and hewn out of the rock in these
Macizo enclaves. Before that time--the close of the classic
period--great works of stone sculpture were created in many
places in Perú and Bolivia, as far south as northern Argentina,

in Central America and in Mesoamerica, and, it is reasonable to
suppose, in the Macizo Colombiano; after about the year 1000
A.D., the situation was quite different, and for the most part
the greatest ages of american stone sculpture had now passed.
Those approximately five centuries had clothed the one-time
lands of the Pueblo Escultor with vast virgin rainforests, from
one side of the cordillera to the other, in which humankind was
no longer a large sedentary force working and transforming the
land, but rather a much smaller presence, laboring within the
context that the great tropical forests offered. No longer were
statues being carved, great earth-working projects being carried
out, underground tomb-and-ceremony centers being built, in
efforts taken on by large and organized communities. However,
we have ample evidence of the fact that the San Agustín region,
at least, was inhabited at the time of the europeans’ arrival.
The Pueblo Escultor no longer existed; the land was covered with
great ancient forests; but there were Indian tribes as permanent
inhabitants, as study of the available documents makes clear ii .
It would and hopefully will be fascinating to read the future
studies that will illuminate the cultural changes that lay
behind these transitions from the statue-makers to their
successors.
Once, during my time in San Agustín, I was shown—by
‘reliable’ local huaqueros, through whom I had previously seen
many authentic Pueblo Escultor articles—some very interesting
just-disinterred items, which had come from tombs that they
judged to be very similar to many other Pueblo Escultor tombs
they had ravaged. The items were strings of beads: most of the
beads I was able to identify as recognizable Pueblo Escultor
articles, but several of them proved to be european glass trade

eads, which were very similar to others of the type that I have
seen in tombs from the north coast of Perú. Admittedly this is
merely hearsay evidence, but for what it is worth it would
support the proposition that some traces of Pueblo Escultor
tradition and belief may have survived, amid the forests of the
Macizo, up to and even after the european conquest.
The first europeans to set foot in the lands of the Pueblo
Escultor—to set the stamp of History on the region and its
people, and begin the process that would lead to written
versions of events and observations—came in the year 1538, in
the form of spaniards heading northward after the sacking of the
lands of the Inca, searching for further empires of gold to
despoil. It was a fateful year for the lands that would become
Colombia, and for the Chibcha of the central plateau where
Bogotá (originally Bacatá) now stands: Jiménez de Quesada
approached with his motley army up the Magdalena River from the
Caribbean to the north, while Federman and his ragged german
Welser from Venezuela would soon cross the mountains westward
from the trackless forests of the Amazon basin.
And Sebastián de Belalcázar, Pizarro’s disloyal lieutenant,
awash in the gold won in the conquest of Perú, came northward
from Ecuador moving into Colombia with his well-appointed troops
draped in perfumed silks. In control of the region of Popayán,
and searching for the way across the mountains eastward that
would bring them to roads heading north to the future site of
Neiva and on toward the lands of the Chibcha, Belalcázar and his
vanguard must have come into possession of information leading
them up onto the slopes of the Puracé Volcano. None of these
early invaders would ever see or have reason to know of the
monuments and remains of the Pueblo Escultor; the great tropical

forests and wild solitary páramos may have made them feel like
they moved through lands where humankind’s impress had been
almost insignificant. Nonetheless, forming the vanguard of
Belalcázar’s army that soon would cross the cordillera and
continue on northwards, his lieutenants Juan de Ampudia and
Pedro de Añasco and their soldiers are supposed to have been the
first westerners to cross the lands of the Statue-Makers. It is
thought that they went up the slopes of Puracé, traversed the
Páramo del Buey and then descended the canyon of the Mazamorras
River, crossing the valley of San Agustín on the northern shore
of the Madgalena, the side where today San José de Isnos is
located, before leaving the great empty forests and the onetime
nucleus of the ancient sculptors behind them and heading
downriver.
By the following year, 1539, near present-day Timaná, the
spaniards had established the colony of Guacacallo, which name—
meaning ‘River of Tombs’ in quechua--was also the original title
they gave to the Magdalena River. By 1609 a contemporary map
shows an already-destroyed spanish town named Laculata Destruida
in San Agustín’s valley iii . Records from the time give us a list
of names of Indian groups whose lands were in this area, and we
read that the Laculata, Quinchana, Isnos, Matanza and Mulales
Indians, among others, lived in the lands immediately
surrounding San Agustín iv . Even earlier—in 1559 and 1574—we have
reports telling us that fierce resistance and warfare is being
offered by an enclave of Indians situated, Juan Friede tells us v ,
in the vicinity of San Agustín: the place is named as ‘Laculata’
in the former account and the ‘Rincón de Timaná’ in the latter.
There are said to be two or three thousand of these warriors,

and they are fierce and bloodthirsty, we read, cannibals in
fact. What might these people have thought of the europeans?
But the number of natives continued to diminish in alarming
fashion—Friede’s data and statistics vi are heartbreaking. The
continuity of the ancient ways of life was forever shattered,
the population nearly extinguished, and now, in fact, the great
forests on the slopes of the Macizo saw the precolumbian cycle
come to a silent end.

studies of the Pueblo Escultor
By 1609, then, an attempt at the establishment of a pueblo
in the valley of San Agustín whose foundation date is unknown—-
Laculata Destruida—has been destroyed in some violent fashion.
Eventually the ineluctable process of colonization is resumed,
Indians and mestizos once again form a pueblo, priests and
mayors and military officers pass across the stage, and then in
the second quarter of the eighteenth century the town is
attacked by Indians and again destroyed. The rebuilding and re-
founding commence immediately.
We may logically presume that at some point during this
process, the major and most visible mound-tombs in what is today
the Parque Arqueológico a few kilometers from the town of San
Agustín have been sacked and looted, with anything golden or
precious taken, and as a byproduct, the first of the stone
statues (buried in those tombs by the Pueblo Escultor centuries
earlier) are now left lying about, open to view. This immediate
looting was among the first acts of the new conquerors
everywhere in America, and the great mound-tombs on the mesitas
of the Parque Arqueológico surely would not have escaped their
attention for long.
Yet halfway through the eighteenth century we still have no
written record of the statues, although such a record may in
time appear: our first mention of the antiquities of the Pueblo
Escultor, from the pen of the franciscan friar Fray Juan de
Santa Gertrudis, was only found in the library of his home town
(Palma de Mallorca in Spain) in the year 1956, two hundred years
after his visit to the tiny collection of huts that constituted
San Agustín at that time.

The year was 1757 (or 1756 or 1758) 9 , and Fray Juan,
traveling from the Amazon headwaters east of the Macizo toward
Bogotá, happened to spend a night in San Agustín. There he met
another itinerant priest, from Popayán, whose interest in
treasure-hunting had brought him across the Macizo; he had
established himself in San Agustín and was at work—or at least
the Indian laborers he had brought with him were at work—once
again looting the previously-known tombs, and opening up
anything else that he was able to find.
Fray Juan spent the morning after his arrival touring the
tomb-areas his new friend had indicated, and a reading of his
report suggests that he saw about 10 statues, as well as a
monolithic stone sarcophagus. Not surprisingly, he interpreted
them in terms of his biblically-based belief system, and in
apocalyptic terms at that. Eventually he would write of his
experiences, and then deposit his writings in his local library
in Spain, where they would lie, unnoticed, for almost two
centuries.
What had seemed, until the discovery of Fray Juan’s
history, to be the first mention of these Macizo monuments was
written in 1808 by one of the most noteworthy figures of the age
in Colombia, the scientist-martyr Francisco José de Caldas; it
appeared in the weekly scientific and cultural journal he
published in Bogotá. He had visited San Agustín and its valley
in 1797, and while his article is not lengthy, he opens the
historical view of the Pueblo Escultor in a thoughtful and
clear-headed tone. These were chaotic years in Nueva Granada,
leading up to the Wars of Independence—Caldas, patriot hero,
would be executed by the spaniards in 1816--and the times were
not propitious for travel, study, intellectual pursuit. Many

years would pass with little notice given to the statues in the
isolated upriver valley of the Magdalena River.
In 1825 the peruvian mining engineer and naturalist Mariano
Eduardo de Rivera y Ustariz traveled up the Magdalena as far as
San Agustín; in 1851 he and the austrian Johann Jakob von
Tschudi would publish the account of their travels and studies
in the Andes, which deals principally with antiquities in Perú;
it was in fact the first published manual of andean archaeology.
But their book also includes the first illustrations, curious
ones at that, of the statues of the Pueblo Escultor, and it gave
Europe and the world of academia its first glimpse of this
previously undisclosed ancient culture. The door opened by de
Rivera would soon enough draw others to follow him; first,
though, another process would have to bring its actors onto the
scene. Caldas, and then de Rivera, had probably seen very few
more statues than those observed by Fray Juan; almost all of the
Pueblo Escultor statues were still underground.
In 1857, the italian geographer and cartographer General
Agustín Codazzi came to the Upper Magdalena, engaged in travels
which would lead to the elaboration of the first complete map of
Colombia’s territory. The results of his explorations would
appear in print in 1863, and would contain a detailed
description and report on the San Agustín area and its ancient
monuments and vestiges which may be fairly said to open the book
on serious study of the ancient statue-makers of the Macizo
Colombiano. The statues would continue to be mentioned
occasionally in print as the century wore on, and to gather a
certain momentum of visibility, but up until the 1890’s all
published reports with one exception would be brief ones made by
visitors who had passed through San Agustín and whose

observations were buried within extensive narratives. The one
exception is Codazzi’s study, which is accompanied by drawings
modeled on watercolors made by his traveling companion, the
colombian painter Manuel María Paz.
Codazzi’s analysis of the statues, though, strikes us as
odd and arbitrary today: he felt that they traced a mystic path
of initiation to be trod by the initiate during a course of
revelations whose essence Codazzi is in fact able to indicate to
the reader. His frame of reference was quite different than
ours, though; he saw only thirty-some statues, compared to the
many hundreds we now know to exist. But the thirty-plus pieces
he registered were a good number more than had been seen by our
first informants, and an understanding of the reasons behind the
process then underway is valuable in helping us to gain a better
view of the discovery of these Macizo lithic monuments.
Eventually, homesteading land would come to be at the heart
of the process which would lead to the discovery of statues:
when land is cleared, worked and planted, then as now, the
telltale signs of underground tombs are discovered, and in
certain cases the tombs, when dug, will prove to contain statues
among the constellation of possible grave elements. But in the
early days of the colonization of this area, more than a century
and a half ago, there was scant habitation of the heavily
forested areas where, nonetheless, statues had begun to appear.
Most probably, we have said, the first statues were
unearthed by spaniards and early huaqueros searching for gold in
precolumbian tombs; they may have found small amounts of gold,
but the statues probably meant little to them. In this way the
handful of statues seen by Fray Juan de Santa Gertrudis in 1757
were discovered. But Codazzi reports a significantly greater

number in 1857, and it may be that some of them were, at that
time, recently discovered, because his visit came just as the
quina boom began.
Quina, also called Peruvian Bark and cinchona, is the raw
material from which quinine, used in the treatment of malaria,
is extracted. When its properties became known, the search for
quina spread throughout the forests of the Macizo, and spawned a
period of bonanza, with far-reaching social consequences, as
employment soared, and the jungles and mountains were
systematically searched. We read that “San Agustín and its
vicinity achieved a notable development in the era called the
‘quina epoch,’” 10 which began, another author writes in 1937 vii ,
“…during the third quarter of the last century…”. Yet another
student explains in 1946 that the exploitation of quina, “which
abounds in the mountains of the Macizo Colombiano,” has
continued through the turn of the century and World War I, and
that traces of the trade in quina still exist viii . The thirty-
some statues of 1857 had become 110 by the time of Preuss in
1913, the great majority of them not the products of his
excavations but rather found already discarded by huaueros.
The suggestion would be that some of these early huaqueros,
almost certainly, are the same quina workers: young, often
unmarried men, some of them travelers in search of work,
individuals who in moving about have had the chance to learn
about huaqueo in other parts of Colombia and South America where
already in earlier periods tombs were being sacked and treasure
discovered. The quina boom, the ‘age of quina,’ is directly
reflected in the quantity of statues which came to light.
During the decades on both sides of the year 1900, scores of

statues would ‘appear’ aboveground in forested or slightly-
developed areas.
Today we are in a position to confirm the opinion of
Lunardi, who opened his 1934 book with these words: “In the
middle of the past century, workers employed in the extraction
of quina near the headwaters of the Magdalena River brought out,
from the vegetation of the thick jungles, stone statues, buried
in ancient tombs near the pueblo of San Agustín.” ix It now seems
clear that the boom in quina was essentially responsible for the
discovery of the statues of the Pueblo Escultor.
By the period between the world wars, quina exploitation is
dying in the region, but huaqueo and huaqueros have become
endemic, have become a part of the local situation, in San
Agustín and other areas of the Macizo Colombiano. Now,
colonization and land-clearing lead the process of the discovery
of the statues.
The news, in the latter half of the nineteenth century, was
spreading; quina workers and huaqueros exchanged stories, told
of their adventures, and local San Agustín folk chipped in with
information about their discoveries. Codazzi’s report, and then
de Rivera and Tschudi’s book in Europe, began to reach an
interested audience. An increasing number of foreign traveler’s
and students would bend their journeys to pass through San
Agustín for the opportunity to observe the strange stone
monoliths standing in small clearings cut from the jungle where,
as we can appreciate today, their ‘discoverers,’ the huaqueros,
had shouldered them aside as they dug, and left them.
In 1869 the german vulcanologist Alfonso Stϋbel, during his
study of colombian volcanoes, came to San Agustín; drawings and
a few photographs from his visit were said (in 1920) to be in

the museum of cartography in Leipzig x . French explorer Eduardo
André was in the area in 1876, and we read that two statue-molds
and some photographs from his journey were left with the
Trocadero Museum in Paris. Frenchman Jean Chaffanjon passed
through in 1885, and his photograph, published in Élisée Reclus’
Nouvelle Géographie Universelle xi , would be the first
photographic image of the Pueblo Escultor seen by most
europeans. And in 1889 San Agustín would host the spaniard José
María Gutiérrez de Alba, whose article was soon thereafter
published in a scientific periodical in Madrid. “All occasional
travelers or explorers who visited the region at the turn of the
century,” we are reminded, “spoke of the dense forest that
covered the prehistoric monuments and of the tangled masses of
vines, underbush, and gigantic fallen trees under which lay
half-buried statues and mounds…..No wonder then that the hidden
valley of San Agustín remained unexplored and shrouded in
legend.” xii
The second serious, detailed resumé (after that of
Codazzi), and the first real investigative effort into these
antiquities carried out by a colombian, would appear in 1893,
from the pen of naturalist/historian and general Carlos Cuervo
Márquez. He had been to the San Agustín region in the previous
year, 1892, and was able to publish a register of statues going
somewhat beyond what Codazzi had seen. Cuervo Márquez also
breaks new ground by carrying out a number of small-scale
excavations, and in his analysis he suggests connections between
the iconography seen in the Pueblo Escultor monoliths and those
of certain central-american and andean cultures.
Two most important points that emerge from Cuervo Márquez’
studies are the following: in 1887 he had traveled in the

Tierradentro region to the north of San Agustín, which today we
understand to have been a separate nucleus of the Pueblo
Escultor, and his Tierradentro investigations are published
alongside those from San Agustín in his book: he was the first
to recognize and comment on the fact that these antiquities, and
these statue-making people, were not restricted to San Agustín
and environs. And second, Cuervo Márquez was the first to use
the name Pueblo Escultor in his writings. Earlier investigators
had found no adequate way to refer to the Statue-Makers and
their monuments, calling them by names which clearly did not
satisfy or apply.
The author of the definitive study of this ‘Prehistoric
Monumental Art’ would not be long in arriving. Before he would
do so, two more expeditions would make their way to the valley
of the statues of the Upper Madgalena. In 1899 the British
Museum would weigh in with an effort doomed to failure: they
managed to remove one major statue from its San Agustín location
and transport it to London—it is on exhibit in the museum today—
but unfortunately the rest of the Pueblo Escultor spoils from
this expedition were loaded on a boat which promptly sank in the
Patía River west of the Macizo. Everything was lost; the
‘scientific report’ of the expedition’s results is less than a
page long.
Karl Theodor Stöpel, german geologist and cartographer,
came to Ecuador and southern Colombia in 1911 and took
photographs and made 18 statue-molds, which were left in a
private aristocratic museum in Munich. His presentation to the
International Congress of Americanists in London the following
year was fundamental in the opening of the world’s eye to the
Macizo monoliths. In Stöpel’s publication we read that his

discourse helped to bring about the first major expedition, that
of Konrad Theodor Preuss, in 1913-14; Preuss, however, puts the
shoe on the other foot, telling us that he himself had informed
and helped guide his countryman toward the ruins of San Agustín
before the geologist’s visit to South America.
Whichever the case, Preuss’ investigations in the lands of
the Pueblo Escultor would lead to the fundamental study of this
ancient culture (which he called “the civilization of sculptors
of San Agustín,” “a remote and enigmatic civilization,” “a
strange culture,” “the artists,” “that ancient people,” “the
pueblo escultor” [one time], and eventually “the San Agustín
culture” and “the San Agustín civilization”), and his volume to
a large degree still holds that key position today. Preuss,
curator of the Museum für Volkerkunde in Berlin and an important
figure in the archeological hierarchy of Europe in his day, came
to Colombia in 1913, and visited San Agustín and the Macizo
Colombiano during the end of that year and the beginning of
1914. Certainly his plan had been to quickly return to Europe
with his statues, photos, molds and reports and measurements,
but he had calculated poorly, because the beginning of WWI found
him in Colombia, and he would not be able to cross the Atlantic
homeward until he had spent six long years in the country he had
only come to visit. But when he was finally able to return
home, his museum show (in 1923) featuring statues and statue-
molds, and the publication in 1929 of his Monumentale
Vorgeschichtliche Kunst (appearing in Colombia in 1931 as Arte
Monumental Prehistórico in spanish translation) created a grand
sensation. The news of this “remote and enigmatic
civilization,” with Preuss’ study and analysis, would be spread
far and wide.

Preuss was able to report some 112 Pueblo Escultor statues,
and he took with him those he could carry back to Berlin, a
place he must have conceived of as a safe haven compared to the
trackless jungles of the Macizo Colombiano; but it was a spot
which would be in the center of the hurricane of the new
century’s great armed conflicts. In fact, the Berlin to which
he returned, post-WWI, was not the glittering city which he had
left years before. Of the 21 San Agustín-area statues Preuss
took with him to Berlin, I was able, in 1992, to locate 17. In
addition, the Berlin museum has 14 small statues from Nariño to
the south of the Macizo which he carried back to Europe but
never published; they are represented in the present catalogue.
So Preuss too, as had Cuervo Márquez, extended the realm of the
makers of the Macizo statues to a further, separate nucleus in
these same mountains.
Preuss’ volume is the seminal study of the Statue-Makers.
His descriptions of the statue sites, and of his own
excavations, are essential in tracing the origins and changes of
location of these so-moveable monuments. He brought the focus
and context of a trained and practiced archaeologist to his
studies; his published results will always be of great value.
The many decades which have passed since his time, however, have
so enriched the context of precolumbian history and archaeology
that many of his analyses and conclusions are now outdated and
unfounded. But he brought the world’s attention to this ancient
people in a new and permanent way.
In a sense, Preuss’ departure from Colombia coincided with
a widening of the focus on the ancient Macizo ruins, a departure
from looking just at the San Agustín-area sites, a new view of
the similarities between the lithic vestiges found in the

different nuclei of statues. We have seen that Cuervo Márquez
had already visited the Páez lands where the Tierradentro ruins
are found, and had mentioned the existence of these ruins in his
publication in 1893; “It is certain,” he writes, “that when this
entire semi-savage region has been explored, new and important
discoveries will be made which, without doubt, will afford us
great revelations regarding american prehistory. There are
probably many more [statues] which are still buried underground,
and this probability becomes almost a certainty if we consider
how unexplored this land is and …… the strange subterranean
constructions …… made by the people who lived there.” xiii Later,
Preuss visits and makes mention of sites in Nariño where other
statues are found. He also passed through the Tierradentro
lands, and mentions having seen a San Agustín-like statue
there xiv .
Cuervo Márquez, in his 1920 re-publication, adds as an
appendix xv a recently-written report, which had led to a brief
article chronicling the discovery of statues at the Aguabonita
site in the valley of the La Plata River. This report (which is
a letter penned by Victor Trujillo and Bernardo Montealegre)
will be noted and cited by others in the coming years, as
similar discoveries recur, and most succeeding writers will
point to the aggregate of new finds and the new focus on the
Pueblo Escultor as statue-makers not just in San Agustín’s
valley, but in different Macizo localities. Quina is still
being extracted from the Macizo during WWI and the following
decade, as we have seen, and new tombs and occasional statues
are still being found by huaqueros during these years. The door
of perception, already open a crack, will begin to swing wide by
the beginning of the 1930’s.

The new phase of discovery will be spearheaded by a
series of men whom the official archaeologists will look on as
mavericks, and amateurs; passionate travelers and students of
archaeology and prehistory, foreigners without portfolio, whose
searches and publications will offer tantalizing new
information. The first of them, one of the stranger figures to
weigh in on the Pueblo Escultor, is the Papal Representative in
Bogotá, Mons. Federico Lunardi, who visits San Agustín in August
of 1931. We have seen that Lunardi seems to be the first to
report that the discoveries of statues are related to the quina
boom and the resulting search of the Macizo forests. He also
mentions that he has heard of discoveries which he relates to
the Pueblo Escultor in the La Plata region, in Nariño, and
elsewhere, and his reference to discoveries of antiquities in
the Saladoblanco region effectively opens to view this Pueblo
Escultor nucleus, until then unknown.
Lunardi had just left the San Agustín region in 1931 when
the next maverick investigator arrived: he was the Belgian
Marquis de Wavrin Villiers-au-Tertre, whose travels had taken
him through Ecuador and Perú as well as Colombia. His theories
are bizarre indeed, but his explorations in the alternative
Pueblo Escultor statue-areas are clearly important: Wavrin is to
a large degree responsible for the early knowledge of statues
and sites—going well beyond the mere mention vouchsafed us by
Preuss--in the state of Nariño. His information on both the
Pueblo Escultor statues (which he recognized as such) and the
stone-cut hipogeo tombs of Tierradentro are the first detailed
published accounts; and he was the first to allude to statues in
the vicinity of Popayán in Cauca, which have really only been

e-included into the Pueblo Escultor study since the late
1980’s.
The third in this series of independent investigators
reached San Agustín in 1932, presenting himself, too, as a
titled member of european nobility: this was the german Baron
Hermann von Walde-Waldegg, who had translated Preuss’ monumental
work into spanish in 1931, and had looked forward to his own
principal ‘expedition’ to the valley of the statues, which would
take place in 1936. His research has been qualified as
“pretentious and useless” xvi , and we might add that his writings
often seem absurd, and ridiculously vain and boastful; it is, I
think, the weirdest edge to have been achieved in the literature
on the Pueblo Escultor. We may thank him, however, for his 1931
mention, in his prologue to Preuss’ work, of statues in the
Platavieja zone, certainly one of, if not the first, reference
to this important statue nucleus. And he publishes 21 , apparently
without even realizing it, the first details and photographs of
the Saladoblanco statues, which would only be carefully re-
inspected in the early 1980’s.
By the latter half of the 1930’s, the colombian government
was ready to build on the advances of Preuss and others by
organizing its own efforts at study and excavation of the Macizo
cultures. In 1937 two archaeologists, colombian Gregorio
Hernández de Alba and spaniard José Pérez de Barradas, would
lead government-commissioned investigations in San Agustín. Both
men had, independently, worked the previous year leading
expeditions in the Tierradentro region. In fact an earlier
Tierradentro effort, that of the german geologist Georg Burg,
preceded them that same year, 1936. It seems to have been an
uneasy triumvirate; all three men published in some form the

esults of their studies. Burg, the geologist, was out of his
league; his article would be brief. Hernández de Alba’s work
was the most extensive of the three, and he would eventually
publish in both english and spanish; but Pérez de Barradas would
reach print first, and his 1937 publication on the land he
called Tierra Dentro would become the most important work on
this statue-area until the studies of Cháves and Puerta in the
1970’s and 1980’s.
Hernández de Alba makes reference, in his studies, to the
statues of Moscopán and Platavieja, and these mentions of
connections to alternative statue-sites come early in the
expanding sequence. Perhaps even more important, he makes them
in english, in the 1946 edition of the Handbook of South
American Indians, thus bringing these matters to a new audience.
Pérez de Barradas, in the same year (1937) that his
Tierradentro volume was published, would move on to his main
task, study and excavation in San Agustín under the aegis of the
government of Colombia. His work from this expedition,
published in 1943, would become the most important work on the
principal Pueblo Escultor statue-area since Preuss. Hernández
de Alba, on the other hand, while he would manage to arrange and
conclude his major study on the Pueblo Escultor of San Agustín,
would never publish it; only in 1979, posthumously, would it
appear in print. These were the two most comprehensive studies
of the San Agustín-area culture in the period between that of
Preuss, on the one hand, and those of Duque Gómez and Reichel-
Dolmatoff several decades later.
With several expeditions having detailed the remains of the
Tierradentro region in the late 1930’s, the stage was set for a
closer look at the sites in the La Plata valley, about which

places hints had been aired since Preuss’ time in Colombia. The
University of Cauca in the city of Popayán, in 1942, would
organize the first such investigation, headed by Gregorio
Hernández de Alba and his colleague Eliecer Silva Célis; they
carried out the first careful survey of the Aguabonita,
Moscopán, and Platavieja sites (as well as Tierradentro), which
were now mapped, measured and photographed for the first time.
Their publications, in scientific journals in Colombia, have not
been reprinted.
Six months later, in 1943, a second University of Cauca
expedition, this one headed by french archaeologist Henri
Lehman, conducted a continuation of Hernández de Alba and Silva
Célis’ work; Lehman would also publish his results. He was able
to disentangle ‘Aguabonita’ and ‘Moscopán,’ which areas had been
somewhat confused in the literature. He also reports statues in
the Popayán region, with some detail, and in fact some of these
statues, and other artifacts, helped form the basis for the
fledgling Archaeological Museum of the University of Cauca,
founded in Lehman’s time.
But by the end of WWII, the ‘golden age’ of investigations
and independent studies into the alternative Pueblo Escultor
statue-areas—which had begun around 1931, the year of the
publication of Preuss’ book in spanish and the visits of Lunardi
and Wavrin to the Macizo Colombiano—drew to a close. Valuable
studies like that of Nachtigall in 1955, which was published in
Germany and has never been translated into spanish, focused on
the alternative Pueblo Escultor sites, but apparently resonated
little with the archaeological authorities in Colombia.
In 1935 the colombian government had purchased land for an
Archaeological Park near San Agustín, and by 1940 the land had

een fenced and the collection established. In 1938 the
celebrated french anthropologist Paul Rivet visited San Agustín,
and during the war years he established his residence in
Colombia. Rivet, the Director of the Musee de l’Homme in Paris,
became the ‘spiritual rector’ of colombian archaeology and
anthropology and played a key role in choosing and training the
future ruling elite in those fields in Colombia. The forerunner
of the Institute of Anthropology was formed in 1941, under
Rivet’s care, and in 1945 the first issue of the Boletín de
Arqueología, destined to become the official organ of
publications in the field, appeared. In this same year, land was
obtained for the future Parque Arqueológico of Tierradentro.
The archaeological superstructure in Colombia had coalesced by
the beginning of the period after the war.
During this period in which investigations into the other
statue-nuclei in the valleys of the Macizo had flourished, a
growing number of books and articles were published which
brought the San Agustín-area monuments and culture into the
public view. Just since the beginning of the war years,
publications by Schottelius in 1939, Arciniegas in the same
year, Acuña in 1942 and Arango in that year as well, and Tiberio
López in 1946, as well as works abovementioned by Pérez de
Barradas (1943), Hernández de Alba (1943 and 1946), Lehmann
(1943 and 1945) and Silva Célis (1943) had appeared. And in
english, Walde-Waldegg in 1936 and 1940, Arciniegas in 1939,
Hernández de Alba in 1946 and Bennett in that same year had
enriched a bibliography in that language which until then had
been nearly nonexistent.
The following years, surprisingly, would change and in
a certain sense reverse the current: Not until the dawn of the

1980’s would the alternative, non-San Agustín statue-areas of
the Pueblo Escultor be once again taken up, studied, and re-
assessed, and attain the full stride that had seemed to be
imminent 40 years earlier. Only a handful of brief articles on
the Tierradentro sites would appear, half of them published in
foreign countries and languages. The Moscopán, Aguabonita,
Platavieja, Saladoblanco and Popayán area sites, as well as
those in the state of Nariño, would virtually disappear from
consideration during this period.
In 1943 Luis Duque Gómez was commissioned by the National
Ministry of Education to begin a series of explorations in San
Agustín’s archaeological sites. Along with his assistants he
began to systematically excavate the area’s sites, beginning
with the principal sites of the Parque Arqueológico, the most
concentrated archaeological zone of the valley. Within two
years Duque Gómez had become the Director of the entire
colombian archaeological superstructure; he continued his yearly
excavations almost without interruption into the 1960’s,
continuing on through almost all of the sites available to him
in the valley of San Agustín. No work was done outside of the
bounds of San Agustín’s region. By 1964 Duque Gómez was ready
to publish his major work on San Agustín. In the early 1970’s
he was at work again, in further San Agustín’s sites, and
through that and the following decade books on the statue-makers
of San Agustín, authored mostly by Duque Gómez and by his
colleague Julio César Cubillos, would continue to be released.
Duque Gómez concentrated not only his own efforts, but
virtually all efforts of archaeological investigation in the
Macizo Colombiano area, for almost 40 years, exclusively upon
the San Agustín-area sites. By the mid-1940’s, as we have seen,

all of the alternative Pueblo Escultor statue-area now known had
been identified, and work in these different areas, to some
degree, had begun. From 1945 through the 1970’s, with few
exceptions, the other areas were to remain unstudied and
essentially abandoned, aside from the ceaseless efforts of the
grave-robbing huaqueros.
In his principal work on San Agustín, Duque Gómez has given
us a book which is a huge welter of information: a compilation
of much of the raw, unfiltered data from his digs, mixed with
many pages of sometimes confusing analysis. Hopefully, future
investigators will be able to find much of value in the data
from his excavations. There is little mention of any of the
other Pueblo Escultor statue-areas, and little use made of them,
though Duque was well aware of the history of their discoveries.
Stratigraphy has little emphasis here; Duque is mostly
interested in a funerary view of the Pueblo Escultor.
The other major study to reach print in these years also
spends no great amount of time on the other, non-San Agustín
nuclei of the Pueblo Escultor: Gerardo Reichel-Dolmatoff’s 1972
publication is titled San Agustín. But, that criticism aside,
it is by all accounts the best book so far published on this
subject. The only downside is that we are referring to a book
now more than 30 years old, and that other, newer studies have
not superseded it. Readers of english are fortunate that the
austrian scholar’s book was written in that language, and
spanish readers unfortunate that it has never appeared in their
idiom.
Reichel-Dolmatoff’s careful study of the makers of these
monumental statues is detailed and descriptive, and takes a very
even-handed look at these people who only too often have been

considered merely to be death-oriented tomb-makers, interested
in little besides their cycle of funerary structures and rituals
and symbols. His 1975 book 22 on stratigraphical digs in trash
middens near San Agustín with evidences of heavy population
through long periods of time is fundamental in shining a new
light on the life-cycle of the Pueblo Escultor, and showing the
way to a new form of understanding that had been little utilized
in the history of Pueblo Escultor studies.
Since Reichel-Dolmatoff’s 1972 publication, the last major
reappraisal of the Statue-Makers, several other works have been
published which represent important advances in the study of the
ancient inhabitants of the Macizo. The series of collaborative
efforts by colombians Álvaro Cháves Mendoza and his onetime
student Mauricio Puerta Restrepo which study the ruins of
Tierradentro have allowed us a valuable new approximation.
Starting in the late 1970’s and continuing on through the decade
of the 1980’s, these books have essentially established the
literature on this statue-area. Stratigraphic excavation of
refuse-heaps and house-sites plays an important part in Cháves
and Puerta’s analyses, and “…the tombs are yet another source of
information…” 1 , which is to say, not the only source of our
vision and understanding.
The work and excavations of colombian archaeologist Hector
Llanos Vargas have also represented an advance; his 1988 study
of the “Patterns of Settlement” in the Granates River canyon of
the Saladoblanco statue-area, as the title indicates, is a look
at the history of human habitation in a chosen area, rather than
an effort to extract and study only the remains of the Statue-

Makers and their time period. This type of work, along the
lines suggested by Reichel-Dolmatoff in his 1975 book,
represents vanguard work in this area, an attempt to find out
where the Pueblo Escultor fits in the overall scheme of human
history in the valleys of the Macizo, and hopefully to
understand the connections that bind them to the history that
precedes and succeeds their extensive period in the region.
Another project, initiated in 1984, chose the valley of the
La Plata River as the area for a study 2 that would seek
“…information on patterns of organization at the regional
level,” and this investigation too would have the Pueblo
Escultor as only one of the actors in the history it seeks to
establish. Robert Drennan, an archaeologist from the United
States, headed this effort to look not at a group of supposedly
death-obsessed tomb-builders, but rather to gather all
information possible on the history of the different groups who
called this area home during the periods of precolumbian
history; the Pueblo Escultor would not be the end-all and be-all
of this study, which would hopefully allow the Statue-Makers to
assume whatever position they really held in the history of the
area.
“Despite the dedicated (and in some cases lifetime) efforts
of a few scholars,” Drennan writes, “the Upper Magdalena…is in
no immediate danger of becoming one of the world’s most-studied
archaeological regions……[and] it will take a sustained long-term
effort to make a significant contribution…” 3 . Hopefully the
present initiative will be seen, too, as just such a

contribution to our understanding of the ancient peoples of the
Macizo Colombiano.

the pueblo escultor and
american traditions
I would like to give some indication of what the value of the
present catalogue might be, what application it might have for those
whose studies border or overlap this one. Hopefully the relevance to
other research will not be the only use that my efforts might end up
having; that is, I would hope that some folks might simply enjoy looking
at these images left us many centuries ago by a long-forgotten people
not so different from ourselves; or that people interested in sculpture,
or art, or human clothing and ornament, or philosophy and religion, or
the history of the uses of stone, or animals and their depictions, and
so on, would find a point of application and an interest in looking at
these images, these approximations of the feeling and meaning poured
into this amazing statuary high up in the Macizo Colombiano so long ago.
If any such interest were to be encouraged, so much the better.
But in the present chapter we will consider the purpose and use
this catalogue might have for people specifically interested in the
particular field, in precolumbian art and archaeology and iconography,
and the history of stone sculpture in America. I would begin by
asserting that the statues of the Pueblo Escultor make up the greatest
lithic library known from precolumbian America. Stone images were
created for thousands of years in America, from earliest formative times
onward and up to the time of the arrival of the european invaders, as
far north as what is today the United States, and as far south as
northern Argentina. But nowhere else, from one people or cultural group
and in a reasonably similar geographical space, do we see such a
quantity of expressive stone sculpture, or, more importantly, such a
wealth of different images. This last comment refers to the fact that
certain bodies of sculpture are relatively monotonous in that their

images are very repetitive, and so the quantity of images will not be
great relative to the number of statues under consideration.
The Pueblo Escultor statuary is not only great, numerically
speaking: there are 460 statues in this survey seen and drawn by me,
and 586 registered as having at some time been published and documented,
and I imagine that at least several hundred more have been destroyed or
disappeared into the black market without documentation, or still remain
in tombs underneath the earth of the Macizo. Pueblo Escultor statues
are also extremely rich in imagery, because essentially each statue
presents us with a new and unique figure. Only rarely is any particular
image repeated, and even then usually the style in which it is carried
out differs so greatly that it becomes a quite new version of the image.
So we have, in the Pueblo Escultor statuary, not only the largest lithic
library of ancient America, but also a body of imagery in stone that is
especially and exceedingly rich and varied.
When looking at the cultural history of ancient America, a basic
division is usually made between the lands in Mexico and northern
Central America which were constellated around that center, Mesoamerica,
and the lands arranged around and related to the other center, in South
America’s Andes. A section in the middle, stretching from the central
parts of Central America down through Venezuela and Colombia, is usually
designated the Intermediate Zone. Neither Anahuac in the north nor
Tawantinsuyu in the south constituted the unitary source for the culture
and tradition of this Intermediate Zone. In many respects, we are able
to see in this center zone the mix of influences come from the south and
the north which contributed to the formation of the world inhabited by
these people not ruled by, but cognizant of and influenced by the two
nuclear-culture areas on their borders.
The statuary of the Pueblo Escultor exemplifies the archaeology and
culture of the Intermediate Zone in that it shows this mix of elements

which ultimately might be traced to one (or perhaps in certain cases
both) of the two nuclear areas. And we can not only see the mix of
elements from the north and south, but in some cases are able to
determine which of the two traditions, and what content, is portrayed in
certain statues of the Pueblo Escultor. The point is worth emphasizing
because many studies have situated the work of the Pueblo Escultor in a
kind of limbo, without much relationship to other american stone
sculpture, almost in some kind of strange isolation. The truth is that,
far from being isolated, the Pueblo Escultor show themselves to be
related, at the most profound levels, to the two traditions,
mesoamerican and andean, both of which are strongly represented here.
In Mesoamerica and the Andes, the two basic mother traditions—in
this standard framework—would be that first expressed by the Olmec of
Mexico’s Gulf Coast region, and that of the Chavín culture in northern
highland Perú, both beginning to flourish perhaps by 1800 B.C., perhaps
by a few centuries earlier or later. There is no reason to believe that
the Pueblo Escultor at this early date are creating stone statues and
etc., and every reason to think instead that they would eventually be
doing so not at points early in the Olmec/Chavín sequences, but rather
during later phases of those sequences, when Olmec and Chavín are
becoming/have become manifest in successor cultures throughout their
areas. Our ‘first’ C-14 date for the Pueblo Escultor, 555 B.C., is
taken from a piece of a wooden sarcophagus found in a tomb-set
construction, and tells us something, at least, about the art of carving
and about the ceremonial/religious and architectonic complexes of that
time.
There are Pueblo Escultor radiocarbon dates from the early
centuries B.C., and others cluster around the 0 B.C./A.D. time period.
Few are specifically tied to carefully controlled finds of statues,
which almost always are discovered by huaqueros digging illegally and

clandestinely. So the tentative suggestion would be that the Pueblo
Escultor, coming late in the mentioned sequences, would at the beginning
have been more directly influenced by Pukara in the Titicaca Basin
rather than Chavín itself, and by Izapa and Monte Albán, rather than the
Olmec, in México. In Olmec and Chavín, though, were born, or awakened,
or coalesced, the traditions, the patrones, and these almost living
entities do not die with cultures or peoples or cities; they stare out
at us from the eyes of the figures in the statues of the Pueblo
Escultor.
Before we take a look at the type of information and knowledge that
can be drawn from an analysis of these statues, it would be worthwhile
to briefly indicate several original, germinal currents which are in
evidence from the very beginning of the stone-sculpting horizon and
which help constitute the earliest and most important traditions of
precolumbian America’s iconography in stone. I mention several here,
with no intent to suggest that this list would be definitive; certainly
others could be included.
First of all, we can see from the iconography and the very form of
these lithic american expressions that the ‘mythological happenings’
referred to are, very often, played out underground; or, we may say, in
an underworld which is in some senses supernaturally located, but in
another sense is underneath the ground that we live upon. “In ancient
America the divinely inhabited underworld was more important than the
surface, where human life takes place…” 26 . We are reminded by Eliade
that “The place where communication could be made between the world of
the dead and that of the gods of the underworld was consecrated as a
connecting link between the different levels of the universe, and such a
place could only be situated in a ‘centre’.” 27
Many of the most important ‘mythological settings’ constructed or
arranged by the various american peoples as the location of the

‘mythological happenings’ are attempts to approximate this mythological
underground otherworld: the interior and subterranean galleries of the
Chavín temples, the ‘subterranean plaza’ spaces at the center of Chavín
de Huántar and later of Tiwanaku, the ‘niches’ out of which lean human
figures on the Olmec ‘altars’—to which we would add the cave-relief #1
art Chalcatzingo and the entire setting and symbolism of the Juxtlahuaca
cave-paintings, among others—in all of these manifestations, and in many
more, such as the secret tombs deep inside pyramids at Palenque,
Teotihuacán, and other mesoamerican sites, where “The dead man was
symbolically returned to the ancient home of the gods, and the ancestors
who had become gods, in the womb of the earth, the source of all
creation,” 4 , in the kivas that served as sacred buildings for the Pueblo
Indians of the southwest of North America, in the Aztec cave-temple of
Malinalco, and so on, we see a recreation of the primal subterranean
place, linked as well to the homeland and origin of peoples. The full
list of analogs would be hopelessly long. We read that the Aztecs came
originally from a place called Chicomoztoc (‘Seven Caves’), while the
Incas first issued forth from their birthplace in four caves at
Pacaritambo (‘Origin Lodge’). Looking at the Pueblo Escultor
constructions, we see that the underground and mounded-earth-covered
stone configurations are yet another version of the same mythical
underground setting.
“Every expression of life, we read, “is the result of the fertility
of the earth; every form is born of it, living, and returns to it the
moment its share of life is exhausted; returns to it to be reborn; but
before being reborn, to rest, to be purified, to be regenerated…; there
is no…break between the earth and the forms engendered by it; these
forms remain bound to their source, from which they are in any case

separated only for a time, and to which they will return to rest, to be
strengthened, and one day to reappear. That is why there is a magic,
sympathetic bond between the earth and the organic forms it has
engendered. Together they form a whole.” 5
The preceding thought leads us to our second connecting current:
the material used to create this particular style and corpus of
iconography is, precisely, stone. A discussion of the very ancient
history of work in stone—the primary, original material—in America would
give an idea as to why the very act of working in stone and the very
material involved must have in a deep sense been regarded as ‘sacred,’
whether the practical point was to make weapons, grind food or carve
images. Those master stone-carvers, the Incas, would basically restrict
themselves to architectonic work, albeit incredibly expressive and
fantastic, producing almost nothing in the realm of lithic iconographic
imagery, while those other master stone-workers, the Pueblo Escultor,
would build no stone buildings or other above-ground works, and would
live in perishable habitations, using stone basically only to carve
their statues and the structures that would house them.
Surely an important element in this ‘sacredness’ must have been the
fact that stone makes up the interior, and the finest, densest part
thereof, the essential structure, of the earth itself, which sustains
us—that is, in andean terms, the Pachamama, the ‘earth-herself-our-
mother,’ place of origin of every race, every species, and home,
undoubtedly, to our forebears and originators now passed away. Stones
are the bones, the skeleton of our Pachamama, and, I would suppose, were
to be treated as such, with respect and much more than respect. It was
not just a quotidian, thoughtless act to be working with, to be carving
stone. To work in stone demanded a certain understanding and a certain

context, and for many peoples it represented the supreme form of
expression.
The third point seems perhaps more of a stretch, more unlikely, to
some, and so I will just state it as my opinion, the fruit of my survey
of american stone sculpture: the supernatural anthro-animal, and the
dominant spirit shown in many precolumbian works of art, which at times
seems to obsess and animate such art, is a supernatural mix of serpent
and feline elements. Many analyses of precolumbian art, and
specifically of the Pueblo Escultor art, have taken a supernatural
feline to be the guiding and principal spirit. But the early
traditions, and also some later expressions of what we might consider
the original traditions—and certainly, powerfully, the Pueblo Escultor
statues--show us repeatedly this mix of serpent and feline attributes,
often at what would seem to be the heart of much basic mythology and
belief. “God sometimes comes also in the body of a lion or a snake, and
it is in that form he walks about among men to behold their doings,” 6
Frazer has written, and while he was not speaking of precolumbian art,
his comment accords perfectly with this vision.
The fourth suggestion will be very familiar to many students of
ancient America: There is a ‘Double Sense,’ a way of showing that the
basic and important and even supreme realities manifest themselves, and
may be represented, in a double way. It may be quite impossible for us
to grasp exactly what is being defined, or to describe the impression,
but this ‘Double Sense,’ this duality, was deeply ingrained in the
american art and belief and, no doubt, experience. The double, or
‘Doble’ as a certain manifestation of this idea is termed, has long been
remarked in the lithic art of the Pueblo Escultor, and ‘Double Sense’ is
eloquently evident in the art of the earliest american high cultures.

We read that “Dualism is the essential principle of the pre-cortesian
world [and, we may add, the pre-columbian world in general], governing
its conceptions of the gods, of nature, and of art.” 7 Below, we will
take a more detailed look at this panamerican trait.
Two final points, on patterns that emerged from this look at the
Pueblo Escultor statuary with the history of all of America’s art as a
background: First, the sculptors of the Pueblo Escultor reflect very
truly in their work the basic american lithic traditions, not only in a
‘pure’ and loyal way, but in expressive, effective and individual,
local, creative manners. These sculptors were in touch with the deepest
currents of tradition, from the Andes, from Mesoamerica, and elsewhere.
Second, I get the sense that the Pueblo Escultor sites were
essentially in some way very liberal centers, where many and perhaps
even all different cults, traditions, beliefs and personages are
represented; and, at the same time, to a greater degree perhaps than in
other great lithic centers, no single cult or cults seem to be dominant
and all-inclusive. Many mythological currents seem to be present, and
what elsewhere is supreme seems here to be part of a larger whole.
**************************************************
The ‘lithic library’ represented by the stone-sculptures of the
Pueblo Escultor will prove to be, at a future time when the entire
context of precolumbian life and belief is far more fully understood, a
great, deep well of new understanding and insight, and a lens through
which this new wealth of knowledge will stand forth, illuminated. To
give a hint of the possible fruits of analysis of these statues, I would

like to take a careful look at a single image, shown us in a pair of
Pueblo Escultor stones. Even with only the fragmentary studies and
techniques to which we today have access, we can sketch in several
important facets and details in answer to our question: what does this
figure mean, and what can we discern in this fabulous, exotic character?
After this look at the single image in question, the rest of the
present chapter will consist of brief comments regarding some of the
worthwhile points of comparison (between the statues of the Pueblo
Escultor and the stone-carvings made by other precolumbian peoples)
which have been suggested by a survey of the stone statuary of America.
These comments should at the least paint a picture of a Pueblo Escultor
very much in touch with the great stream of American traditions, and
nurtured and oriented by them, rather than suggesting any kind of
isolation. Hopefully, they may help point the way toward future
investigations which will cut much more deeply.
The image under study here reveals itself in two different
statues, both found in the valley of San Agustín, both known since early
in the past century. PMAL2 is located atop the Alto de Lavapatas, the
highest location, the culminating step, in the Parque Arqueológico
several kilometers uphill from the pueblo. AP1, the second version of
this single vision, is near the valley’s eastern extreme, at the site
known as Alto de las Piedras. Both are first reported by Preuss, who
saw them during his visit in 1913; Codazzi in 1857, and Cuervo Márquez
in 1892, had not seen them.
The german archaeologist in describing PMAL2 calls it a ‘double,’
and after bringing AP1 into the picture, calls the figure ‘Das zweite
Ich’ in german, which is to say ‘Segundo Yo’ in spanish and ‘Second I’
in english. In the literature, and in local parlance, this quickly
became ‘Doble Yo’ or ‘Double I,’ and such has remained the case down to
the present day. Echoes of these two most famous Dobles abound

throughout the statuary of the Pueblo Escultor (see Chapter Five—Doble
Yo section) and a small group of statues in the Parque Arqueológico may
be said to form a strict group with them, and to clearly show us
versions of the same image: PMA1 and PMA2, PMA7 and PMA8, and PMB9 and
PMB10. Curiously, in each of these cases, as a glance at the drawings
will show, this Doble image is itself doubled, for reasons that we
perhaps don’t fully understand. And a survey of a range of different
sculptures—for instance PMAL3, PMC8, LA1, PE7, PA6, PMC14, M2, PMC3—will
show how this seminal image has threaded itself throughout the entire
Pueblo Escultor tapestry.
There are some fascinating similarities to the Doble Yo figures
among the stone statues elsewhere in America; among the closest analogs
in form would be the Chorotega stone-sculptures from Nicaragua
(especially Zapatera and Ometepe Islands in lake Nicaragua) and from
Nicoya in Costa Rica, and the statues from the Barriles site in Panamá.
But the traces would lead us back through many other stone-carving
cultures, and we would find them as well near the beginning, in Olmec,
and in Chavín.
Preuss, seeing the profound ‘Double Sense’ with which the two Doble
Yo statues are imbued, called them by the term ‘Second I’ for a specific
reason: because he could see that in each case a second, supernatural
being hovers above the ‘principal’ human figure. Preuss interpreted
this as representing a ‘Second I’ looming over the first, and in this
sense the statue showed a ‘double’ figure. This view of the ‘Double
Sense’ in these two statues (and in many more as well) has been adopted
and affirmed by most of the literature on the Pueblo Escultor. But we
will see that the double-nature of these two statues takes a series of
different forms, and by bringing our attention to them we will be able
to illustrate the type of investigation that this catalogue, used in
context, will hopefully allow.

1. To begin with, the image on which we are concentrating appears
in not one, but two different statues in the valley of San Agustín, and
while in some measure the two versions are different, in a more
important way we can have no doubt that the two make the same statement
and show us the same ‘moment’ or ‘being’ in the mythos. It is certainly
true that this may be the merest coincidence—the third and fourth copies
may be disinterred tomorrow. But at the same time we don’t want to
ignore that fact that that these valleys have been extensively worked by
huaqueros for a century and a half, and that while we may now look at
close 500 statues, we nonetheless have no exact peers for these two
mirror images. Add to this the fact that they were found in the two
greatest concentrations of statuary, one in each of the twin centers of
the Pueblo Escultor in San Agustín’s valley: the Parque Arqueológico on
the one hand and the area near Alto de los Idolos on the other. It may
not be coincidence at all.
2. Each of the two statues is double in that a ‘principal figure’
which is a human being is surmounted by a second, supernatural (or
monstrous or divine) being. This is the meaning that Preuss had in mind
when he called these pieces ‘Double.’ The lower figure is male in both
cases, and human except for bearing fangs, which detail I presume
suggests the nature of the supernatural blood flowing in his veins; both
examples are notable in that the proportions of the man’s body are much
closer to nature than is the case in the vast majority of the Pueblo
Escultor statues. The second figure, looming up above the first, grasps
the human with both hands on or just above the head, seeming to
‘control’ the man’s head. A study of the list of analogs given several
paragraphs ago—including the pairs of Mesitas ‘guardians,’ PMA1 & PMA2,
etc. as well as a number of other stones, PMAL3, PMC8 and so on—will

help us to elicit the sense, to perhaps feel something of the message,
of our two subject statues. And we must also take a look at the ‘Feline
Procreator’ group, and stones such as U4, PA6, M2 and OU90.
A slight digression into the essence of the ‘Double Sense’ being
exhibited in these sculptures is important here. I would like to
distinguish between, on the one hand, a Doble-figure, like the image
under discussion, in which one great (and probably supernatural) being
stands above a lower, usually more human, personage; as opposed to a
Double-figure, in which we see a ‘doubling,’ usually fairly precise and
faithful, of a given figure. The AP1 and PMAL2 statues are perfect
examples of the Doble, whose origin lies to the north, in the world of
Mesoamerica. The image is born in Olmec stones like the San Martín
Pajapán statue, and the Chalcatzingo relief #1 of a human figure inside
the gaping mouth of a great serpent-creature, and Mopnument #19 from La
Venta, and the ‘altars’ or ‘thrones’ where human figures lean forward
from ‘niches’ or ‘caves’ which are also the maws of supernatural
animals. We see the image pass down through, for example, the statues
on the islands of Lake Nicaragua, to the Aztec and Huastec sculptures
whose faces emerge from encompassing masks. This is the path which
brought the Doble image to figure in the mythos of the Pueblo Escultor.
The ‘Double,’ on the other hand, the principle of duality which
permeates the art of ancient America, shows us twin halves of a
‘doubled’ vision. The formative ceramic figurines of Tlatilco in México
show us that this concept is of great importance from earliest times in
Mesoamerica, and it is never absent thereafter, as a survey of pre-
cortesian art will testify. But the manifestation of the Double in the
art of stone-carving comes, I think, essentially from the world of the
Andes, where we see it everywhere in Chavín de Huántar: the ‘Cornisa de
los Felinos,’ the ‘Dintel de los Jaguares,’ the etchings on the ‘Portal
de los Halcones,’ the black-and-white stairway, the twin staffs in the

hands of the Staff-God all bespeak this primal duality.; we will see
echoes of this mirror-imagery in the ‘Sun-Door’ figures at Tiwanaku, and
among the statues of the Callejón de Huaylas, and recognize the trait in
the double-parade of ‘victims’ on the stone-carvings of Sechín. In the
Pueblo Escultor statuary, this effect is also constantly present, as we
see in such stones as U4, LB2, PMB6, PMB14, and PMB20, PMB27, PMC9,
(1)P1, (2)PV1, (4)A4. The same analysis applies to the pairs of
‘guardian’ figures of the Mesitas: the pairs of nearly-mirrored statues,
PMA1 & PMA2 and so on. These ‘guardian’ statues, as we have seen, are
the closest analogs of the two statues that we are studying; and are
thus, themselves, representatives of both the mesoamerican-derived Doble
and the andean-origin Double.
3. The top figure of the two in our chosen image, the
‘Supernatural Figure,’ is also itself Double, in that it is formed of
two different beings, one which is oriented upward and is alive, and a
second which flows downward and is not ‘alive’ in any normal sense. A
look at the drawings will make this clear. In both cases, the upward-
flowing creature emanates energy and vitality, seems terrorific and awe-
inspiring, and the creature’s hands are upraised, engaged in an action
of control. In comparison, the downward-hanging half of this composite
being seems flat and lifeless. The mouth seems like a caricature
compared to that of the ‘living’ creature, and contrasts starkly with
the rounded, vital form of the ‘upward’ half’s mouth. On the Mesitas
statues PMA1 and PMA2 we see another version of this same Doble
creature; the upper, ‘living’ half is something like a fanged, puffy-
faced baby, while the serpentine body of the ‘lower’ half, curling down
the statue’s side, shows this same caricature-being with the grinning,
lifeless mouth. Another version appears on AP4.

In fact, one aspect of what is being presented here is that the
hanging, ‘lifeless’ part of the Doble is (or is represented by) a skin,
the skin of a monstrous/divine personage. In our natural world, the
world of human beings, the skin is that of a feline, and we can see that
essence in the animals flowing downward as the lower part of the Doble
being. The image, with its ‘N’-tooth design shown in profile, is
reminiscent of the Huaca del Dragón and other similar Moche depictions
from northern Perú, and of Pashash stone monoliths and related Recuay
ceramic representations, where similar figures appear.
The Doble, then, is in a certain sense represented by the skin of a
feline draped over the back of another, human figure. This is an image
that we will find throughout a great range of precolumbian art, in much
of America and from the earliest times. Among the statues of the Pueblo
Escultor, a number of different figures are worth looking at in this
light—starting with PMB22, R3 and (6)I2, the latter from Popayán, to the
west across the Macizo Colombian from San Agustín. Others may be of
interest as well: OU4, (1)TI9 and (6)SF1 all carry not skins, but
human-like figures on their backs.
4. There is a fourth way in which these two statues exhibit this
Double Sense: the ‘Supernatural Personage’ is also Double because the
Doble by its nature is a blend of two different essences, that of the
feline and that of the serpent, and it is in the guise of these two
animals that our Personage appears. PMAL2 and AP1 are marked with the
symbols and the shapes of both. The fangs, it would seem, could be an
aspect of either of these two animals, or of both.
Glancing again at the drawings, those so disposed will see that the
lower half of the Doble-creature, that which I have suggested is a skin,
is in the shape of a feline. The case is made clearer by a look at the
other statues just mentioned with skins on their backs; there is no

doubt, for instance, that PMB22 shows a feline draped over the back of
the human figure. The two anthropomorphs in the statues under study
here, analogously bear feline skins (which are much more than feline
skins) on their backs.
The serpent essence inherent in the two ‘Supernatural Figures’
shows itself most precisely in the shape of the Doble, which flows up-
and-backward and then over and downward; seen in profile, this shape,
doubtlessly extremely significant for the Pueblo Escultor, proclaims
itself in each of the many analogous statues that carry it. Aside from
the two estatuas under study, we would look first at PMA1 and PMA2,
because in these Doble-stones too the flowing-back creature most
certainly is a type of serpent-being, who writhes in duo down both sides
of the column. The others of the six ‘guardian’ stones referred to
above also share this shape, and the whole figure occurs at another spot
in the Mesitas, once again in tandem images: see PMB14 and PMB20. It
is then but a step to similarly-shaped statues like LA1 and PMC8, and
AP5 offers yet another depiction of the same idea. In all of them, the
germ of the shape given this idea comes from the serpent.
If we were to miss the feline-skins on the sides of our two statues
and the serpent-shape down the back, we would still be left with yet
another reference to the other-than-human nature of the stone’s
protagonist, because both statues are marked with symbols that carry
this meaning. First of all, both statues, all down the serpent-curve of
the back, are etched with a series of parallel lines that are ‘writing’
a certain message. In the case of PMAL2 the lines slant parallel, and
on AP1 they take the form of parallel ‘V’-shapes. They are both variant
forms of what would more usually be crosshatching, which is to say, the
symbol, for the Pueblo Escultor, of the serpent and the serpent-energy.
The lines on our two statues etch them with serpent-being.

This symbolism, and its function in the art of the Macizo, is the
subject of the Serpent section of the following chapter. But we can
shortcut that detailed discovery by taking a look, first, at PE1 and
CA2, a pair of stones in which respectively a bird and then a monstrous
anthropomorphic figure grasp twisting serpents in their beak and talons,
in the one case, and hands in the other. Both are among the best
‘natural’ representations of serpents among the Macizo stones, and both
are etched with lines that give us the clue as to the meaning of the
lines we see on our two sculptures. The serpents held by each of the
two, PE1 and CA2, are marked with symbolic lines that proclaim their
essence, the serpent-current which animates many other Pueblo Escultor
figures as well.
In each case, curiously enough, we see three different kinds of
line-patterns. There are crosshatched lines, which create diamond-
shapes, and there are what I have called squared crosshatching, creating
squares; the third lines I refer to as half-crosshatching, and they
really consist of parallel lines. These two statues of beings-carrying-
serpents are showing us the symbols that mark them to be just that, and
these symbols then reoccur in the Macizo statuary in ways that are
consistent with the expression of this serpent-energy, as the Serpent
section attempts to illustrate.
If we look at PMA1 and PMA2, previously cited, we will see that the
serpent-bodies running across the top and down the sides of the column
are elegantly cross-hatched. And two of the etched tomb-construction
slabs, PMB(G)6 and OU(G)1, also show us this same graphic connection of
crossed lines over the shape of the serpent. And PE7, taken by Preuss
to Berlin, is another ‘classic’ Doble stone; its flowing serpent shape
is lined with the half-crosshatching, or parallel lines. We can now see
that the serpentine backs of the two original Doble Yo stones which we

are considering are marked with lines whose meaning is a reference to
the serpent and the current of serpent-energy.
One of our two statues—AP1—is also marked with circles. Although
the other is not, it not only is weathered, but we now know that a great
number of the statues were painted with other designs over the
sculptural work; PMA7 and PMA8, for instance, seem to show us blank-
column Dobles, when in fact they were originally painted with crossed-
line serpent markings, as we can still just barely make out. In any
case the circles of AP1, I would argue, are the corresponding symbols
for the feline. We can leave the point as opinion, because I do not
find it backed up by other Pueblo Escultor stone-carvings. Nonetheless,
circles as markings on depictions of felines are well known in America,
and specifically the art of Chavín uses the convention repeatedly.
Chavín de Huántar is replete with this image, beginning with the stones
of the Sunken Plaza of the Early Temple. And the slabs of tomb-
constructions in the Mesitas sites near San Agustín—the equivalent
there, we might say, of Chavín’s Sunken Plaza--were painted with both
crossed-line and circle designs. 8
There is a variation to the circles found on Chavín felines which
consists of balanced crosses where the circles would otherwise be,
spotting the feline. For what it might be worth, these balanced and
other similar crosses are shown several times in the Macizo etched
stones; one of them, PMA(G)1, gives us the symbol combined with an
elongated crosshatched figure.
5. As a corollary to the preceding discussion, there is yet
another manner in which our two subject stones reveal to us the duality
of their nature. The symbols graven into the Personage we are analyzing

indicate also the gender of each half of this dual being, and the
Male/Female union that it must, ultimately, be. Specifically, the ‘X’-
shapes symbolize the female as well as the serpent, while the circles,
which refer to the feline, also stand for the male.
The Serpent section of the following chapter illustrates the method
by which we come to understand that crosshatching, for the Pueblo
Escultor, symbolizes in the first place the earth-dwelling serpent, and
logically becomes the emblem of the earth-mother, the divine female. A
reading of that text will introduce the reasoning.
The circles are male because the felines indicated by them are
indisputably male in this statuary. The ‘Feline Procreator’ group
listed in the Feline section of chapter five would be the clearest
indication of this; in the case of U4 and PA6, we see a great feline
mounted on, and presumably copulating with, a human woman. And a human-
like figure draped with a feline or feline-skin will be a male: see R3
(with male genitals) and PMB22 (wearing a loincloth) again, as well as
the two statues that we are taking as our focus.
6. There are at least two further ways in which the AP1 and PMAL2
stones reveal their Double nature. One of these ways is again a
corollary of the recognition that the parallel lines and the circles
etched on the flowing back of the Doble creature are symbolic markings
applied to convey specific, identificatory information. We have already
seen that this information indicates the serpent-feline nature of the
Doble, and also the male-female union which this being embodies. But in
these etched decorations, I would argue, we are also given an insight
into the ultimate origins of these symbols.
Of course, in perhaps a deeper sense the symbols are simply lifted
from nature. It isn’t much of a stretch of the imagination to see the
scales and the patterns on a serpent as crosshatching, or spots/circles

as indicative of a feline. The fact is that these animals are, not
infrequently, naturally patterned this way, and I wouldn’t be surprised
to learn that serpents and felines were decorated (and identified) in a
similar way in the art of people outside of America as well.
Certainly, though, these specific diagnostic markings have been
used to identify these animals in precolumbian art, and specifically
lithic art, from the time of the advent of high culture in America.
Where, then, did this usage come from, and under whose influence did
these symbols enter the image-language of the Pueblo Escultor?
As for the crosshatch-pattern, there can be little doubt that the
genesis lies in Mesoamerica, to the north; the use of the symbol is
consistent in meaning in both spheres, where serpents, serpent-energy,
women and vital creation-energy are immediately evoked. The serpent on
Olmec Monument #19 comes with crosshatching attached, and the
underground serpentine mosaic of La Venta has a fringe of diamonds that
is extremely reminiscent of the crosshatch-turbans of the Pueblo
Escultor female figures; and the eyes of a number of earth-monsters on
the altars and at Chalcatzingo are carved with ‘X’-shapes.
Crosshatching will thereafter not be absent in the art of Mesoamerica,
and in the final days of the precolumbian world the Great Coatliocue of
the Aztecs, whose head is a double-serpent, will wear skirts whose
crosshatching consists of live, writhing serpents; and the serpents are
as well etched deeply with crosshatching.
The serpents of Chavín, and of the andean tradition, are quite
different in style and in use. The complex of meanings we have
described above certainly came into the art of the Pueblo Escultor from
the mesoamerican world to the north.
The circles that we see on AP1, and the feline meaning they
encapsulate, are, I think, from the Andes, and from Chavín, where, to
all appearances, they originated. Above we have considered the slabs of

the Sunken Temple of Chavín de Huántar; that is only the beginning, and
the student who studies the stone-carvings from this seminal culture
will see the extensive use which this symbol is given. The circles come
from the world of Tawantinsuyu to the south, then, while the crossed-
lines are from the Anahuac and the north: another measure of the
duality inherent in this Pueblo Escultor image, and one that the ancient
sculptors may or may not have themselves realized.
7. The final Doubling of the image we are studying is this: in
addition to pointing both north and south and indicating a geographic
double-origin, we will now see that these statues pose for us a vision
which directs our view both backwards chronologically, to the origins of
high culture (and lithic sculpture) in America, as well as forwards, to
the final phase of precolumbian history. The links with the beginnings,
and specifically with the symbols and images—and no doubt the mythology
and spiritual beliefs—of the Olmec culture of Mesoamerica and the Chavín
people of Perú’s central Andes, have already been suggested above; they
are extensive and wide-ranging, and elsewhere I have attempted to
develop them at length.
The task here, then, will be to illustrate the strict relationship
that the mute images left us by the people we call the Pueblo Escultor
hold with the evidence we have of the cosmology of the conquest-era
americans, which of course is backed by a much greater breadth and
volume of testimony. A single instance, I think, will illuminate the
point: that the meaning within the confusing and complex images of the
statues of the Pueblo Escultor, and even the specific representations we
see in the statues, were not restricted merely to the time and place of
this culture of the Macizo Colombiano, but rather were panamerican, were
developed by the creators of the original, seminal cultures, and were

still valid and infused with life and significance during the final days
of the precolumbian cosmos.
The illustration is taken from the chronicle written by Cristóbal
de Molina, “el cuzqueño,” 9 during the latter half of the 16 th century.
De Molina was a spanish priest who came early to America and spent three
decades in charge of the parish of Cuzco, Perú, which city had been the
center, the ‘navel,’ of the empire of the Inca. He was not only fluent
in quechua, the language of the Incas, but was a famous orator in that
language; his work is said by some specialists to be the best existing
synthesis of prehispanic andean religion. 10
De Molina relates how the Inca Pachacuti, the ‘Earthshaker’ or
‘Renovator,’ received the vision that proved to be germinal in the
establishment of the Inca empire; for Pachacuti, still known at this
time (during the reign of his father Viracocha Inca) as Inca Yupanqui,
was essentially the founder and the driving force of the empire. His
career of conquest came after he had his famous vision, due to which he
would thereafter establish Temples of the Sun, along with Inca power,
throughout the breadth of his andean world. De Molina relates the story
as follows:
“It is said that before [Pachacuti] was the Lord Inca, and when he
was on his way to visit his father Viracocha Inca who was at Sacsahuana,
five leagues from Cuzco, he came to a spring called Susurpuquio just at
the moment that he saw a crystal mirror fall into the spring, within
which he could see the figure of an Indian in the following form: From
the top of the back of his head, flashing upward, emanated three
dazzling rays of light, like rays of sunlight; and where his arms joined
his shoulders there were coiled serpents…He had the head of a lion

etween his legs, and on his back was another lion, whose arms seemed to
embrace both his shoulders, and a type of serpent which grasped him from
the top of his shoulders all down the back. And when he saw this
figure, the Inca [Pachacuti] began to flee, and the statue-shape called
him by his name from within the spring, saying to him: ‘Come here, my
son, do not fear, I am the Sun your father, and I know that you are
destined to conquer many nations; take great care to venerate and revere
me, and remember me in your sacrifices.’ And then the shape
disappeared, but the crystal mirror remained behind in the spring, and
the Inca took and kept it; and it is said that he was afterward able to
see within it everything that he desired. And with respect to this—he
being the Lord Inca, for whom everything is possible—he ordered that a
statue be made of the figure of the Sun, which was neither more nor less
than that figure he had seen in the mirror…” 11
A look at the statues we are scrutinizing, PMAL2 and AP1 (and also
PMA1 & PMA2 and the others previously mentioned), will reveal that the
vision of the Divine Presence which Pachacuti Inca saw and later ordered
immortalized as a statue—a human figure with a great feline crouched on
his back and embracing his head and shoulders, and coiled serpents where
his arms met his body and a great serpent cascading down behind him from
the top of his back—already existed and had already been carved in stone
many centuries before, in the Macizo Colombiano, by the sculptors of the
Pueblo Escultor.
************************************************

With this preceding discussion in mind, the following comments are
meant to aid in furthering the investigation of the statues of the
Pueblo Escultor and the elements and symbols that they display. Some of
the following references are more specifically considered elsewhere in
this text. The relationships to the sculptural traditions evident in
Olmec and Chavín stone-carving are important precisely because in these
seminal cultures the most essential and basic, original american symbols
and beliefs were worked out and displayed for the first time. That the
wide range of Pueblo Escultor iconography stems so directly and
faithfully from these original formulations is eloquent testimony to the
key position of the statuary of the Macizo Colombiano in terms of the
dissemination and revelation of these powerful images.
*****************************************
To begin with Mesoamerica, there is a whole range of meaning shared
by the stone-carvings of the Pueblo Escultor and those of the Olmecs,
going well beyond essential pan-american beliefs such as the use of
stone as ‘primal material,’ the omni-presence of serpent and feline
energy, and the mythic underground location that is constantly being
illustrated. This last trait, shown by the Olmecs in the form of the
‘altar-niches’ that human figures lean out of, the ‘earth-monsters’ with
human figures inside them (that surround the ‘niches’ and appear in
rock-carving and in cave-painting), the extensive underground galleries
and painted caves, and so on, is portrayed in the Pueblo Escultor art by
the subterranean tomb-constructions which are, as well, the theater of
the statue-personages.
The goddess-figure of La Venta is the beginning stage of the
exalted representation of Woman in the art of Mesoamerica, and the image
will never be absent thereafter in America’s northern sector. At around

the same time, in central México, Tlatilco’s artists are creating in
ceramic a whole set of feminine figurines. The Pueblo Escultor statues
include an extensive series of female figures, most certainly linked to
this northern current of beliefs—see the Woman Signs section.
The ‘X’-pattern as a symbol and adornment for the serpent, linked
in turn to the earth and mankind’s genesis, is a recurring theme of
Olmec iconography, and as we have seen it is equally central to the
symbolism of the Pueblo Escultor stones—see the Serpent and Woman Signs
sections.
The image of a supernatural being hovering up above a human figure,
in some sort of guiding or controlling role, is given its first
formulation in Olmec art. Olmec statues—the figure from San Martín
Pajapán would be an example—often convey this meaning by showing, up
above the human being’s head, a looming supernatural mask. In Pueblo
Escltor terms, this becomes the root of the Doble Yo complex and the
Doble figure—see Doble Yo section—in which a great feline-serpent being
hunches on the shoulders and back of the human figure. That type of
formulation is also present in, for instance, a relief-carving at the
Chalcatzingo Olmec site.
Related to the previous group are the Olmec ‘were-babies’ or ‘were-
jaguars,’ which are childlike, puffy-faced creatures. They are clearly
very important in the Olmec mythos, and are no less so for the Pueblo
Escultor, where they appear as the ‘doble-spirits’ hovering up above
human beings, essentially replacing the Doble Yo creature just
mentioned—see PMA1 & PMA2, PMB9 & PMB10, PMB14 & PMB20, and so on. In
both cases, Olmec and Pueblo Escultor, there is a curious element which
is involved here somehow: a notch in the head. All the just-mentioned
Pueblo Escultor stones, as well as others, have notched heads, and the
trait has often been mentioned in the literature on a range of Olmec
monuments.

Childlike figures—whether related or not to the beings just
considered—appear in still another way in both Olmec and Pueblo
Escultor. The human beings leaning out of niches in the Olmec ‘altars’
(or ‘thrones’) sometimes hold these ‘children’ horizontally in their
arms, as if in offering. In the Pueblo Escultor case, we have a series
of images (see Sacrifice Figures-A & -B) in which a human figure holds a
small human-like being upright in his/her arms; the small person is
always marked with distinctive head appendages called ‘cuernos.’ It may
be germane to note the evidence for child-burial and possible child-
sacrifice in both cultures; in the case of the Pueblo Escultor these
suggestions have been made with regard to the tiny graves in the
Quinchana site.
The ‘feline procreator’ figure seen numerous times in the Pueblo
Escultor statuary (see Feline Figures-A group) is supposed by many to be
related to the much-discussed Olmec stones from Río Chiquito first
reported by Stirling; in both cases a supernatural feline looms over a
human (and seemingly female) being, and from what we can see, copulates
with her. The mythic moment revealed by these statues may be a matter
of the utmost importance; conceivably, the genesis of the Pueblo
Escultor race is being reenacted here, in the coupling of the
otherworldly feline male with the super-earthly (and thus serpentine)
female being, which leads to the fangs and the ‘supernaturalization’ of
many of the statues.
The horizontal-axis creatures resembling caimans from such sites as
La Venta and Tres Zapotes have their counterparts in Pueblo Escultor—see
AI8, AI21, (1)HM8, (1)HM9, (5)M2 and etc.
There are numerous other traits shared by these two peoples. In
Olmec (and mirrored in Pueblo Escultor) we observe figures with one hand
down and the other upraised; figures with staffs held diagonally across
the body; figures holding a serpent or serpents, or a double serpent;

and figures with the arms across the torso one above the other and
wearing a rounded hat. These may seem like small details, but in fact
the confluence of elements across space and time suggests that the
relationship may in each case be a strict and meaningful one.
We will revisit all of these images in the course of these
comments. The figure holding one hand upraised, for instance, appears
exceptionally in the Olmec work, but as we shall see, this is an
essential image from the andean tradition, momentous in that world.
What, then, is the meaning of its appearance at such an early date in
Mesoamerica? The Pueblo Escultor analog, PMC1, is from the epicenter of
San Agustín’s archaeological vestiges.
The staff-across-torso figure too seems to be principally important
in zones of south-american influence, so once again, what do we say of
its appearance in an Olmec site? There are a number of Macizo examples:
AP5, (4)A2, (3)Y1, (3)SJ3, (3)SJ7, and (2)LG1. And the personage with
arms arranged asymmetrically across the body, too, eventually takes on
great importance far to the south in the Titicaca Basin, but we see it
in sites both of the Olmec and of the Pueblo Escultor (PMA4).
The figure holding a writhing serpent occurs twice in the Pueblo
Escultor statuary (CA2 and PMB2), and in doing so seems to show roots
come from Mesoamerica, and from the first Olmec examples. The image
will still live, will still be created from stone, during Aztec times on
the eve of the european invasion.
******************************************
Elsewhere in Mesoamerica, during later periods of stonework, appear
many more elements shared with the sculptors of the Macizo Colombiano.
Certain post-Olmec sites on the Pacific slope and highlands of
southern México and Guatemala, such as Izapa, Kaminaljuyú and Cerro de

las Mesas, are well-known for stone sculptures, among which the echoes
of the Pueblo Escultor are clear. The dates of the development of this
mesoamerican complex may coincide with the dates of the early monuments
in the Macizo Colombiano. The ‘toads’ that we see in several of the
Pacific-slope sites, for instance, bear comparison with such Macizo
‘ranas’ or ‘caymanes’ as M1, (1)HM4, (1)HM5 and others of the
Cayman/Rana/Lagarto group.
At Izapa we note such elements as beheading; figures holding
serpents; figures bearing small figures on the back; and something
appearing on an extended mouth or tongue. For the first, Pueblo
Escultor offers for comparison PMB11, QC4 and the Sacrifice Figure-E and
–G groupings; for the second, CA2 and PMB2. As for small figures borne
on the backs of others, Pueblo Escultor has as extensive series (see
Sacrifice Figure-J section). The something-on-the-tongue category enters
a labyrinth of groupings, not at all transparent, which appears to have
come from, or to have originally been important in, South America;
Pueblo Escultor group Lengua/Cinta/Cabeza is a listing of such figures.
The classic-age city of Teotihuacán, the center of the mesoamerican
world, must be contemporary with an era of sculptural greatness in the
lands of the Pueblo Escultor. It is no coincidence that the conception
of carving rounded anthropomorphic figures in stone comes to fruition in
both places at once, at the same time, basically, in which this form of
stone-sculpture also is mastered in the Andes. The stone-carving art of
the Olmec, like that of formative Chavín in South America, is mostly an
art of relief-carving, or figures only partially freeing themselves from
the background slab. The first steps toward this new method are taken
at the Pacific Coast post-Olmec sites and at the contemporary Titicaca
Basin sites in Bolivia and Perú. At Teotihuacán, and in the Macizo
Colombiano, bulky, blocky upright anthropomorphs achieve a new
independence in stone.

The massive figure of Chalchiuhtlicue is an example of this new
presence, all the more interesting because here again we see the figure
of the goddess, complete with a skirt of ‘X’-markings, just as we do in
the Pueblo Escultor series of female statues (see Woman Signs section).
Also at Teotihuacán, the image of the feathered serpent takes memorable
shape, prefigured already by Olmec examples, and paralleled too by such
Pueblo Escultor bird-and-serpent stones as PMB6 and PE1. Double-
serpents are present in both cultures, as will be common henceforth in
Mesoamerica: in Pueblo Escultor we have PMB27 and LT4 and Doble stones
such as PMA1 and the back side of AP5. Skulls, another Teotihuacán
element, are listed for Pueblo Escultor in the Sacrifice Figures-E, -F
and –G groups.
The art of the Maya seems at the far end of the spectrum
stylistically from the work of the Pueblo Escultor, engaged in a very
different direction. Nonetheless, themes that fascinated many cultures
in the northern world, and figure in that of the Maya, resonate in the
statues of the Macizo: we see in both cases the skirts of females marked
with patterns of ‘X’-shapes and diamonds, and Doble-masks above
principal figures. Double-headed serpents are notably present. Another
mayan symbol, a ‘T’-shape known from a number of sites (see ‘T-Shaped
Pectoral’ text of following chapter), occurs in the iconography of both
cultures; among the stones of the Pueblo Escultor it appears as a
pectoral, and that same usage is known in mayan pieces as well.
The mounds of skulls at sites in northern Toltec-influenced Yucatán
recall (1)HM1 and so on. The ‘telemones’ of Tula represent a step along
the line of development of the freestanding statue; they hold unusual
shield-shaped objects that may be worth comparing to PMA7 & PMA8, and
OU2.
On México’s Gulf Coast, even hatchet-shaped ball-game hachas
sometimes have Doble-masks above the faces, and there is a stelae on

which the female figure’s skirt is crosshatched with ‘X’s, and from the
decapitated head gush serpents (as blood) plaiting themselves into a
pattern of ‘X’-shapes.
Turning our attention now to the stone sculptures of the Huastec,
we will see that although stylistically speaking there is a relatively
narrow range of form, in terms of the elements involved there are
numerous parallels to the statuary of the Pueblo Escultor. There are an
overwhelming percentage of female statues—not a surprise, perhaps, due
to the mesoamerican orientation—and they dress in skirts and at times
turbans, as do the Macizo female figures. And we will find masks above
the faces of principal figures, indicating some type of Doble creature,
and even cases of Doble-animals on the backs of the statues. Related
here are small figures carried on the backs of the principal statue
personages, found both in Huastec sculpture and among the Pueblo
Escultor (see Sacrifice Figures-J group).
Certain Huastec characters hold with both hands a staff that seems
like a walking-stick under (but not quite touching) the chin; the shape
thus closely approximates an element titled ‘Staff-&-Mask’ in the
present study, in which the staff, grasped before the body by both
hands, touches the chin of, or more precisely, touches (and sustains)
the bottom of the mask that in reality covers the face of the main
figure. It is an element of stone sculpture that seems to originate in
post-Chavín times in South America, occurs repeatedly (as we will see)
in Central America, and is recognizable here in these Huastec stones.
There is an important series of these images among the sculpture of the
Pueblo Escultor—see the Masked Figures grouping.
The flat, rounded-top background typical of the Huastec statuary is
uncommon trait which finds its echo among the Macizo statues; PMC3 (and
its neighboring stones on Mesita C in the Parque Arqueológico), perhaps
(1)TI4, and especially C1 are worth comparing. And the conical hats, so

typical of the Huastec statues, deserve a mention: such Pueblo Escultor
figures as PMA4, (1)TI26, PMAL9 and even PMB8 carry a hint of this
distinctive form.
******************************************
While by far most of the stone sculpture of ancient America was
created before 1000 A.D., this venerable art, with the Aztecs and on the
eve of the european conquest, would live one final glorious era. Many
centuries had passed since the creation of the monuments of the Pueblo
Escultor, and many more since the beginnings of the stone-carving
tradition; the Aztec sculpture features numerous images which had long
been known and recreated. Skulls, for instance, are now a prominent
element, and we have seen that some of the Macizo stones carry this
image. And serpents are, as always, abundant: some are double (as is
Pueblo Escultor PMB27), some are held in the hands of humans (see, for
Pueblo Escultor, CA2 and PMB2), and a stone in México’s Museo de
Antropología shows a person holding two serpents in his hands.
The ‘Plumed Serpent’ is one of the most recognizable Aztec images
(surviving today as the emblem of México), and the examples in this
statuary are many, and of greatly varying styles; we have seen that the
roots lie in earlier mesoamerican cultures. The examples from the
Pueblo Escultor (PMB6 and PE1), though much older, are perhaps truer to
the image on Mexico’s flag and coins than anything still existing that
was carved in stone by the Aztecs themselves. And when we look at the
Aztec temple of Malinalco, with serpent entrance and feline and bird
figures carved in the cave-like interior, we remember that all three of
these animals are also repeatedly evoked by the sculptors of the Pueblo
Escultor (see the respective sections on all three).

The serpent skirts with ‘X’-patterns and their relationship with
female figures have been touched on a number of times, but the great
Aztec figure of Coatlicue may be the greatest apotheosis of this idea:
her head replaced by a tremendous double-serpent and her skirts plaited
in writhing serpents, wearing a necklace of human hearts and hands.
Principal examples of the Pueblo Escultor ‘serpent-skirt-lady’ include
T5, T1, AP7 and AI1—see Woman Signs category.
We have also already considered the fact that the Doble, which
begins with Olmec mask-above-face figures and in Pueblo Escultor takes
the form of supernatural animals perched on the shoulders of human
beings (see Doble Yo groups), is represented in Aztec sculpture by masks
that envelope the face of the principal figure: the human being emerges
from the mask, in effect, and at the extreme edge of this idea the
‘mask’ is the flayed skin which is sewed on to the entire body of a now-
invisible person.
There is one more entry in the list of relevant stone-carvings
which should be mentioned here: these statues are found in Manabí on the
Pacific coast of Ecuador in South America, and while their makers may
have been inhabitants of the southern continent, their culture, and
their symbols and artistic expressions, are clearly in the tradition of
Mesoamerica to the north. It may well be that an analysis of the
ceramics would illustrate this more fully, but a series of flat stone
slabs are illustrative in just the same way. Certain of these slabs
show females, and as we have seen, the lithic complex of female images
comes from México and the north: in fact, these Manabí examples seem to
be virtually the only south-american stone-carvings of women, apart from
those of the Pueblo Escultor (listed in the Woman Signs section). Yet
more unusual is the fact that the Manabí sculptures show the women
opening their legs to expose their genitals; the Pueblo Escultor stone

OB4—unique in the Macizo area—is an analog of these mesoamerican stone-
carvings from Ecuador.
There is another series of stone sculptures from the Manabí sites
which merit attention. They are called sillas or ‘seats’ and are in
fact strange ‘U’-shaped carvings often supported on anthropomorphic or
zoomorphic bases which may or may not have ever actually been seats.
But the idea is not at all out of context: certain other american stone-
carvings have also been called seats, such as the ‘thrones’ (if not
‘altars’) of the Olmec, and the ‘tables’ (if not ‘seats’) of the
central-american sculptors. The relevant Pueblo Escultor piece is
completely unique among the Macizo ruins; neighbors of the distant
isolated hillside in the Moscopán statue-area where it stands have long
called (3)LC9 ‘la silla.’
****************************************
When we shift our gaze further to the south, beyond Mesoamerica and
deeper into Central America, we come to an area in which the genesis of
the symbols of iconography is a complex question, in which both andean
as well as northern (and perhaps other) languages of symbol leave their
marks on the stone sculptures. This Intermediate Zone covers lower
Central America as well as Venezuela and Colombia in the southern
continent: the Pueblo Escultor pertain to this same bridge of culture,
and share and exhibit the cross-currents that leave their traces
throughout the isthmus to the north.
Much of the stonework from Nicaragua and Costa Rica apparently
dates to periods of time which come after the great ages of sculpture in
the Macizo Colombiano. The relationships that are revealed by our
survey, then, would indicate influences moving through Pueblo Escultor
toward the central-american traditions in this art.

The group of statues known as Chontales, from the Cordillera
Amerrisque to the east of the lakes in Nicaragua, display a whole range
of elements shared with the stone-carvings we are studying here; we
begin to feel something of the presence inherent in the Pueblo Escultor
world. There are many females in the Chontales art, and they wear
crosshatched skirts and turbans, and numerous figures carry miniature
animals (which we recognize as Dobles) above their heads; both of these
ideas come, as we have seen, from Mesoamerica.
One figure we see repeatedly is a female personage with arms non-
symmetrically arranged, one above the other, across the torso. The
Pueblo Escultor PMA4 is female (wears a skirt), lacks fangs as is the
case with many figures of women, and has her arms folded in like manner
across her body. While there is an Olmec version of this figure who
wears a rounded hat just like that of PMA4, it is very possible that
this figure has come to Central America (and to the Pueblo Escultor) not
from the north but from South America, where, in the Titicaca Basin,
there are a good numbers of statues with just this image which
considerably predate these central-american stones, and perhaps the
Pueblo Escultor example as well.
There are a series of Chontales figures who hold a spear or
scepter diagonally across the body, with the tip across one shoulder.
This is a familiar figure to the student of the Pueblo Escultor, in
statues such as AP5, (2)LG1, (3)Y1, (3)SJ3, (3)SJ7, and (4)A2. Although
there is an analogous Olmec monument, and perhaps other examples
elsewhere, it would seem that the two most important series displaying
this particular image are those of Chontales and of the Pueblo Escultor.
Other symbols relate the two cultures: one figure seen in Chontales
holds, on a necklace or held in hands or with mouth, a vertical device
that looks something like a musical instrument. Pueblo Escultor statues
like C1, OB3 and J4 are worth comparing. These figures can also look

much like the Huastec statue previously discussed which holds a long
vertical staff sustaining a face-covering mask. The Masked Figures
category groups a number of statues from the Macizo showing this symbol,
which is probably of south-american derivation.
Ultimately, the personage with something in his mouth or on his
tongue becomes a figure whose tongue extends downward and then
transforms into some other thing; often that new thing is a face or
head, and the hands of the main figure may grasp the vertical tongue.
The image is difficult to understand; it borders on those just mentioned
who hold staffs or ‘musical instruments.’ But this important personage
occurs repeatedly in the Chontales statues and in those of the Pueblo
Escultor: see the Lengua/Cinta/Cabeza group. This image too has come
north from the Andes, where we observe it among the Titicaca Basin
statues of pre-Tiwanaku times.
The Chorotega statues from Nicaragua are probabaly, as is the case
with Chontales, post-Pueblo Escultor, but they differ in that they
predominantly show mesoamerican-derived imagery. These monumental
statues were found principally on Zapatera and Omotepe Islands in Lake
Nicaragua and in the Nicoya region of neighboring Costa Rica; they are
among the statues most closely related to the sculptures of the Pueblo
Escultor, as has been suggested in the literature for many years. All
three principal forms of the Doble Yo are to be seen in Chorotega: the
huge creature perched on the shoulders and back, the smaller animal or
mask up above the head, and the enveloping mask from which the head and
face emerge. The first of these three, the huge supernatural being, is
the style that we see in the statuary of the Pueblo Escultor, and a
study of the related statues—see the Doble Yo groupings—will illustrate
the extensive connections.
The relationships with the many stone figures from Costa Rica are
difficult to group because peoples in so many parts of the country left

statues and other sculptures in stone, and because much of these
antiquities were collected carelessly with no thought to preservation of
the data related to the finds; and perhaps most of all because so many
different cultural currents at different times crossed and re-crossed
the isthmus. But there can be no doubt as to the extensive range of
elements shared between the different stone-carving peoples of Costa
Rica and the sculptors of the Pueblo Escultor. Many of these elements
have already been discussed. The majority of the costa-rican lithic
sculpture probably dates to the end of, and posterior to, the Pueblo
Escultor sequence; once again the shared iconography, whatever its
ultimate origin, was passing from south to north.
Many personages in the stones from Costa Rica bear tremendous
fangs, as do those of San Agustín. There are large numbers of females
in the statuary, many showing their breasts (see Woman Signs-B), and
there are serpents with crosshatching and diamond patterns: symbols
whose origin lies in Mesoamerica. The same may be true of statues in
which the principal personage carries a smaller person, or a trophy
head, on his back (Sacrifice Figures-J group).
There are other motifs common in Costa Rica which we have already
observed in other areas, and which are known in the Pueblo Escultor
work: figures holding trophy heads or skulls, or carrying them as a
pendant (see Sacrifice Figures-E) for instance, or figures holding the
staff-and-mask device (see Masked Figures). Another image seen in both
culture areas that has appeared centuries earlier in South America is
the Lengua/Cinta/Cabeza figure whose tongue descends and turns into
something else or bifurcates. And we may see, in both our subject
areas, statues with not two but three superimposed figures (see (1)HM2,
(1)HM10 and Doble-Yo-C group).
There are also versions in Costa Rica of images derived from Chavín
by way of cultures such as Pueblo Escultor. One such would be the

Staff-God of Chavín, which image appears in Costa Rica and in Pueblo
Escultor is represented by PMC2. And a costa-rican figure of a person
who holds two objects, one in each hand, recalls the ‘Personage Holding
Two Objects,’ the descendant of the Staff-God, frequent in numerous
versions in later Chavín art and present in the Pueblo Escultor
sculpture (there are many examples, starting with PMA3 and (3)LC2 and so
on, and the Coqueros such as PMA9, QC5, (1)VP1, etc.).
Several more devices common to Central America and the Macizo
Colombiano are best known from the eastern or Atlantic watershed. One
would be the round altar or table with a ring of faces around the rim or
outer side; in the Pueblo Escultor area we would look at AI9 and (1)SA2.
There is an analogous Olmec stone from Chalcatzingo; on the eastern
watershed of Costa Rica and Nicaragua, the image usually takes the form
of a flattened table-like grinding stone with faces hanging from the
rim. Another eastern-side image is one in which a woman holds or
strokes her own breasts. The related Pueblo Escultor statue, AI16, is a
striking piece of sculpture. In México’s Anthropological Museum may be
seen an Aztec version of this figure, which was thus still alive in the
american mythos up to the time of the euoropean invasion.
Yet one step closer to South America, on the panamanian side of the
border with Costa Rica, there is a final site which deserves
consideration in any discussion of the stone statues of the Pueblo
Escultor. The site is Barriles, and the stone tables with rings of faces
that we have just considered appear there, as do figures with trophy-
heads, and we have seen that there are echoes of both these complexes in
the Pueblo Escultor canons. But the Barriles site is best known for a
set of statues which have been called ‘Man-on-Slave,’ and the apparent
relationship of this group to the Doble Yo figures from the San Agustín
area (see the Doble Yo grouping) has been mentioned and commented upon a
number of times.

In the ‘Man-on-Slave’ image, a standing human being carries,
sitting on his shoulders, another, similarly-shaped and –sized, human
being. Neither is overtly supernaturalized, they are not fanged, and
both seem very human, although the upper figure is distinguished by
wearing a certain type of conical hat; it is somewhat similar to the
Huastec conical hats, and PMB8 and PMB13 are worth comparing. But the
implication which follows identifying these Barriles statues with the
Pueblo Escultor Doble Yo stones is that the upper Barriles figure is not
just another human being, but a version of the Doble creature. I too
suspect that this is the case, and it is important to remember that the
dates of Barriles are not, like much of the central-american statuary
that we have been studying, late in the pre-Columbian sequence, but
rather are said to fall in the early centuries of our present era, which
is to say, relatively early in the Pueblo Escultor sequence.
***********************************************
The ancient south-american culture of Chavín, centered on the site
of Chavín de Huántar in the northern sierra of Perú, is to the Andes
what Olmec is to Mesoamerica: not necessarily the beginning, but rather
the first full florescence, the first grand statement of the tradition;
the place where for the first time all the formative strands are woven
together, and the weaving begins to reveal itself. Like those come
southward from Mesoamerica, many of the key threads from the Andean
tapestry will run to the north and clothe the statues of the Pueblo
Escultor, and among them we may identify a good number which originated
in Chavín during this first horizon.
Briefly, we must take a look at the pre-Chavín site of Sechín on
the north peruvian coast, where carved relief-slabs adorn the walls of a
small temple which is clearly a precursor to Chavín, though the

elationship continues to be very difficult to address with any
precision. Among the dismembered bodies shown at Sechín, we see
decapitated heads, which recall the Sacrifice Figures groups showing
skulls from the Macizo, and the trapezoidal or truncated hats of the
‘victors’ who parade among the holocaust are slightly reminiscent of
those worn by PMB8 and PMB13. But the most striking connection between
Pueblo Escultor and these stone slabs lies in the essential position of
the ‘Double Sense’ which is exhibited so strongly in both cases. The
Double Sense, unlike the Doble image in which a supernatural figure
hovers up above a human-like being, is a mirroring, a true doubling, of
an essential image. It is fundamental to the stone imagery of America,
and may have its most important roots in Chavín and Sechín. In the
latter case, the parade we see is actually a double parade, echoing
itself around both sides of the temple, winding from both directions
toward the entrance.
This type of Double Sense is overwhelmingly present at the Chavín
site and elsewhere in the related artwork, which is animated, in fact,
by this essential mirrored duality. At the beginning of this chapter
there is an illustration of the extension of these double-elements, and
we need not go into them here. But the importance of this doubling
never flags during the centuries of precolumbian history, is amply
presented in mesoamerican art as well in later phases, and is a vital
principle in Pueblo Escultor creation: see such stones as (4)A4, (2)PV1,
(1)P1, PMC9, AP5, PMA1 & PMA2, PMB14 & PMB20, and many more.
There is a central fact enclosed within the sharing of beliefs
between Chavín and Pueblo Escultor, and that fact is revealed by two
statues from the Parque Arqueológico near San Agustín, and a pair of
related Chavín images. But these are not just any images, they are
considered to be the Principal Images of this andean ‘mother-culture,’
of inestimable importance to the people of Chavín and of many other

places and cultures after that, to judge by the geographical propagation
of these two motifs. The two stones are the Lanzón, Chavín’s first
Principal Personage, still embedded today in its tiny underground
chamber in the Chavín temple, and its successor as the Principal Image,
the Staff-God, now in the National Archaeological Museum in Lima. Their
importance for the Chavín culture is not in question, and so it is of
great significance that we find cognates of the two, buried next to each
other, in a highly exalted and very unique site named Mesita C in San
Agustín’s Parque Arqueológico.
The Lanzón is a ‘Lance,’ a knife-blade, and it is shaped as such,
with the blade thrust down into the ground. The Pueblo Escultor analog
in question, PMC1, has a strange shape in that the statue has a rounded
top, and the same is true of the Staff-God analog (PMC2) and two other
statues which form a line on Mesita C; they are the only Pueblo Escultor
stones known which have this shape. By a glance at the shape of both
these stones we can see that they are formed like tumis, which are
ceremonial blades; by their very shape the statues themselves, like the
Lanzón, represent knife-blades. Tumis appear repeatedly in the
iconography of the Macizo—see PMA3, OU53, Q2, and (3)LC2.
The Chavín Lanzón is a fanged creature with right hand upraised and
left hand down at the side. PMC1 is similarly fanged, and the most
outstanding feature of the figure is that the right hand was upraised,
with the left folded across the torso: it is the only statue of the
entire survey with one arm upraised outside the body, in a Lanzón-like
posture. The right arm of PMC1 was long ago broken off, but a close
inspection of the statue will confirm that this arm was originally
raised up toward the shoulder. Lanzón-like figures may be seen as a
relief-carving in Olmec Chalcaztzingo, as an earth-glyph on the Pampa of
Nazca (under the name of ‘the Astronaut’), among the petroglyphs of Toro

Muerto near Arequipa in southern Perú, and carved on rocks as far south
as Santa Rosa de Tastíl near Salta in the northwest of Argentina.
The Staff-God was, if anything, yet more important, was carried
farther afield: most famously, the central figure in the ‘Door of the
Sun’ at Tiwanaku is an analog of the Chavín figure, and is reproduced
endlessly in the art of the era. All examples carry two large staffs,
one in each hand, as is the case with the Pueblo Escultor PMC2; the
measurements of the Chavín piece and the Macizo slab are very similar.
The Staff-God, though, has an elaborate tower of images up above the
head, almost reminiscent of (1)HM2 and (1)HM10 from the Tierradentro
area.
A third important Chavín figure, derived perhaps in some way from
the Lanzón and the Staff-God, and also to be widely disseminated in the
art of successor cultures, is known as the ‘Smiling God,’ and might also
be considered the ‘Personage Holding Two Objects,’ because this aspect
of the figure is probably more important than the ‘smile.’ This
Personage will appear in a supremely important position in the statuary
of Tiwanaku, and we see repeated versions in the art of the Pueblo
Escultor—see PMA3, LM4, and (3)LC2, as well as PMA9, AI4, etc.
Several other motifs which appear in the Macizo statues are given
beginning forms by the sculptors of Chavín. The carrying of trophy-
heads, which appears in the Macizo (see PMB11, PMB8, (2)L2 and QC4),
first shows up in Chavín relief-carving; there may be a hint of this
complex in the stones of Sechín. And the Chavín Tello Obelisk and Yauya
Stela are both said to represent caymanes, which animal (see
Cayman/Rana/Lagarto-A listing) is certainly present in Pueblo Escultor
stonework, though the similarity in form might seem closer to somewhat
later mesoamerican sculptures.
Two other important images first surface on Chavín monoliths at
sites far from Chavín de Huántar. One is from Pacopampa, far to the

north: the Lengua/Cinta/Cabeza figure, whose tongue extends downward and
then is transformed into something else, often a face, would seem to
begin here in the Chavín horizon in South America, appear among the
Pueblo Escultor in the series just named, and only later penetrate into
Central America and the northern continent.
And at Kuntur Wasi appears what may be the earliest representation
of the ‘Staff-and-Mask’ personage, which is illustrated in the Pueblo
Escultor work by such stones as Q4, Q1, U1, PMC4, (4)A1 and other Masked
Figures. Unlike the ‘Lengua’ figure, this ‘Staff-and-Mask’ image does
not become a widespread one in precolumbian America, only appearing a
limited number of times, and so the Pueblo Escultor series is perhaps
the most extensive known.
The Kuntur Wasi stones are also notable in that they have departed
from the Chavín norm (also coincidentally the Olmec norm) and taken a
step toward becoming freestanding rounded statues. It is a new
development in technique, and in the phase that comes next—represented
by the post-Olmec Gulf Coast sites in Mesoamerica, the Pueblo Escultor
sites, and the post-Chavín sites in the Titicaca Basin—it will step to
the forefront and be extensively explored and utilized. Sites such as
Kuntur Wasi represent the awakening of this new concept.
****************************************
As Chavín fades, and disseminates its seeds into the many cultures
which have come under its influence during the years of this horizon,
the impetus for sculpture in stone moves to the Titicaca Basin. During
the Basin’s pre-Tiwanaku phase, stone sculpture is produced in many
sites around the lake, of which Pukara, to the north, is perhaps the
best known, along with Taraco, on the northern side, and Pokotía and
Chiripa on the south. The Tiwanaku site itself, to the south of the

lake, also has its roots in this period, but in the succeeding Tiwanaku
era takes on a predominant position. The Pueblo Escultor were probably
contemporary with both of these phases, although the precise periods in
which the different Macizo statues were created is not known with any
certainty. During both phases there are evidences of relationship in
the stone-sculptures of these distant cousins.
One set of relief-stones, notable at Pukara and Taraco, carry
complexes of images which include frogs, lizards and serpents, including
double-headed serpents. The lizards have a certain resemblance to such
stones as PML2, PMB18, PMB19 and (3)LC5, and while both frog-like
animals (PML1, M1, (3)LC7 and J8) and fish (AI19 and PMB3) are present
in the Pueblo Escultor stones, in the Titicaca statues they have taken
on great importance. There is a double-serpent stone from the Parque
Arqueológico (PMB27), but more striking is the ‘banding’ or ‘striping’
we see on Titicaca serpents—we recall the ‘half-crosshatching’ on PMAL2,
AP1 and T5.
Found close to the lake on the southern side are a group of statues
which have been named ‘Yaya-Mama’ stones, and they convey a compelling
link to the Pueblo Escultor imagery. The classic Yaya-Mama statue is
carved on multiple faces of the stone and shows matched pairs of
standing human beings balanced off against pairs of undulating (and
sometimes double-headed) serpents. The Double-Sense is patent, and
reminds us again of the many Double-Images of the Pueblo Escultor.
Beyond this, though, the Yaya-Mama figures have their hands
asymmetrically placed across the torso, which recalls PMA4 from near San
Agustín. We recall that this latter figure wears a skirt and a rounded
hat, has no fangs, and is almost certainly female. The Yaya-Mama
stones, with their accompanying serpents, hint at being females as well:
at least according to the meaning that this symbol had for the Pueblo
Escultor and certain other American peoples. One Yaya-Mama figure in

the Pukara Museum has a skirt and a rounded hat (like PMA4) marked with
something like crosshatching. The ‘Bearded Personage’ of the Tiwanaku
plaza, who is accompanied by serpent and feline imagery, represents an
early Yaya-Mama figure.
Rounded, freestanding figures, we have seen, are being
explored by the time of the creation of these Titicaca Basin statues,
and several of them offer clues to the origin of motifs seen in the
Pueblo Escultor stone-work. One such example is an image of the
‘Lengua’ class of statuary we have looked at, in which the tongue
descends and then is transformed: there is such a figure in the Pukara
museum, and another associated image in a statue from Pokotía. The
former figure’s tongue-object is an upside-down humanoid, and while the
latter has been called a ‘flute player,’ the ‘flute’ is in reality
something similar to the small humanoid. Among the Pueblo Escultor
work, we would first reference PMB13, who holds just such an upside-down
human creature, and also the Lengua/Cinta/Cabeza group including PMC7,
U2, and PMB1. Associated are such stones as LM3, OB3, J4, OU48 and C1,
the latter being the San Agustín-area stone known for many years as the
‘Flute Player.’
There is another Titicaca Basin freestanding figure named the
‘Degollador’ or ‘Decapitator,’ also known as the ‘Sacrificer’; a well-
known example is from Pukara. The ‘Sacrificer’ is a supernaturalized
anthropomorph with tremendous fangs who holds a decapitated head in one
hand and a sacrificial knife in the other. The fangs would fit well in
the San Agustín area, of course, and there are decapitated heads held in
hands (PA2, PMB8 and (1)ED1) and strung on necklaces (PMB11, QC4 and
U2), as well as sacrificial tumi-knives (PMA3, Q2, OU53, and PMB(G)15).
Statues like the ‘Degollador’ and the ‘Flute Player’ are, we should
remember, very close in form to the freestanding anthropomorphs of the
Pueblo Escultor.

A final note brings us forward in time to the Tiwanaco epoch, for
statues like the ‘Bearded Personage’ of the plaza or the two kneeling
‘bulky’ figures in front of the church in the pueblo of Tiwanaku
probably date from pre-Tiwanaku times and yet may still have been
standing during the classic era as well. Two statues from Taraco are
very similar to these ‘bulky’ church-door statues, and one from each
site holds up in one hand a stone or round object as if in aggression or
defense. Figures with similar appurtenances from the Pueblo Escultor
are PMA7, PMA8 and PMB10.
Before taking a look at Tiwanaku, however, we should briefly
consider a set of small, rough stones from the Cochabamba area of
Bolivia, which may be from this Titicaca Basin time-period. There is a
human figure with a second human face on the chest, similar to PMB8,
PMB11 and (1)HM2, and to the ‘Degollador’ of Pukara. Another stone has
a twin-figure of side-by-side humans sharing a single pair of arms,
reminiscent of (4)A4, and yet another is similar except that in this
case we are presented with a trio of horizontally-arranged persons
sharing but one pair of arms; not only (4)A4, but the ‘triple-figures’
(1)HM2 and (1)HM10 come to mind. The statuary of the Pueblo Escultor
has been specifically referenced by students seeking to analyze these
Cochabamba sculptures.
***************************************
Tiwanaku, close to the southern shore of Lake Titicaca and near the
present-day border between Perú and Bolivia, was the greatest and most
influential city ever built on the southern continent. This powerful
center radiated its culture throughout the known world, and most closely
approximated the american archetype of being the ‘navel,’ the genesis
and summation. It was also a great center of stone-work and sculpture,

and given these facts it is to be expected that the relationship and
elements shared with its contemporary culture, the Pueblo Escultor,
would be evident.
As mentioned, there are pieces of the Tiwanaku stone display which
represent an earlier (Titicaca Basin) era: the ‘bulky’ statues from
Taraco and from the church in Tiwanaku pueblo, for instance (see above),
and the ‘Bearded’ statue from the sunken Tiwanaku plaza who pertains to
the ‘Yaya-Mama’ class of statues and is analogous to Pueblo Escultor
PMA4.
But the analysis of the shared heritage of Tiwanaku and Pueblo
Escultor must begin with a searching look at the central figure of the
‘Puerta del Sol’ or ‘Sun-Door,’ which still stands at its original
location on the bolivian altiplano. We read that at the time of the
conquest this figure was referred to as Viracocha, which is to say, the
Creating and Sustaining Divinity of andean belief. There can be no
doubt that the Tiwanaku Sun-Door entity, which was reproduced far and
wide during the centuries of Tiwanaku’s power, is a reincarnation, 1000
years later, of the Staff-God of Chavín, the divinity that we know to
have been the Principal Personage during his era for the people of that
‘First Horizon.’ And I think that that certainty extends to the Pueblo
Escultor statue PMC2, which was buried in the most exalted burial area
next to the day’s analog (PMC1) of the original Chavín Personage, the
Lanzón. This should definitely inform our search for the meaning of the
sculptures of the Pueblo Escultor.
The suggestion has been made that after the Lanzón and the Staff-
God, a new divinity appeared in the Chavín iconography as a Principal
Being: the ‘Personage Holding Two Objects’ (referred to as the ‘Smiling
God’), a standing anthropomorphic figure with an object in each hand
held across the torso. This Personage takes on great importance at
Tiwanaku as well; three of the statues found in Tiwanaku’s central

precinct--in the Sunken Plaza and the Kalasasaya--represent different
versions of this figure, holding a cup or vessel (a kero) in one hand
and a different object in the other. The ‘Two Objects’ Being occurs
repeatedly in the art of the Pueblo Escultor, and we could begin by
looking at PMA3 and (3)LC2, and the Coqueros group of coca-chewers,
along with certain statues of the Other Implements category.
Interestingly, two Pueblo Escultor female figures (AI1 and AP11) hold
rounded cups in their hands.
It may not be a mere detail that one of the Kalasasaya stones, the
‘Ponce Monolith,’ has the ankle-bone-knobs on the outside of the ankles
detailed in the stone. The other two statues referred to above as also
being from the central precinct of Tiwanaku are very similar in form to
the Ponce stone, but are too damaged around the ankles to show if they
might have been detailed in the same way; in any case, at least one
other Tiwanaku-age stone shows this same element. There is a connection
with a set of Pueblo Escultor statues, all from the principal
Tierradentro site and all similar in form to these Tiwanaku stones in
terms of being monumental block-like, squarish anthropomorphic figures.
The ankles of (1)T1, (1)T2 and (1)T3 all show this same peculiarity, and
nearby (1)T4 and (1)T11 may have once done so, but are damaged like the
Tiwanaku figures. I find this very curious and have not seen the same
detail elsewhere; the two groups of statues are thought to share similar
dates.
The ‘Degollador’ of the Titicaca period has metamorphosed into the
‘Chachapuma’ of Tiwanaku, and instead of being a fanged anthropomorph
has become fully feline; in both cases this ‘Sacrificer’ holds a severed
head in one hand and a sacrificial knife in the other. As related, the
Pueblo Escultor work has numerous examples of severed heads held by what
could be ‘Sacrificers’ (beginning with PA2, PMB8, and (1)ED1) and of
sacrificial tumi-knives (such as PMA3, Q2, OU53 and PMB(G)15). There

are also Feline Figures (see R1, T2, PMB22 and that group) which may be
compared. The ‘Chachapuma’ when looming over a human being (or even a
human face) can also seem much like a Doble Yo image.
The cabezas clavas or tenon-heads that line the inner walls of
Tiwanaku’s sunken plaza are clearly descended from the tenon-heads sunk
into the outer walls of the Chavín temple. There is no such
architectonic feature in the Pueblo Escultor tomb complexes, but
inasmuch as the image refers to trophy- or sacrifice-heads, we may look
at such images in stones as PMB11, QC4, (1)ED1 and the Implements-C
group, and also such statues as AI9, (1)SI1 and the Sacrifice-G class.
There are a set of strange Tiwanaku stones, called ‘Anticéfalas,’
in which a stubby-bodied human being with a large, elaborate headpiece
emerges half-modeled from the stone, and above his head is an equivalent
figure, but positioned upside-down. The ‘Double Sense’ of which we have
often spoken is patent here, but as well there is a hint of the Doble,
of one figure up above the other. There is no surprise in finding the
Double Sense here in the andean ‘navel’: at the center of the Tiwanaku
cosmos, the Sun-Door figure holds vertical staffs in each hand and is
flanked by two symmetric corps of bird-figures, and the Door itself is
carved in radically different fashions on its two sides (see the two
sides of PMAL3 or G3 for a suggestion of this last concept).
The ‘Anticéfalas’ would provide another view of the Double Sense,
and we may adduce as well a pair of statues of kneeling human beings
from Pokotía, somewhat reminiscent of the Tiwanaku ‘Chachapumas.’ The
Double Sense inherent in this pair reminds us of the pairs of ‘Guardian’
stones near San Agustín: PMA1 & PMA2, PMA7 & PMA8, etc. The Pokotía
figure wears a necklace which turns into a bicephalic serpent on the
back, looking very similar to AP5 of the Pueblo Escultor.
******************************************

This may be the appropriate place to introduce a reflection on one
consummate example of the Pueblo Escultor lithic art: the magnificent
tableaux of the creek-bed known as the Fuente de Lavapatas (PML2), some
12 meters by 15 meters in area and carved across its length with more
than 30 figures. There are many serpents and lizard-like ‘water-
animals’ among them, and we have noted similarities in that regard to
certain other american cultures, but in truth little has been suggested
that links this unique stone-carving to much of anything in America.
(It should be noted that there was once [before its destruction] a
‘second Lavapatas’ at the Las Moyas site near San Agustín, though the
carved channels and pools there were not augmented, as is the Fuente de
Lavapatas, with a set of life-like figures; and I have seen, in the
Platavieja area in the La Plata Valley, yet another channeled and
grooved creek-bed, again without all the living images.)
Nonetheless, if we pursue the search for analogs to the Fuente de
Lavapatas, we must come to consider several mysterious complexes of
stone-carving far to the south in the Andes. The first would be the
hill named Samaipata (near the town of the same name and not overly
distant from Santa Cruz, in Bolivia) where the crown of the hillside was
stripped to the stone and carved integrally. Another would be a set of
carvings named Khopakati, near Copacabana on the bolivian shore of Lake
Titicaca. At all three sites water, and the flow of water, is essential
to whatever the meaning and the function of the stonework must have
been. And—stepping forward in time, to the eve of the european
invasion—there are several other carved stones, attributed to the Inca,
which merit a look with regard to the Pueblo Escultor because of the
panoply of figures displayed in a single lithic scene. One such would
be the principal Saywite stone, between Cuzco and Abancay in Perú, and
another the K’enko stone not far from Cuzco.

A final search will complete this survey of relationships drawn
between the sculptors of the Pueblo Escultor and those of other american
peoples. Upon the decline of Tiwanaku, the principal impetus for the
stone-carving art moves northward into the mountains of northern Perú.
The dates are relatively late, and Pallasca and Aija, and the Callejón
de Huaylas and the area of Huaráz, give us a certain orientation in this
search; we are back in what had once been the homeland of Chavín. These
stone sculptures of northern Perú recall, in a certain sense, some of
the work we may see from Chontales in Nicaragua and from Costa Rica: to
a large degree they represent a post-classic age, and they are moderate
in size, with few truly monumental sculptures such as we see abundantly
in earlier ages. The elements and motifs are limited and repeated, and
we do not always have the sense of cosmic import we have come to feel in
earlier times.
Certain elements even seem to link the two far-flung bodies of
stone-sculpture; and the statues of the Pueblo Escultor, geographically
intermediate, help us to reveal the outline of these links. For
instance, there are in all three areas stone images formed of a
combination of three figures, the two on the outside similar or equal to
each other, flanking a fundamentally different central character. In
Central America the triple-figures were hanging side-panels of flattish
grinding-tables; now, in the stone-work of northern Perú, they are
architectonic relief-slabs, often showing an anthropomorphic figure
between two felines. The Pueblo Escultor sculptures to compare would be
the pairs of San Agustín Mesitas ‘Guardian’ stones, PMA1 & PMA2 and PMB9
& PMB10, etc., along with the central figures of the tombs: they
function as trios today, supporting the great roof-slabs of the tombs,
and supposedly did so in earlier times as well.
Besides the reliefs, the statuary of northern Perú includes numbers
of isolated and freestanding and tenon heads, as well as many rounded

stone figures. The heads recall Pueblo Escultor stones: the Sacrifice-E
group and such stones as PMB11, AI9 and QC4 may be relevant, as well as
isolated heads like LE3 and AI26.
The freestanding statues and the reliefs display many elements we
have come to recognize. Trophy heads are abundant. Staffs and clubs
and lances are carried, reminiscent of the Implements-A and –B classes.
Human beings have shields strapped to their arms (PMA7 & PMA8, and OU2),
or bags hanging on cords at their sides, as with (3)Y3 and (1)T10, and
the bag (or headband, etc.) may be marked with an ‘X,’ a symbol ever-
present in mesoamerican art and common in that of the Pueblo Escultor.
They may have small animals on headbands or as coronets—a representative
of some type of Doble creature, perhaps, which would also be of
mesoamerican origin, and related to the Dobles of the Macizo Colombiano.
There are also serpents with bifurcating- or feline-heads, and the
reliefs show pairs of felines, or serpent-feline creatures. The entire
complex has shown itself to be omnipresent in precolumbian art, and
emblematic of the Pueblo Escultor stone sculpture. The Pashash region
developed a certain type of serpent-feline image which shows up in its
stonework, recalls Recuay ceramic designs from the same zone, and
appears in the sculpture of the Macizo in the form of the Doble-animal
we have chronicled at the beginning of this chapter, depicted on our AP1
and PMAL2 subject statues; all versions show the ‘N’-tooth design which
characterizes this particular being.
But perhaps the typical and most emblematic form that stone-
sculpture took under the hand of the sculptors from these northern
mountains of Perú is that of the ‘stone mummy,’ which presumably
represents not a god or a supernatural entity, but rather a dead human
being, the deceased, the ancestor. The figure takes on a bundle-like
shape, sitting or with the legs drawn up, and he may carry objects
(especially those already mentioned) with him to the underworld. The

Pueblo Escultor category named Death Posture groups many examples of
this type of figure, most in similar postures, which may also represent
the deceased and the ancestors. It is not inconceivable that in both
cases representations of ‘stone mummies’ are late examples of the stone-
carving tradition dating to the final period of this millennial art.
The final actors on our stage, the Incas of Cuzco, put full energy
into construction in stone, into carving and fitting and designing
stone-works and stone structures, and relatively little into the art of
representational stone sculpture. There are, to be sure, exceptions.
Most of them seem to be the portrayal of animals. In architectural
contexts, a number of building wall-blocks have, as design, sculpted
relief figures of animals. Both twin-serpent designs and feline motifs
may still be seen on the ancient wall-stones of Cuzco, and the Inca site
of Huánuco Viejo near the town of La Unión in the peruvian sierra is
famous for the twin felines sculpted over a principal doorway. The road
from Chavín (and Olmec) to Inca (and Aztec) has been a long one,
accompanied at the end as at the beginning by these two most important
iconic spirits.
****************************************************
****************************************
********************

Part One: THE SERPENT
categories
Why choose the image of the serpent to open the discussion
of the sculptural iconography of the Pueblo Escultor? Well, we
must begin somewhere. In precolumbian America the serpent
represents—inhabits, is one with—the mother earth, the base-
line, the place/being on which we stand and which gives us life.
And at the least, the numbers are impressive: there are about
40 stones showing in some context the figure of a serpent, and
we can add to these another 20 which display the crosshatch
markings that in this cultural nexus function as the symbol of
the serpent. Sixty statues equal approximately 13% of the total
considered in this study.
The idea here is not to suggest that this one image held a
predominant place in the thought or the religion of these people
who have often been considered one of a number of early American
cultures identifiable as a ‘people of the jaguar.’ Our
appreciation of their realities, and of their spiritual beliefs,
is just too thin, and therefore too easy to generalize and
compartmentalize.
But we can say that among other images the serpent, for the
Pueblo Escultor, played an extremely important role, and
certainly no picture of their beliefs would be complete without
a serious consideration of the role of this animal, so primal in
our human experience, and in symbol–systems everywhere in the
world. 36

In America, the serpent is a key player in the drama
suggested by a study of ancient art, in virtually every region,
and from the beginnings of high culture. Among the Olmec
monuments in the Gulf Coast and highlands regions of southern
Mexico the serpent is consistently present in a dramatic role.
In the highlands of northern Perú, in the germinal culture and
tradition which we name Chavín after the central site of Chavín
de Huántar, the serpent is, if anything, yet more important.
All the principal monuments display serpents; in other Chavín
sites we see the same image repeated continually.
We need not follow the serpent image, stage by stage, down
through the different american cultures––the list would be
nearly all–inclusive. Given this perspective, there is no
surprise in finding the serpent time after time in the different
Pueblo Escultor monuments.
In a number of cases we are shown a natural version of a
serpent. One stone, PMB27, stands out because there are two
serpents writhing about this flat slab; and the double, or
double–headed, serpent was an archetypal image of ancient
America which can be seen, repeatedly, in the art of many
peoples. Some stones––see PMC12, (1)T13 and others in the
Serpent–D section––show what we may describe as a `natural'
serpent image, while others––PMB18, (3)LC5 and the Serpent–E
group––show one or more serpents accompanied by additional
animals.
The section B statues––PMB6 and PE1––are two different
versions of an image in which a bird grasps a serpent in its
beak and talons. This image, well–known to most students of
ancient american symbols, was certainly current throughout long
epochs of precolumbian life, and is especially familiar to us

for having led the Aztecs of Mexico to found their capital of
Tenochtitlán on an island in the middle of Lake Texcoco; today
the scene is pictured on the mexican flag and currency. It
would be difficult at this remove to try and flesh out the
Pueblo Escultor image as we have it, embodied in two blocks of
stone. But it appears that here we have evidence for the
sharing of this important american symbol and archetype, in some
fashion, by the ancient Pueblo Escultor. Throughout the history
of world mythology, too, the interplay of these two animals has
been a familiar image.
The serpents in section C are grasped with the hands of the
fanged anthropomorphic principal figures of their respective
stones (CA2 and PMB2). It would seem clear that the writhing,
curling serpents depicted here are meant to be seen as alive, as
is also true of those in section B. What, though, one is driven
to ask, is the sense? What exactly are those two men doing with
these writhing serpents?
Among the stones carved with the technique known as
`grabado,' or etching––which stones usually formed tomb–walls or
–roofs and were otherwise not sculpted––the serpent is also
apparent, as we see from the section F stones, such as PMB(G)6,
OU(G)1, and LB(G)1. In section G are listed several petroglyph–
carved boulders which also, in that live–rock technique, depict
serpents in a number of different styles. Only a handful of
petroglyph stones have been included in this present study, and
yet in that handful, images of serpents are abundant––see AS1,
AS2, CO2, and (2)VC4.
Leaving the realm of what we have called `natural'
serpents, which are attempts to draw in stone the animal known
from nature, we will still find many more examples of serpent

symbols in the stones of the Pueblo Escultor.
Among the most important and most often–repeated of the
`serpent–in–a–supernatural–state' images is one referred to here
as the `Serpent–Doble' or `Doble–Spirit,' listed in section A.
The word Doble, spanish for `double,' has been specifically
applied to certain statues of the Pueblo Escultor when dealing
with stones [traditionally known as the `Doble Yo' (or `Double
I') statues] which show a supernatural feline–serpent personage
perched atop a human figure; the label has especially been used
to refer to the two Doble Yo stones, PMAL2 and AP1.
In this study, the concept of the Doble is considered in a
wider context: a good number of statues aside from those two
just mentioned seem to show this same double–figure. It is
composed of two distinct personages, the human being below and
the `Doble–Spirit' above.
Certain other stones (such as PMA1, PMA8, PMB9, PMC8, PMC3
and AP5) show a similar pair of human and
supernatural/zoomorphic figures; yet other statues show the
`Doble–Spirit' in characteristic position, but now hanging over
a blank space instead of over a human being; examples such as
PMB14, (2)PV1 and (1)HM4 show variations on this image.
One constant in the different figures denominated `Doble–
Spirits' or `Serpent–Dobles' is the fact that all of them
partake of the serpent essence. Perhaps PMA1 and PMA2, with
their coiled–serpent bodies, will show this best; but it is
important to recognize that PMB9, PMC3, PMC8, and LA1 also have
serpent–shaped bodies. The same was true of PMA7 in painted
form, and in yet another manner in AP5 and OU28. This serpent
form––here designated ‘flowing–back–shape’ or ‘serpent–body’––is
an essential, identifying trait of this particular supernatural

personage, the `Doble–Spirit,' so persistently present among the
works of the Pueblo Escultor.
[A further step would be to identify the `Doble–Spirit,'
here considered in its serpent aspect, as a creature usually
partaking of both serpent and feline characteristics.]
Crosshatching:
As mentioned, a certain number of stones marked with
crosshatching are showing us a symbol referring to serpents.
Elsewhere I discuss the fact that crosshatching, in the images
of the Pueblo Escultor, marks a figure as female. Here we may
more fully illustrate the use and function of this symbol.
Crosshatching in the Pueblo Escultor statuary is, in its
simplest form, a reference to serpents, and the symbol was born
of nature: many snakes commonly show characteristic patterns
formed of X's, in effect being themselves, in numerous different
variations, crosshatched. It follows that shaped, carved, and
painted serpents should have come to be marked with, and
eventually symbolized by, an X–design or crosshatching, in the
different ancient american cultures.
Among these many cultures we find the Pueblo Escultor.
Several of the `natural' serpents in this art are marked with
the crossed–X pattern––see PE1, PMB(G)6, OU(G)1 and the crossing
lines on PMB27. Beyond these specific stones where the symbol
is made explicit, though, are a whole series of stones in which
the crosshatching has been used as a device in different forms.
They fall into several groups, and may seem confusing or even
meaningless at first. But a serial look at a selection of
different uses of this design will allow us to find a vector of
meaning for the crosshatch symbol.

At first it is a symbol of serpent, accompanying and
marking the serpent, as in those stones mentioned above, as well
as the PMA1 stone with its `supernaturalized' serpent. PE1
especially is useful, showing us three different forms of
crosshatching: one shows standard slanting lines; a second with
lines squared to the main axis, forming squares instead of
diamonds, helps us recognize the crossing lines in PMB27; a
third type, which slants but does not really cross, we might
refer to as half–crosshatching—see T5 for instance--carrying the
same essential meaning.
The next step is to follow the serpent's X–design as it
moves off the serpent itself and into other contexts,
specifically the items of women's clothing. Remembering that
only one case contradicts this relation––no male figures among
the entire Pueblo Escultor corpus of statues are marked with
crosshatching save, apparently, QC5––we can be sure that it is
not a vague or vain connection. AI1 is an excellent case in
point: a woman, as we can see from her breasts, and wearing a
crosshatched turban.
Numerous other stones confirm this figure: AP11, cup in
hand and all, is the same personage, while AP7, who is pregnant,
and her near–twin AP8, also both show the same crosshatched
turban; and AI10 is an analogous etched version. Other statues,
like T1, have crosshatched skirts instead of turbans, and below
we will see that skirts seem conclusively to indicate female sex
in the art of the Pueblo Escultor. Nearby T1 on the El Tablón
hillside is its own etched version T3, also with crosshatched
skirt; the same design is shown on SA3 and, apparently, on OU35.
Another stone, from the area of Tierradentro, has both a
crosshatched turban and a nose-ring, another well-known lunar

symbol which, we may conclude, indicates that the wearer is
female. With that stone, (1)T9, and the others just mentioned
in mind, if we look at T5 we will be able to recognize this
figure with turban, nose-ring, and elaborate skirt, as a female.
Her turban, however, is marked with the half–crosshatch design
seen before on the serpent in PE1, all of which is a
confirmation that we may accept this half–crosshatch marking, as
well, as a serpent symbol of equal magnitude with the full
crosshatch.
With a final step, we may complete this look at the vector
of use of this design. The two statues known by the name of
Doble Yo––AP1 and PMAL2––are both marked with this half–
crosshatch design down the length of their `flowing–back'
bodies. As suggested, the `Doble–Spirit' `supernaturalized'
animals are both feline and serpent (see PMA1, PMB14, etc.) and
the idea here would be to see, in the half–crosshatch on the
Doble Yo serpent bodies, the serpent–symbol marking which
pertains to that part of their being. PMA1, with crosshatched
serpent body, works as a strong confirmation. It would seem,
too, that the circles intermixed with the half–crosshatching on
the AP1 creature represent the feline side of this fused being.
Since the Doble Yo creatures are hardly pure serpents, but
rather are complex mixed beings, the crossed lines with which
they are marked may be said to have come full circle: from the
marking of a serpent, to the various ways of marking a female
anthropomorphic figure, to the symbol of a strange supernatural
creature, part feline and part serpent, and even sometimes part
human, to judge by such stones as PMAL3.
Let us now adjust the focus of the micro–glance and
recognize that what we are being shown may not be so tiny and

compartmentalized. Perhaps it is something more general, a
broad sense, a drive or feeling, that is being expressed by the
crossed–line X's. In this vision it would not be that the
serpent is something, but rather that it has something, an
electric current, we might say, just to make the image concrete,
and that others too share this current. And the others are,
specifically, 1) human (and/or `supernaturalized') women, and 2)
the feline–serpent `Doble–Spirit.'
If AP7 is a specifically important clue, then the current,
whatever else it may be, is a current of life, and the women
marked with the sign of that current are being celebrated for
being, in our human world, those who carry, share, and reproduce
it. That current brings into being our reality; at this point
the woman so marked is virtually divine, yet still here among us
in our human scene.
The animal, the serpent itself, among the Pueblo Escultor,
must have partaken, on a somewhat more earthly level, of the
same ‘current.’ And on a yet more elevated, otherworldly level
the being here called the `Doble–Spirit,' shown in a variety of
different statues and modes, must have been a powerful fountain
and repository of that sacred essence.
Part Two: WOMAN
A personage in the mythic world of the Pueblo Escultor may
be shown to be a female in a number of different ways. It is
fair to say that we do not understand the fullness of what being
so marked must have meant for those people in the spheres of
daily life, of ceremony and office, of legendary and mythic
life, and so on. The intent of this category is simply to bring
together all those statues marked in different ways as female.

I find 32 statues which seem clearly to be marked as female;
this is 7% of the total Macizo statuary, although it is
important to keep in mind that there may be quite a few more
statues which indeed are female, but whose clues as to their
femininity we have not yet learned to discern. Thirty of the 32
are from the San Agustín area (about 10% of the total there),
and the other two are from the Tierradentro area, and show women
with their breasts exposed. Among the statues of the other
Pueblo Escultor areas, we cannot point to one certain female
image.
It will be worthwhile to give this category some context.
Stone statues portraying women may not be uncommon in
precolumbian America; but when we take a look at the specific
circumstances involved, the truth of that blanket statement is
revealed in striking ways. We may begin by affirming that in
all of the vast corpus of stone statuary in South America—apart
from the statues of the Pueblo Escultor—there are virtually no
statues of women, whatsoever [with the exception of the female
figures of Manabí on Ecuador’s mesoamericanized coast]. The
tremendous series of images of women we see in these stones from
the Macizo Colombiano are unique on the southern continent.
The connect, however, is as powerful as the disconnect. In
Mesoamerica, to the north, we find the analogs of the Pueblo
Escultor statues, and from earliest times, beginning with the
Olmec, the ‘Mother Culture’: we can hardly help being struck by
Stela 1 from La Venta. This monolith, over two-and-a-half
meters tall, depicts, within the cave-like mouth of a
crosshatched earth-serpent, a standing female figure wearing a
skirt, and with a turban covering her head. We will soon see
the significance of these details.

In that same time period in the Valley of Mexico, in
Tlatilco, ancient sculptors in clay are already creating a whole
world of female figurines. It must then be no coincidence that
by the time of the classic period, the people of the central
plateau, already accomplished stone sculptors, fashion a series
of female figures which lay down the patrón that we see in the
statues of the Pueblo Escultor. The enduring image, some three
meters tall, from Teotihuacán, is the great statue of
Chalchiutlicue, the ‘Lady of the Jade Skirts’ or ‘Lady of the
Living Water,’ who sums up the complex revolving around
Earth/Water/Fertility/Moon/Woman.
This tradition, which accords to women an important place
in the lithic mythos, will continue to flourish in Mesoamerica
throughout later periods. The Aztec, in the latest era of
precolumbian history, will again give us a series of female
images, and ultimately we can have no doubt that the ties that
bind and inform the Pueblo Escultor statues portraying women
come from the north, from Mesoamerica. The famous statue of
Coatlicue, ‘Lady of the Serpent Skirts,’ in Mexico’s
Anthropological Museum is another, fantastic formulation of this
image in stone.
To return to the statues of the Macizo Colombiano: section
B has a list of nine different statues which show figures with
female anatomy: they are the basic pieces in this
investigation, and their analysis will lead us to further clues
that will help identify which statues show female personages.
Most show us the women’s breasts. A most unusual lithic piece,
the fragmented statue OB4, however, shows us the female figure’s
genitals—unique here, and very exceptional in America. (2)LG1
may or not be related: the vertical furrow shown within the

image of male genitalia may or may not be showing us another
female image. And the striking AI16 is quite unusual, caressing
her own breasts, but bearing no other identifying female traits.
A look at a series of these female images—starting with one
of the nine statues just cited—will illustrate the range of
elements which indicate the sex of the statues we are
considering. That statue, AI1, whose breasts make clear her
sex, also resumes much of the essential female imagery: she
wears a skirt, and a turban marked with a repetitive ‘X’ design,
and both these elements will be seen to be definitive female
symbolism which is nowhere contradicted in the statuary of the
Pueblo Escultor. And she carries a cup in her hand (something
we see again in the AP11 stone). AI1 also sports a specific
type of necklace composed of many strings and a central section
of squarish plates, as well as thick striated bracelets on both
wrists; and while these decorations are not restricted to female
use—see the male statues AI4 and PMA9, for instance, both coca-
chewers and both males—they are more usually female
accoutrements which figure prominently in the series of female-
statue figures.
Following the sequence, we will see X-marked turban in such
statues as T5, AI15, AP7, AP8 and AP11, and T1 and T3 have the
X-markings on skirts rather than turbans. In the Tierradentro
region we find turbans etched similarly with the X-symbolism on
(1)T6 and (1)T9. The T5 figure, a high-water mark of Pueblo
Escultor stonework, adds that familiar lunar symbol, a nose-
ring, to the skirt (long and flowing in this case), the turban
etched with a variant of the X-marking, the platelet-necklace
and the puffy wrist bracelets. The list of these essential
female figures that wear both necklaces and bracelets includes

AI1, AI5, AP7, AP8, AP11, (1)T2, (1)T4, (1)T6 and (1)T11.
Now, with these clues, many other statues reveal their
feminine nature. A statue like PMA12, with her breasts, skirt
and turban, shows us the design carved to display a turban—a
specifically female attribute—which we may then in turn discover
on AI18, otherwise unadorned, but clearly female, and (1)T4,
(1)T11, and many others. AG1, with her skirt and breasts,
likewise puts us in a position to see such skirt-wearing figures
as C1, CA1, PMA4 and PMC5 as women. PE2 wears skirt and turban;
and so on. And then, when the stone sculptor is satisfying the
fancy of the artistry, the X-decorated turban on PMB17 will be
unorthodox, although quite clearly identifiable.
It is notable, too, that most of these statues which
clearly show women do not have the fangs so common to other
Pueblo Escultor monuments, or to be more precise, the monuments
in the San Agustín region. But this trait is not diagnostic,
because some do have fangs: see AI5, AI15, T1 and T3.
In section C are noted all the figures which in my judgment
may be said to wear skirts. Such a determination is not always
completely evident and there are a number of other statues, not
on this list, which perhaps should be there. The reader may
make his or her own determinations. A key fact is that there
seem to be no contradictions in judging these figures to be
female: skirt-wearing figures show no male activities or
implements, and there are plenty of backup female details on
skirt wearers, such as turbans, crosshatching, and nose-rings.
The three known monuments with nose-rings––T5, Q2 and
(1)T9––form section D. Statue T5 has already been described.
Q2, though, is fanged, and sustains two large `tumi'–knives
(which mimic breasts) in her hands. All three of these

personages must be female.
A list appears, in section A, of figures who by virtue of
the crosshatch symbol seem to be marked as female. All of these
statues appear in the serpent lists, too, because they are
figures with crosshatched turbans and skirts, as we have seen.
In contrast is section E, which shows all instances of
crosshatching in any context apart from that of section A, i.e.,
apart from figures of women. Virtually all are already clear:
they are serpents, `Serpent–Dobles,' or simply incised
crosshatching devoid of specific form––pure `current,' perhaps––
apart from three statues. (1)T10 has crosshatching as
decoration on a coca–`poporo' (or lime–carrying–gourd); and
(5)M2 is enigmatically marked with crosshatching on the arms of
a `supernaturalized' figure. QC5, as we have seen, is the
aberrant, confusing exception to our ‘crosshatch=female’ rule.
Part Three: MALE SIGNS
This section deals with the statues which can be
distinguished as males. There are only two sure ways considered
here to judge a figure as male, but probably one could go much
further: figures carrying coca apparatus (see Part Ten:
Coqueros), for instance, and almost certainly those sustaining
war implements and staffs and other large instruments in their
hands (see Part Thirteen: Other Implements) could be judged to
be exclusively male. We would find many of these figures to
adhere to the second of our two ‘certain’ criteria—the wearing
of loincloths—and essentially none that would contradict them
Section A lists statues which display male genitals. There
are 38 of them, which is considerably more than the nine stones
showing female anatomy, or even than the 30 statues established

as female by the four different methods explained above. The 38
masculine stones alone account for over 8% of the total
statuary.
The number of male figures more than doubles to 89 (which
equals almost 20% of the total—close to three times the
corresponding female number) when we take into account the 51
statues showing figures wearing loincloths. This item of dress
can be seen to be clearly a male indicator; no figure clad in a
loincloth has breasts demarked, or a nose-ring or turban, or
crosshatching in any context if we except the aberrant QC5.
Although the wearing of a loincloth shows us clearly that a
figure is male, we are not lacking the contradictory exception,
or seeming exception, and in this case the story is also a
compelling one: the statue in question is PMB15, whose original
situation on Mesita B in the Parque Arqueológico near San
Agustín places it squarely among the greatest concentration of
elaborate, important Pueblo Escultor sculptures. This
sarcophagus cover depicts a full-length human being who wears a
loincloth—we would thus think we were unquestionably observing a
male, but for the fact that the breasts are very obviously
outlined, are in fact emphasized.
How unfortunate that this extraordinary statue was
carelessly and needlessly destroyed. Preuss saw it in the plaza
of the little pueblo in 1914, brought there from the Mesitas
where the Parque Arqueológico now stands. The statue had
already been broken in two when Lunardi saw the bottom half in
1931; the other part was missing. Pérez de Barradas visited the
area in 1937 and remarks “I don’t know why the upper part was
lost, nor how to explain why the bottom half was crushed for
rock to build the nearest bridge on the road to Pitalito. I

can’t find any way to understand and justify the loss of this
first-class archaeological monument.” 37
The fangless mouth, the large round ear-pendants, the
ligatures on the legs are all interesting, but not enlightening
as to gender. We can’t negate our entire diagnostic scheme due
to this one misunderstanding, but we are justified in wondering:
what is being portrayed here? And we may then puzzle over J1,
which figure wears a skirt that almost seems to be marked, as
well, as a loincloth.
Nonetheless, the many figures wearing loincloths and yet
having no other sure indicator of maleness (such as a weapon in
hand) occur across the board in the different statue-areas—see
the Male Signs-B list—and we can safely conclude that they are
all male.
Part Four: SACRIFICE FIGURES
When we decide to group together certain lithic works and
call them `Sacrifice Figures' we have immediately created a
problem. The practice of sacrifice, especially of human
sacrifice, is an image that sparks us, jolts our consciousness,
causes our passions to rise. The concept, and the vision, are
muddied, both down within our deepest psyche as well as on the
modern pop-culture veneer.
When we have stirred the waters in this way, the search
through the evidence becomes difficult. An inquiry into the
role and the act of sacrifice, and of human sacrifice, among the
ancient peoples of America, is no easy matter.
That other ‘charged’ subject—sex—is here connected in a
fascinating, but not precisely defined, manner. One key insight
into this subject rests perhaps on the interpretation of one

image, shown in two different sculptures (PA6 and U4).
These two stones are specifically linked to the question of
sacrifice. They demonstrate images in which a large animal
stands or perches over another being, and even seems to grip or
control the second being; they bear a relationship to a group of
some seven statues, here listed as section A, in which a larger,
principal anthropomorphic figure grips with its hands a smaller
anthropomorph which may be a child. Statues PMB13, PMB21, C2
and PE10 exemplify most typically this figure.
Similar, as well, are another group [the next section, on
the Doble Yo, will deal with these statues] in which a
supernatural/zoomorphic figure, often with a face resembling
that of a young child, stands above, perhaps descends upon, a
standing human figure. Here too the upper figure often seems to
grip or control the head of the lower, human figure. Such
statues as PMAL2, AP1, PMA1 and PMB10 will most clearly convey
this figure.
These three statuary groups are surely related, and in fact
the lines between the three sets are considerably blurred. All
three may in some way have something to do with sacrifice. The
section A group, larger anthropomorphs holding small human
beings in the hands, will be considered here separately as the
beginning step in this study of possible sacrifice symbols in
the stones of the Pueblo Escultor.
The attempt here is to consider the act, and the meaning,
of sacrifice in the widest possible sense possible; that is, as
an offering, something of value which is being presented, in
accord with both the cultural norms and the understood compact
with the powers in question, in the hopes and expectations that
a corresponding benefit will flow from those powers to the needy

human community, the sacrificers. A child held in the hands
(section A) may or may not be such a sacrifice, and we may say
the same of the cups held by the section K figures, the heads or
skulls sustained by the figures in section E, the sacrificial
tumi–knives of section I, or the animals held in the hands of
the section D figures.
We are simply not in a position to definitely confirm or
deny these different possibilities. I have tried to group, in
this section, all those images which suggest that they might
speak of the act of sacrifice or offering. Some are probably
correct; others may be wrong. The reader will have to satisfy
him– or herself in deciding.
*******************************************************
The section A statues may be the base line in this
question. If indeed the reference is to human sacrifice, then
we would say that the large, fanged human beings hold in their
hands small figures, who would be child sacrifice figures.
PMB13, universally hailed as `terrorífico' and `bestiál,' and
known popularly in the region as ‘the Bishop,’ holds its child
upside–down. PE9, weirdly, rather than holding a child in its
hands, has a child which passes through a wound in its left arm.
Related here are the already-mentioned stones denominated
`Feline Procreators' (PA6 and U4) [to be dealt with in a
separate chapter]. We seem to witness the sexual act, with a
large quadruped male animal perched over, and apparently engaged
in sex with, the human woman below him. The 1969 discovery of
PA6 made it clear that the large animal above is in fact a
feline, and this time a third figure is involved: the large
feline holds a small childlike figure in his front paws, and he
grips the child weirdly, almost savagely, around the neck; the

child's body is splayed out strangely. At this point we have
nearly returned to the statues of section A.
In the monuments of section A, all showing a larger figure
sustaining a small human being (except for OU83, and OU91, where
in each case three such smaller figures stand isolated in a
row), the most pertinent detail to be noted is the fact that all
of the secondary figures or `children,' without exception, are
endowed with a pair of small curving devices to be seen
extending outward from both sides of their heads. These
ornaments are known as `cuernos,' the spanish word for `horns,'
and while this title is gratuitous, because there is no reason
to believe that they really have anything to do with horns, yet
the small curving devices themselves are far from meaningless,
in fact are clearly of great importance. No other figures in
the Pueblo Escultor statuary are so endowed, beyond those listed
in section A, and yet always when a child is held in a larger
figure's hands, the small figure is marked with ‘cuernos.’
It is a detail, an eloquent symbol, which must be telling
us a great secret. Unfortunately, we cannot read the meaning,
however clearly it has been expressed.
The seven statues of section A form a tight picture of the
‘cuernos’ symbol, and are similar with the excepted details that
the OU83 and OU91 figures stand alone, rather than sustained in
hands; the child in PE9 passes through a wound in the arm; PMB13
holds its small figure upside–down; and the child in U6 lacks a
body. In section B are listed the only two examples among the
remaining stones of the Macizo Colombiano in which we are shown
the symbol of the ‘cuernos’: AP12 is familiar, the small figure
is nearly identical to that of U6, with only the exception that
the bodiless `child' is sustained, not in the principal figure's

hands, but as a pectoral on a necklace.
PMAL3, however, is something quite different, and also,
perhaps, debatable. This appears to be one of the most
revelatory statues known and is quite complex, but a full
exposition is not available to us. Among other details a
secondary human–shaped figure stands on top of the shoulders of
a fanged, staff–bearing human being. The upper figure is,
unfortunately, cracked and partly missing at the top of the
head. We seem to see a face, or maybe instead a mask, and the
headpiece at forehead level of this mask, half cracked away,
appears to bear a round object with one remaining ‘cuerno’
curving familiarly downward.
But it is hard to tell. Some people do not see this half–
broken, partially–erased detail at all. The upper, masked
figure, though, is not just any personage, but represents a very
valuable alternative view of the controlling being we see in
many statues, including AP1, PMAL2, U4, PA6, PMA1 and so on.
This is, furthermore, the only frontal and anthropomorphic view
that we have of this Personage. If such a being is indeed
marked on the forehead with an approximation of the section A
head–and–‘cuernos’ symbol, then that symbol, and the reality to
which it referred, must necessarily be greatly enhanced in our
view.
*******************************************************
Beyond the figures with ‘cuernos’ held in the hands of
fanged adults, it is possible to identify a fair number of
different sets of statues which may possibly refer to the act of
sacrifice. To begin with, many figures among the statuary carry
objects in their hands. Several categories may be set up
listing figures holding objects with uses and meanings that we

ecognize. When we except these examples as not necessarily
referring principally to sacrifice––without ruling out such a
function––we are still left with a good number of object–
holders, and most of them are included here under different
headings because they may perhaps be some type of offering.
Excepted, for example, are figures holding coca apparatus:
it would be too narrow to exclude the possibility of some
sacrifice angle to the use and ritual of this supremely sacred
substance; but in the foreground view what we have here is a
coca user. Also not included as sacrifice symbols are figures
who hold war apparatus, clubs and stones, in aggressive
attitudes (PMA1, PMA7, PMAL5, etc.), or those who carry staffs
in their hands, an image which has a long history of use in
America involving meanings often not related principally to
sacrifice, but rather to command, hierarchy, and so on.
In section D, then, are the five Pueblo Escultor statues in
which a human being sustains an animal in his/her hands. Two
figures hold serpents (CA2 and PMB2), two hold fish (PMB3 and
AI19), and one holds an unidentified mammal (AI12).
Section K, as mentioned, lists two statues (found
relatively near each other, though in different sites) in which
a female figure holds in her right hand a cup: AI1 and AP11.
What would be the intent of these cupbearers?
In section I are mentioned eight lithic pieces which show
us the shape of the tumi–knife in different contexts. The tumi
is a well–known ancient south-american shape and article, and is
specifically related to the northern coast and sierra of Perú
and to Ecuador. Students interested in archaeology are familiar
with the tumi––which may be a tweezers, for instance, or a

`topo' (a shawl–pin)––as a knife, and south-american museums,
especially in the indicated areas, show many examples of tumi–
knives. Investigating the meaning of the eight tumis under
study here, we must consider the possibility that in some way
the symbol relates to sacrifice.
Three statues (Q2, OU53, PMA3) hold tumi–knives in their
hands––these are the most suggestive. Three more have tumis on
necklaces around their necks––(1)HM7, (1)TI10, and (3)LC4––and
all three are from Pueblo Escultor centers other than San
Agustín. One figure––(3)LC2––grasps a tumi–shape in his right
hand, but the tumi is, at the same time, the head and beak of a
bird. The final example––PMB(G)15––is an abstract etching: a
fine tumi–form appears amidst other designs.
This final, etched tumi may serve to remind us of another
set of statues, all found on Mesita C of the San Agustín
archaeological park. Simply put, it would seem that these
statues––PMC1, PMC2, PMC3 and PMC4––themselves represent tumis,
not with some sculptural detail, but in the form of the stones
themselves—and it is a form that we see virtually nowhere else
among the Pueblo Escultor statues. A look at the tumi incision
of PMB(G)15 or the tumi grasped by PMA3, compared with the shape
of statue PMC1 or PMC2, will illustrate this idea.
Continuing on to section E, we will find an extensive and
very important list of those figures who hold or somehow sustain
a skull, head, or some similar object. The possible connection
to sacrifice is obvious, but the individual interpretation of
what is seen in each image, perhaps, is not so clear.
Such stones as PMB11, QC4 and (2)B2 are the home point
here, sustaining not just heads, but heads recognizable as
skulls. A slight step away are (1)ED1, AP12, PMB26, PMB8 and

PA2, and others; in looking at them it is difficult to avoid
classifying them with the first three named. When we then look
at PMC8, LM3, (2)L2, PMC7 or PMC14, we seem to be seeing a
further symbolization of what must be something very similar.
Other stones seem related for other reasons. CH3, PMB18,
(2)LG3 and others show us an image in which one head is tucked
under, or appended to, another, while (3)Y3 carries what may or
may not be a head on a cord slung over one shoulder, and (5)S2,
uniquely, has a head, which is furthermore a skull, between its
folded legs. And another group––(1)HM2, (1)HM3 and (1)HM10––all
from the same site, present rather a column of faces, one under
another.
In section F are mentioned seven stones which seem to be
not sustained skulls, but rather simply figures of skulls. The
group is varied in that some cases seem to be more certain than
others. (1)HM1, for instance, is clearly a carving of a skull,
stylized in its own way, and the same is true of (1)SA5, carved
upside–down on a large live–rock boulder, and (2)B3: in all
cases the triangle or `absent' nose is an indication that this
head is deceased. PMB7, which is a well–known stone often
interpreted as the image of the sun, and LE3 and Q4, seem to me
very suggestive of skull–images, in large part because of the
treatment given to the cheeks; perhaps they will not seem so to
everyone. The same is true of EQ2, which also seems marginally
skull–like.
A list will be found in section G of a number of lithic
pieces which portray a row or set of heads or skulls rather than
just one; the image lends itself easily to thoughts of
sacrifice. Especially notable are AI9 and (1)SA2, stones from
two widely separated places which seem to show the same image,

and even to have had the same function. Both are round and are
flat on top, although the San Agustín–area stone is like a table
on a pedestal, while the Tierradentro–area piece has a jointed
hole part–way through its center. Both show traces of having
had rows of faces all the way around the outside; apparently
those on AI9 originally numbered 16, and those on (1)SA2 totaled
eight. Another stone from the Tierradentro area, (1)P1, is
similar. Of the others, several show pairs of faces: LF1,
(2)PV1, and PMB(G)16. We have already considered OU83 and OU91
as rows of small figures with ‘cuernos.’
Section H stones have already been cited and will be
considered more fully as `Felines'; here they are seen hanging
or standing atop secondary figures: M2, U4 and PA6.
Section J has a list of five interesting stones with the
trait in common that each one carries on its back a smaller,
apparently anthropomorphic figure. Four of the five are from
alternative Pueblo Escultor areas, and the fifth is from an
Origin–Unknown within the San Agustín area. Three of the four
alternative–area stones––(1)TI9, (1)TI26 and (6)SF1––are very
similar, and the San Agustín–area stone is definitely related,
although here the posterior figure is askew and also seems to be
oddly strapped on with a belt across its neck. The fifth
section-J statue, with a pair of arms on its back, is frankly
baffling.
The final section of the Sacrifice Figures category,
section C, is labeled ‘sustaining strange figures,’ and here are
all the stones which were impossible to classify, whose
`objects' were indefinable, but which still seemed suggestive.
See, for instance, (3)LC3, (2)PV3, (1)TI20 or PA5. It is
difficult to define the beginning edges of the subject of

sacrifice for this long–disappeared, little–understood people;
and here on the outer limits we are yet further removed from any
certainty, left with little more than a handful of odd
characters with strange, unknown objects in their hands.
Part Five: DOBLE YO
The Doble Yo, when christened, referred to just one
particular image seen on a statue at a San Agustín–area site.
This image is shown on PMAL2, and is repeated in AP1, so
actually it turns out to be a double–image. The german
archaeologist Preuss began this line of inquiry when he saw the
first of the two stones, PMAL2, and referred to the upper figure
as a "double". 12 He reports on AP1 without qualifying it as a
"double," 13 but then in his analysis devotes a section 14 to what
he calls the `Segundo Yo,' the `Second I,' or `Das zweite Ich'
in the original german; apparently he is commenting on both
stones, as well as PMA1 and PMA2, to which he has already called
our attention.
Preuss’ Segundo Yo became, in both the literature and the
popular designation, the `Doble Yo’ or `Double I.’ Today, as
well as the four cited statues, we would include PMB9, PMB10,
PMA7 and PMA8. These four, along with the second pair cited by
Preuss (PMA1 and PMA2) form a special class, which here are
referred to as `Guardians,' and were called by Preuss and others
`caryatids' because each pair serve as the two side–figures in
the three most elaborate mound–tombs of the San Agustín
archaeological park, surrounding in each of the three cases a

larger, more elaborate, unique central statue. All six statues,
though, have a very strict relationship with the two original
Doble Yos: they show the same figures and the same mythic
situation.
In the present study the idea and the image of the Doble Yo
are going to be considered much more broadly. Following
directly the path signaled by Preuss and by subsequent
investigators, we find that the double–figure, one being
hovering over and perhaps in control of another being, is an
important element in this statuary, and probably a vital key to
the thought and belief of the ancients. But the double–element,
the divided figure or sense of double–being––here labeled the
`Double Sense'––is much more than an isolated personage or set
of figures; it is an element which proves to be widely
represented in different forms throughout the statuary, and in
fact to some degree becomes the spirit which informs, unites,
and breathes life into the entire picture that, in fragmentary
form, we are being presented. Moreover, the Double Sense is a
germinal and integral element of american art since its very
inception––in Mesoamerica, in South America, in the entire
precolumbian world––and as such works as one of the most
essential links that bind the art and thought of the Pueblo
Escultor to the principal, formative american traditions.
Most of the total of statues included in this Doble Yo
category form part of section A, the Definite Doble, statues
which without doubt exhibit an aspect of the Doble, of the
essential Double Sense. Section B is devoted to the Possible
Doble, the sculpture which seems, not without an element of
doubt, to be suggesting the Doble nature. Section C consists of
a short list of extraordinary stones that present a triple image

or a triple series of personages; and in section D are a number
of stones that seem to imply a glimpse at the Doble spirit, but
only in an unusual way, one that in many cases depends on
‘knowing the rules.’ To some readers these last examples will
not seem convincing.
To begin with section A: all of the above–named eight
statues, the Dobles in a very strict sense, are here in this
section. Here also are many other figures which derive, in one
way or another, from these eight. PMAL3, too, is at least as
important, and the other eight statues may in a sense derive
from it.
A good number of statues can be seen to be, without doubt,
other representatives of the ‘classic’ Doble Yo when we compare
them with the above–named pieces. A look at PMC8 and PMC14, for
instance, will show their essential unity with the full,
elaborate image as seen in PMAL2 and AP1; and LM3 is only a
slight step away.
PMC3 is another Doble Yo variant, and here we see that the
`Doble Spirits,' themselves double, are over the heads of the
main figures and descend near the shoulders; but they are easily
recognizable, with their serpent body, descending form and
curious, childlike faces. AP5 is another stone where the
simplified elements are identifiable; the `warrior' figure is
unchanged, and the `Doble Spirit' now descends the main figure's
back and then bifurcates into two serpent figures. And OU28 is
just a small step beyond.
PMAL9 is also a Doble figure with one being, unfortunately
now destroyed, above a second, human figure. And (1)HM3,
created in a totally different style than most San Agustín–area
stones, is still quite recognizable, with its head–above–head

formation, as a Doble. (1)HM3 should also be compared with the
two `Triples'––(1)HM2 and (1)HM10––found nearby it in a
Tierradentro site.
Turning to another style of Doble statue, let us look again
at the two stones called here `Feline Procreators' (U4 and PA6)
which show us, as interpreted in this study, a supernatural
feline male copulating with a human female. The connection
between these two stones and the ‘classic’ Doble Yo has already
been commented upon: in both cases supernatural feline beings
stand above, and even grip the head in control of, a lower and
more fully human being.
If we now look at M2, for instance, we will see another
analogous image, and PML1, with the second, lower figure barely
outlined, is also very similar. This last–named stone should
serve as a bridge to help us be able to see such stones as OU14,
M1, G1, CH6 and so on as being essentially representations of
the same `Feline Procreator,' but with the feline alone made
visible; the lower figure is now `understood,' with only the
proper empty space being left.
In the same way, certain stones show the ‘classic’ Doble Yo
with only the upper figure, the `Doble Spirit,' visible––the
human element is again left out, is `understood' by the space
left in place of it. PMB14 and PMB20 are excellent examples,
and were twin caryatids of an elaborate Mesita B mound–tomb,
identical in function to PMA1, PMB9, and so on. Another
interesting example (from the Platavieja statue–area) of the
`Doble Spirits' being portrayed alone, hanging with outstretched
arms over an empty, uncarved space, may be seen in (2)PV1. Here
the `Doble Spirits' descend not over one human being, but over a
`lodge' which we might presume is full of human beings; perhaps

the meaning is analogous.
Another set of figures which must be related to the Doble
Yo beliefs––PMB22, R3 and (6)I2––show their affinity with the
`Feline Procreator' statues by dint of having, draped over their
back and shoulders, something akin to both a feline–skin and a
live feline. It is valuable to recall here the PMAL2 and AP1
Doble Yo statues, whose supernatural feline standing above the
human figure is a live creature in the upper part, but at the
same time apparently only a lifeless skin hanging downward, as
indicated by the stylized faces and in one case by the forelegs
stripped of paws.
While two of these three statues wearing skins are clearly
human beings topped by `natural' feline figures, the third––
(6)I2 from the Popayán statue–area––is more ambiguous. The
suggestion is that the round head and characteristic rounded
ears (compare PA6 or PMB22) indicate a feline skin–and–mask
draped over this figure, albeit in a shadowy way, which is the
essence, at times, of the `Doble Spirit.'
The group of statues already considered as section J of
Sacrifice Figures––all of whom have small anthropomorphic beings
on their backs––comes into the picture here, because their
resemblance to the three feline–skin figures indicates again the
relationship, which we do not understand well, between the
sacrifice–oriented statues, and those of the Doble Yo.
All of these figures are descended from or related to the
original, ‘classic’ Doble image. In continuation we will see
some other forms of the essential `Doble Spirit' that we can
perhaps best understand as yet–more–variant images of something
closely related to the complex here under study.
One group––PMB13, PMC9, G3, (1)P1 and (4)A4––presents us

with images that are divided forms, with one image melded to its
mirror and thus of necessity double; see the double–simian in
PMC9, for example, or the two `warriors' of (4)A4. This latter
statue, of two `guardians' with upraised clubs, is clearly also
an analog of the ‘classic’ Doble caryatid `guardians' of the
Mesitas in San Agustín's archaeological park. G3 provides us
with two stylized faces, one on each side of a slab; (1)P1 has
already been discussed. PMB13, considered above as an essential
Sacrifice Figure, is also fascinating for the way in which the
two mirrored aspects, upper and lower, differ in numerous
details; they must surely give insight into the upper and lower
spheres of the Double–World perceived by the ancients.
Another group––LB1, LB2, CH3 and (2)L6––shows images in
which one lesser figure is suspended below an upper, more
clearly defined figure. There is a reference here (and in
PMB18) to the Sacrifice Figures–E group which sustain skulls as
pendants, such as AP12, (2)B2 and PMB11. The similarity between
(2)L6 and LB2, far away from each other geographically, is
notable.
Another trio of related stones which may have a Doble
reference is composed of (2)L2, (2)G3 and (2)PV1. All three are
from the Platavieja statue area, so this may be a certain local
way of conveying this image. There is a similarity between the
different treatments of the pair of sustained heads.
PMB(G)3 and AS1 give evidence of Doble themes presented in
the techniques of `grabado' incising and of live–rock petroglyph
carving.
The line between section A and the following section B is
not at all firm. In the latter the image is a bit more subtle,
or simple, the doubts somewhat greater. PMC12, for instance,

may be a single serpent, or may perhaps be double. PMC14, LF1
and OU28 are all similar to Definite Doble stones discussed
above, and difficult, ultimately, to distinguish from those
statues. The sub-categories are arbitrary.
PMB25 is much like PMC3; only the faces are missing. AI5
is certainly similar to PMB13. And PMB27 and PMB(G)6 themselves
form a pair; the meaning, though, is hardly clear.
In section C are listed five lithic monuments which take on
particular interest for displaying not a double–, but a triple–
faceted being. One begins as a matter of course by assuming
that a `Triple' is much like a Doble, is a more–elevated Doble;
perhaps, though, this is not the case, and something quite
different may be the point. (1)HM2 and (1)HM10 are very
analogous stones and were found in the same site; the nature of
the rock, the style employed, and the figure displayed are all
very similar: the effect is a tall, thin column of three
different human faces, one above the other. The similarity to
(1)HM3 is also great; the latter stone has only two faces
visible, but once may have had three.
AI26 is a rounded stone, crudely carved with three
different faces around the outside––vaguely recalling AI9 and
(1)SA2. The huge La Chaquira boulder on which are carved
figures CH1, CH2 and CH4 has an odd similarity to the small Alto
de los Idolos stone with its three faces. The La Chaquira
boulder shows three full human figures carved on the north, east
and south sides of the rock which is perched on the edge of the
Magdalena canyon; clearly they are linked among themselves in
style as well as function. A strange detail here is that a
fourth figure (CH5), small and unusual, and also exceptional for
being a profile image, can be seen tucked down between the south

and east images of the La Chaquira boulder.
PA6 is the final statue to be discussed here as a possible
`Triple.' We have already met this supernatural feline,
standing atop a human woman and grasping by the neck, just above
the woman's head, a small figure, a child who is splayed out
sideways. Three figures, caught and pictured at the moment of
revelation: what precisely is happening here, in this mythical
everpresent other–now?
In section E are found the statues (G2 for example, or
LT4's double–headed serpent) which are different from those in
section B in that they imply, simply by a suggestive shape or a
subtle detail, that they carry a Doble–message. These Doble–
shaped stones can be divided into two main groups.
The first group shows images which seem to mirror the
`Feline Procreator' of U4 and PA6, with the difference that now
the lower figure is absent, and the feline hovers or stands
alone over blank rock. G1, OU14 and CH6 will all fit this
description. A slightly different group are from the
Tierradentro site known as Hato–Marne: (1)HM4, (1)HM5, (1)HM6
and (1)HM9, the first three of which are still to be seen on the
original site. All of these statues, in a style quite different
from the several San Agustín–area styles, seem to show a version
of the feline.
In the second group are statues which may be considered to
exhibit the Doble–trait of the ‘flowing–back’ shape seen in the
serpent–bodies of the ‘classic’ Doble Yos (i.e., PMAL2, AP1,
PMA1, PMB9, etc.) This diverse group of anthropomorphic figures
consists of LA1, AI25, QC3, OU53 and (1)A1; the first especially
shows its relationship to the Doble Yos of the Mesitas, while
the last is a Tierradentro–area version of this suggestive

shape.
Part Six: THE FELINE
To come this late and by such a roundabout way to the
`Feline Personage' will not, hopefully, be interpreted as a sign
of disregard for this figure of maximum importance due to whom
the Pueblo Escultor have sometimes been said to belong to the
`Age of the Feline' and to be a `People of the Jaguar.'
In fact, if we assume the famous `colmillos' or fangs to be
a feline trait and then count up the numbers, we will surely be
in agreement with that assessment: perhaps some 127 out of 460
total lithic pieces in this study are seen to display fangs, and
without tabulating those statues, once fanged, that time and
weather have erased, we thus have an impressive figure of about
28% of the total; but (since there are very few fanged figures
among the statues outside of the San Agustín area) the number of
fanged figures within the San Agustín sculpture jumps to
something like 120 of 317, or 38%. No other personage, no other
animal or image or idea or complex of ideas, no other form more
precise than `anthropomorphic' will compare with this
percentage.
There is no doubt, then, that if the fangs indicate that
the bearer is feline or `felinized,' we must conclude that the
jaguar is the prime personage here, and that the Pueblo
Escultor, apparently among others, were his people. But we
don’t really know, to a convincing certainty, that this is the
case.
Without counting the specific trait of being fanged, then,
we may ask: How often is the feline represented in the
statuary, and what are the forms in which he is presented to us?

Unfortunately, our categories are not completely airtight, and
the feline figures are not all easy to pin down. In particular
they tend to blend into the images discussed in the next chapter
(called in this study `Cayman/Rana/Lagarto.') Within the
necessary limitations, though, the feline figures in the
statuary may be arranged into three groups.
In section A are those felines seen in the role of the
`Feline Procreator' already mentioned above. The archetypal
images left to us are U4 and PA6; with the discovery of the
latter, less–damaged stone, it became clear that, rather than a
pair of monkeys and/or a ‘maternal love’ image (as had
previously been suggested), what we are shown is a large,
supernatural feline standing over, and apparently copulating
with, a human female.
U4 was known to Codazzi (1857) and Cuervo Márquez (1892)
before Preuss (1913) saw it; the usually perspicacious german
professor concurred with both his predecessors, saying that "The
principal figure of this sculpture is without doubt a monkey." 15
He felt, however, that the lower figure "...seems more like a
human being than an animal."
In the mid–1940's the north-american archaeologist
Stirling, during investigations of the most important Olmec
sites on Mexico's Gulf Coast, made several discoveries of stone
monuments which were to have a great impact on the
interpretation of the two San Agustín–area statues in question.
In effect, he discovered two Olmec versions of the previously
known San Agustín statue. One, he writes, "...apparently
represents an anthropomorphic jaguar seated on a human figure

lying on the back cross–legged. Presumably the lower figure is
that of a woman, and the act of copulation is depicted." 16
Stirling goes on to describe a situation that was to be
played out in San Agustín as well: "This identification would
be much less certain were it not for the fact that we later
found a much more realistically carved monument representing the
same subject." In another site in the same zone, Stirling found
a statue "...similar to [the first] monument," which
"...apparently represented copulation between a jaguar and a
woman...Although badly broken, enough remains to indicate that
in its complete form [this monument] must have been a strongly
carved and striking piece of sculpture" 17 ––as the second San
Agustín–area statue, PA6, certainly is.
David Grove writes that "Both Matthew Stirling and Michael
Coe have suggested that this may have represented the
mythological creation of were–jaguar individuals…" 18 so often
noted in the Olmec statuary; and if such is the case among the
Pueblos Escultores, then certainly this role of child–like were–
jaguars is represented by the `Doble Spirits' of PMA1, PMB9,
PMB14, AP5, (2)PV1 and so on.
When Gerardo Reichel–Dolmatoff and others turned their gaze
on the statues of San Agustín in the mid–1960's, then, one
supposes that they were not completely surprised to come across
the feline–over–woman image. Stirling's Olmec stones had been
known for a long time, and other early american high–cultures
were seen to be intimately linked to the Feline. The 1969
discovery of PA6 served to confirm what Reichel–Dolmatoff had

ealized; he wrote that it "represents, beyond any doubt, a
jaguar that is overpowering a smaller, human figure with marked
female characteristics." 19 .
It is only fair to say that there is another hypothesis as
to the import of this figure, this scene, which would suggest a
very different meaning and image. Essentially, the figure has
been seen, in this alternative view, as a feline attacking and
mauling, or killing (rather than copulating with), a human being
who may be of either sex—Olmec monument #31 at Chalcatzingo,
which undoubtedly shows “…two stylized felines pouncing on two
prone human figures…” 20 would be an early example. And such may
be the case; or, in fact, there may be several different images
involved here which we ourselves have blurred or misunderstood.
But for the purposes of the present study we will continue to
investigate our original suggestion.
The `Feline Procreators' of section A can be broken down
into four groups; most of them we have seen before in other
contexts. First there are the `archetypes': PA6 and U4, to
which may be added the simpler copy seen in M2.
The statues where a feline, often very vague, hangs in
typical fashion over not a carved human figure, but simply over
the blank stone, are M1, G1, CH6, OU14 and their Tierradentro–
area analogs (1)HM4, (1)HM5 and (1)HM9.
The statues of an anthropomorphic figure with a jaguar skin
and/or live feline draped over its back are PMB22, R3 and (6)I2.
And the Doble Yo statues are PMAL2 and AP1.
In section B of the Feline category are listed the statues
in which a supernatural being, part serpent and part feline, is

seen above a human figure. These sculptures form, as mentioned,
a list of the ‘classic’ Doble Yo statues: PMA1, PMA2, PMAL2,
AP1, AP5, PMB9, PMB10, PMB14 and PMB20. Other stones suggest
the same combined being, but this section lists examples where
both the serpent and the feline natures are unequivocally
exhibited.
Section C is an attempt to group together the statues which
show us what we can interpret as a `natural' figure of a jaguar,
aside from those already considered in the `Feline Procreator'
and `feline–serpent' groups. These are felines, then, without
specific function, simply identifiable as such.
R1 has the characteristic shape of a feline head––as we
see, for instance, in PMB22––and it is interesting to compare
the row of heads in AI9. Another stone with a comparable head
is LB2, this time shown without a body. CA2 has a head that is
somewhat similar, and with PA7 helps to form a series of
variously stylized feline heads.
PMAL4, like PA7, is only a bodiless head, which may be
feline; the same is true of LE5. But T2 is quite a different
case: this statue is popularly known as ‘El Jaguar’ and the
tremendous claws on his hands and feet leave a memorable
impression, and little doubt as to his feline spirit.
(1)HM8 and (1)HM6 are, like the other three similar stones
in the Hato–Marne series, difficult to define. Any or all might
be felines; the former is headless. There is perhaps less doubt
about the feline nature of (1)HM4, (1)HM5 and (1)HM9.
The final statue to be considered here is (2)LG2 from the
Platavieja statue–area, a very curious stone, difficult to
categorize. Because of the tail, though, we have good reason to
suspect that this figure shares a feline nature––compare U4 and

PA6. The head is, unfortunately, missing; and the male genitals
on the figure's front are split by a vertical groove which, some
observers have guessed, might suggest as well female sex.
Part Seven: CAYMAN/RANA/LAGARTO
This is a category of statues which at some points border
the Feline grouping, but at other points are so distant from
that category that, it would seem, these statues must be meant
to represent something quite different, some other animal or
animals entirely. We are reminded of "...the problem of the
divinity which Carrión Cachot has quite appropriately called the
`felinic dragon,' [also] designated, following Rowe, as the
cayman figure. The cayman shares traits with the feline and as
far as the Chavín artist was concerned, undoubtedly partook of
its essence. The fact that the sculptor went to the trouble to
portray it, using canons different from those applied to the
feline...indicate[s] that on at least one level it was
conceptually separate from the feline." 21 And in our search for
analogs we should certainly not overlook the series of Olmec
stones, such as Monument 20 from La Venta, nearly two meters in
length along its vertical axis, which portray creatures arguably
similar to those in this Pueblo Escultor category.
The title of this section is based on the Spanish names for
the three animals which, in local popular San Agustín lore, are
represented in these statues. A `lagarto' is a lizard, a `rana'
is a frog, and a `cayman' is simply a cayman, the tropical
american river animal analogous to an alligator or a crocodile.

All three are reptiles/amphibians, and are easier to separate
from felines in nature than in sculpture.
It is very difficult, at such distance, to identify the
parts played by these creatures in the iconography of the Pueblo
Escultor, or in the beliefs which inspired these sculptural
representations. Those which we are not confusing with felines,
it is probably fair to say, are most likely related to the
water, are `water creatures' both by nature and function––as far
as we may be from divining that function. (The interested
student should be sure to study the display of what are for the
most part water creatures––with many serpents, etc., included––
represented by PML2, the extraordinary `Fuente de Lavapatas'
carved creek-bed near San Agustín, adorned with more than 30
anthropomorphic and zoomorphic images.)
Most of the figures which seem to fit into this hybrid
grouping of several animals are given here in section A. The
lines dividing the animals are difficult to define, but we may
suggest some different possibilities.
PMAL1, AI8 and AI21 form a type of core group, surrounded
in different directions by lines of analogs. Are these three
animals felines or are they something like caymanes? In this
case, frogs and lizards do not seem reasonable alternatives.
The importance of the feline in the iconography of the Macizo
Colombiano monuments, and the unsure stature for the cayman,
argue in favor of the former; but the lines of the three stones
here under view may arguably be more similar to those of a
cayman than of a jaguar. PMAL1 was called a `perro echado' by
Preuss, that is, a `dog rushing forward' or `attacking.'
PMA13 is another figure, now deteriorated to the point of
having no details left, which must have been a similar, cayman–

shaped figure. PMAL4, when considered alongside AI8 and AI21,
seems to exhibit a very similar animal–head (although we have
already considered this statue as a possible `feline figure' in
the Feline–C class). All four of these statues display animals
with large fangs, which has traditionally been considered a
feline trait.
If we now look at M1, known since the 19th century as the
`Rana of Matanzas,' we will see that the choice here seems to
exclude the cayman, and rest instead between feline and frog.
This statue, a carved live–rock boulder, was clearer in earlier
days, and today is much erased––analysis is now extremely
tenuous.
Another figure, carved into a live–rock outcropping near
the Fuente de Lavapatas, has been known as the `Rana of
Lavapatas' since the middle of the 19th century. This stone
(PML1) has a vague shadow–double carved below it and may for
that reason be a `Feline Procreator,' as we have seen above.
But perhaps the folk–name that this statue has long carried has
some truth to it, and the animal may be more similar to a frog––
and to (3)LC7. This latter statue seems also to straddle a
line, looking perhaps most like PMAL1 but at the same time being
closer, it would seem, to a frog than a feline. (3)LC7 should
also be compared with M1 and (1)HM6. Another stone, small and
from the Tierradentro area––(1)SA6––is known there as a `sapo,'
another way of naming a toad or frog.
Another group bearing relations to the Cayman/Rana/Lagarto
group is the series of five stones which we have already looked
at from Tierradentro's Hato–Marne site: (1)HM4, (1)HM5, (1)HM6,
(1)HM8 and (1)HM9. All, as stated, may be felines; the first
two listed, together with the last, especially seem to fit this

ole, but they may, as well, be caymanes. (1)HM6, for its part,
seems more like a frog, and (1)HM8, which is headless, seems
very like the San Agustín–area caymanes depicted in AI8, AI21,
and PMAL1.
A final stone, little known and of great interest, should
be looked at while considering this context: (5)M2 from the
Saladoblanco statue area is quite a unique statue, a flat slab,
perhaps a sarcophagus–cover, carved on both principal surfaces
and on several of the edges. On the `main' surface we see an
anthropomorphic creature whose hands and mouth (and fangs) are
folded down onto an edge––a unique sculptural treatment in the
Macizo statuary. With its horizontal axis, this creature is
apparently an analog to such Cayman/Rana/Lagarto stones as M1,
PMAL1 and so on. But at the same time we must consider the
possibility that this may be a feline: both the unusual arm
position and the tremendous fanged mouth argue for a
relationship to such feline images as T2 and R1.
Section B presents a list of animals which, belonging to
this amphibian/reptile class, seem to be definable, first of
all, as not being felines, and second, due to their long tails,
as something akin to lizards or salamanders. This group is
useful because these animals convince us that under no
circumstances are we seeing only felines in many eccentric
guises.
A look at PMB19, for instance, will show us two animals
which surely are not felines. They also seem neither to be
frogs nor caymanes, nor even similar among themselves. But if
we establish a class of `water animals,' then certainly these
two will help conform that group. PMB18, found close by, adds
to this grouping, displaying a long–tailed lagarto along with

several other animals, including a serpent, a human head, and a
small unidentifiable animal.
PMB18 is another example of a stone with one true analog,
that is, another statue which seems to carry almost exactly the
same image: (3)LC5 from the far–distant Platavieja statue–area.
Here we see again, in nearly the same configuration, a long–
tailed lagarto who has an almost human face, grouped with a
human head, a serpent, and some small unidentifiable shapes.
To complete this lagarto section it is necessary to look
carefully at the Fuente de Lavapatas, PML2, where so many `water
animals' are grouped in one great scene. There are human
beings, to be sure, and many different serpents, along with what
seems to be a mammal standing next to the main human figure, and
two superimposed possible–mammals on the left side, near the
secondary pool.
But at least five or six animals here have forelegs and
long tails and seem, rather than serpents, frogs, caymanes or
felines, to be part of our class of lagartos. Especially
notable are three large animals descending from three sides into
the main pool: all have long bodies and tails, all have (or
had) forelegs, while the main and central lagarto has a long,
bifurcated tail enclosing within it the head of a human being.
Apparently these animals descend to `drink' water when the pool
fills; in doing so, they resemble the `Doble Spirits' discussed
above (see PMA1, PMB9, PMB14, etc.).
The final section, labeled C, lists three stones on which
are carved a particular image, here called lagarto, but widely
known and usually suggestive of both a humanoid and a zoomorphic
figure. This shape is not known solely from the Macizo
Colombiano; similar forms may be seen––often in petroglyphs––in

many places throughout America, and perhaps around the world.
Here we see several petroglyph versions which include (2)VC4 and
CO2, and a rarer slab–stone version from the Tierradentro area,
(1)AS1. As regards this latter, it is worth noting that the
nearby `hipogeos' or stone–cut subterranean tombs are painted
with a number of designs, among which may be found identical
lagartos.
Part Eight: BIRD FIGURES
In this section are gathered together all the statues which
display the different images of birds left to us by the Pueblo
Escultor.
The true or `natural' images of birds are reserved for
sections A and B. In section C are the statues in which some
figure is decorated with the specific adornment which has
usually in the literature been referred to as a `bird'––a
symbol, that is, rather than a `natural' figure. As for the
statues in section D, it is questionable as to whether they
carry any bird–reference at all, although the possibility does
exist.
We are left, then, in sections A and B, with a total of
nine statues (out of the 460 or so in this survey) which seem to
display an ornithomorphic image. Of these nine, two or three
seem somewhat questionable, so a `sure' count might be even
lower. This does not seem a large total for an animal which is
such an important image of art, and personage of myth, among
numerous ancient american peoples. In the present grouping we
see the degree to which the ornithomorphic figure was a presence
in the mythic/lithic scene of the Pueblo Escultor.
The two most elaborate examples of this image that we may

look at, here grouped in section B, are those twin stones to
which we have already referred: PMB6 and PE1, where an upright
bird grasps a serpent in its beak and talons. PMB6 is somewhat
more realistic and is one of the best–known pieces of sculpture
in the Pueblo Escultor catalogue. PE1, flatter and more
stylized, is as we have seen a particularly valuable stone due
to the crosshatched designs etched on the body of the serpent.
In the literature on this corner of American archaeology, a
long and greatly disputed battle of words has attempted to
determine just what class of bird is represented in these two
sculptures. Authors who believe that the image is that of an
owl (including Codazzi, Preuss, and Pérez de Barradas) and
investigators who think that an eagle is portrayed (such as
Cuervo Márquez, Duque Gómez, and Hernández de Alba) have
published their views. Local opinion in San Agustín is
similarly divided. Other suggestions too have been made;
Reichel–Dolmatoff mentions that a crane–hawk may be the correct
interpretation. 22
My own feelings are that 1) the symbolic function of the
bird, rather than his particular identification, is of greater
importance here, and is laid out expressly in these bird–with–
serpent images, where the celestial/terrestrial, light/dark,
up/down, life/death dichotomies that must have so fascinated
these Double–obsessed people––and which were firmly rooted in
widespread ancient american beliefs––are certainly of the
essence. And 2) given these facts, a corollary conclusion might
be that a bird like an eagle, as a high–flying solar emblem,
would be much more apropos to symbolize the essence at play here

than a low–flying night–dweller like the owl.
Whatever the case, PMB6 and PE1 are the best images that we
have of the bird as portrayed by the ancient sculptors. Next
would come BA1, a seated bird with its wings neatly folded up
over its tail. AI20 is still a very interesting little figure
although its missing or destroyed face and beak detract somewhat
from the effect. (3)LC8 from the Moscopán statue area, known
there popularly as a `loro' or parrot, seems to resemble the
latter stone, but the resemblance is not totally satisfactory:
(3)LC8 is a very strange image which, birdlike or not, does not
completely resolve in the eye of the viewer.
R4, an adornment at the end of a sarcophagus, seems to be a
bird reference, though nearly without detail. (3)LC2 shows a
human figure holding in his left hand an object already referred
to as a tumi–knife, but which is also, it would seem, the head
and beak of a bird. With this we come to the end of the
`natural' bird images, although two more stones, both low–relief
designs on flat slab–stones, are worth mentioning here. (2)L4
seems to show a bird–face or a bird–mask, while AI14, which has
been said to depict, on a sarcophagus–cover fragment, the talon
of a bird, might instead display something else.
One more statue is worth considering before leaving this
section. The back of PMC2 is carved in low relief with a
curious abstract design so striking that it has been adopted as
the official seal of the Municipality of San Agustín, and is
also displayed on the back of the ‘Monument to Simón Bolivar’ in
the `Parque Bolivar' in the center of the pueblo. The design is
not well understood, although there may be a relationship with
certain other statues (see Winged Figures group), and the
element in the center has long been seen to be similar to a

series of exemplary chalices or cups found in the tombs. But in
recent years a new interpretation has been suggested in which we
are looking from the back at a bird in flight: the central
element is the bird's neck and head seen from behind; the
rounded outer `heart' shows us in one sense the bird's wings,
while encompassing at the same time a separated view of the
bird's wings flashing downward in flight and the flaring bird's–
tail at the bottom. 23
Whatever the truth of this interpretation, it is a bold and
original conception of the manner of vision of the ancients, and
has become an important component of the local popular view.
Section C deals with the `bird emblem,' as the device has
been called. The nine figures listed here, all from the San
Agustín statue area, are the only known Pueblo Escultor
personages adorned with a specific ornament that is shaped, it
has been suggested, like a bird hanging beak–downward. To be
decorated with such `aves' must have denoted a special station
accorded only to a few, whatever its actual meaning might be.
The device occurs as a forehead ornament in eight of the nine
cases, and in the other––PE11, the most questionable among them–
–is a pectoral on a necklace.
Five of the nine figures have five ‘aves’ arranged across
the forehead: PMB10 (a `guardian' and warrior with club and
stone grasped in his hands), PMB22 (with another ‘ave,’ it would
seem, upright and suspended from a necklace), T8 (without fangs,
like the other two cited), J3 (which is only a bodyless head)
and Q2 (fanged, apparently a woman to judge by the nose-ring,
skirt and turban, and with her five ‘aves’ arranged, unlike the

others, in two rows).
Another statue––PMB26––is a fanged figure sustaining what
appears to be a skull, with three ‘aves’ on his forehead. PE10,
one of the two painted statues from La Pelota, is also unique in
the respect that no less than nine ‘aves’ are suspended in a
line across the forehead of this figure––the fifth male of the
group, as opposed to one female and three (T8, J3 and PE11)
whose sex is undetermined. This last–named statue differs from
all the others in that here the ‘ave’ is not portrayed on the
forehead, but rather hangs from a necklace, and in that way is
similar to PMB22. And AP4 not only shows the greatest number of
‘bird emblems,’ with ten, but stands alone in being the only
figure with an even number of these symbols: all the others,
strangely enough, are decorated with an odd number.
Section D of the Bird Figures category is devoted to
statues with a series of etched, vertical parallel lines across
the forehead or head. This particular form of decoration has
been called `feathers,' although there is no strong reason to so
consider it. The decision is arbitrary and those who do not
agree are welcome to disregard such a denomination and simply
accept the fact that all so–marked statues, whatever the meaning
of the etched markings may be, are listed here.
In fairness to the possibility, though, it should be borne
in mind that feathers were a very popular and well–known art
material used in decoration, dress and personal ornamentation
and often documented as relating to status, office and position
in many places across America, from North America to the central
Andes, the southern Andes, and the Amazon forest. They were
very possibly used among the Pueblo Escultor and there is no
reason why such a device could not occur in the statuary.

All of the 17 examples are relatively similar; PMC1 and
PMA9 are on the elaborate, and perhaps convincing, side. AI12
is different from the rest in having the etched parallel
markings on what will here be called `wings'––but the
significance would be difficult to judge.
Part Nine: OTHER ANIMALS
This chapter will complete the list of animals present in
the statuary of the Macizo Colombiano, and perhaps help us to
gain a glimpse of their relative importance in the scheme of
beliefs of the ancients. First we must take into account the
fact that we have already considered most of the animals that
are present: serpents and felines, we have seen, ranked high in
importance in the iconography of the statues, while both birds
and a range of animals that we have called caymanes, frogs,
lizards and `water animals' are present in significant numbers.
Several other animals are represented somewhere among the
vast scene conjured up by the many statues. The first to be
named, listed here in section A, are the monkeys. The list will
show five statues, of which one is certainly a monkey, two are
very convincing, and two others are more equivocal.
CH7 shows a `natural' figure of a monkey that is probably
as true-to-life as any figure among the statues. PMC9 and PMAL7
too must surely be showing us images of the monkeys the ancient
people were familiar with in the forest around them. EQ3 might
perhaps be meant to represent a monkey, while PMAL4 is a
different image which we have before considered both as a feline
and as a cayman; its profile is also reminiscent of a simian.
Section B is composed of but one statue, which presents a
singular figure unique among the ancient Macizo Colombiano

sculptures and at the same time completely recognizable. AP2 is
clearly a rodent, which word translates in spanish as `roedor,'
and except for the bifurcated tail is quite realistic to the
modern eye. This statue, exhibited in erect position today, is
flat on the `bottom' (below the four feet) and may have been
originally intended to serve as the cover to a sarcophagus or a
slab–box tomb.
Two statues, listed in section D, bear images of fish,
which animals are in both cases held in the hands of the
principal anthropomorphic figure. PMB3 carries one large fish
horizontally in both hands; AI19 has a smaller vertically–held
fish in each hand. A third figure (OU35) has in its hands an
object that might be a fish.
Section C resumes the few animals left unconsidered, all of
which are difficult to identify, and all of which may be
mammals. On the PMB18 stone, between the serpent and the
lizard, is a small undeterminable animal. And on the fantastic
composite of PML2, the Fuente de Lavapatas, are a great number
of animals. Almost all are serpents, humans, and different
versions of what we have called `water animals.' But on the far
right, just to the right of the human being on the back wall of
the principal pool, is an animal with upright tail which may be
a mammal: in popular local lore this animal is an `ardilla' or
squirrel. And on the far left of the Fuente, in middle view on
the back wall of the secondary pool, are two superimposed,
similar animals, the smaller of the two with a curling tail
above the back. They appear to be mammals, and in fact all
three of these mentioned animals have the curling tail which
reminds us of the felines of U4 and PA6, leaving the borders of
our definitions once again somewhat blurred.

Part Ten: COQUEROS
The coca plant and its product the coca leaf, as is well
known, played such an important part in the ancient Andean world
that it becomes impossible to consider the phenomenon of coca
without emphasizing the magical, spiritual, and eventually
religious aspect of this marvelous bush. Economy, utility,
political and geographical considerations all must have
eventually been reinterpreted in light of the realization that
coca was in fact a divine substance.
In the precolumbian world of the Andes––and since that
world has never completely died, to a lesser extent in today's
andean world––coca, beginning at some point in the very distant
past, became entwined with, identified with, became a part of
and then a very important element in, that world of archetypes
in which the divinely archetypal actions take place: the world
where the divine personages live and which the ancestors also
somehow inhabit, a place that human beings may at times, under
special circumstances, penetrate.
In that timeless, archetypal world, coca became an element
of grace and power. So, not surprisingly, in our world coca
became a plant endowed with special, magical virtue. Hunger is
eased aside, sleep and fatigue are banished, strength and
endurance are increased; and all of this is only prelude to a
greater virtue, for coca, like any true sacrament, gives the
initiate entrance to the sacred place, to the divine presence.
We must look at coca in this light in order to understand
its place among the tableaux of these ancient statues. It is
because of this sacramental essence that coca would come to play
the roles we see it playing in the archaeological and

ethnographical sources available to us: supposedly restricted
in use to certain elites and certain honored or victorious
individuals; agent of divination, of knowledge of the wisdom and
future plans designed for us by the divine beings; key element
in rituals, ceremonies and ordeals; and so on. 24
Given the exalted position of coca in the prehispanic
andean world, its magical and life–giving properties, and its
close identification with both the ruling elites and the `divine
personages,' we are hardly surprised to find the elements
associated with the use of coca present in the statues of the
Pueblo Escultor.
The apparatus of the `coqueros'––as the users of coca leaf
are known in spanish––among the inhabitants of the Macizo
Colombiano region consisted of three separate items. The
coqueros here listed are those figures who carry in their hands
any of the three articles. Although somewhere near 11 statues
show the use of each item, only two statues are of figures
carrying all three.
The first item is a `palo' or stick, with which the coquero
will dip out of a container the catalytic agent which looses the
active alkaloids from the coca leaf into his system. The second
item is a `poporo,’ a gourd or some similar vessel that contains
this activating substance. A `bolsa' or bag, used to contain
the dried coca leaves, completes the list of instruments.
U7 and QC5, the two stones holding all three objects, show
us the ‘complete’ coquero: the ‘palo’ gripped in the right
hand, dipping into––or near to dipping into––the ‘poporo’ held
in the left hand, while the ‘bolsa’ is strung on a cord around

the left wrist.
There are 12 statues in section A which have been classed
as holding coca ‘palos’ in their hands. Of these, six have
‘poporos’ in the other hand, and we can use that as a
confirmation that the figures are surely coqueros. The others––
PMAL7, PE9, OU39, AI17 and ES1––hold what may or may not be
‘palos’; these figures may or may not be coqueros.
Four statues––PE9, QC5, (1)VP1 and (4)A3––hold similar
eccentric, over–large ‘palos.’ The fact that the latter two are
surely coqueros makes us suspect that PE9, too, with its over–
large ‘palo,’ would be a coquero, although in this case the
‘palo’ has an eccentric cross shape at its narrow lower end.
The fourth statue, (4)A3, holds the large ‘palo’ in his right
hand and another object in the left. This latter item may
perhaps be an eccentric ‘poporo,’ but appears more to be a
`vara' or scepter––compare with PMA3 and (3)LC2.
Four coqueros hold their ‘palos’ in an eccentric grip, and
in three of the cases the grip is the same. PMA9, U7 and AI4
all hold the ‘palo’ so that it passes over the thumb, under the
first two fingers and over the last two. Certainly there is
some special meaning involved here. The fourth figure (AI17)
seems to pass his ‘palo’ under three fingers and over the last;
the other three have ‘poporos’ while AI17 does not, so the
shared grip reinforces the idea that this fourth statue would
indeed be a coquero.
AI17 is also notable for another reason: of the 11 ‘palo’–
holders, only this statue sustains his instrument with the left
rather than the right hand. One out of 11; is this near to the
percentage of left–handed persons found in the population at
large today? Could this be the one–in–eleven left–handed

coquero?
Twelve statues, all holding ‘poporos’ in their hands,
compose section B. Six of the twelve also carry ‘palos,’ as we
have seen. Only three of these ‘poporo’–holders carry ‘bolsas’
for coca–leaves: U7 and QC5, already discussed, being joined by
(1)T10. Whereas only one of the eleven ‘palo’–holders is from
an alternative statue area, three of the twelve ‘poporo’–holders
are from non–San Agustín–area sites.
It would appear that in the time of the Pueblo Escultor,
shells were the typical containers for the catalyst, unlike what
is suggested by the name ‘poporo’ (or gourd) used today to
designate all such containers. Five of these twelve statues
seem to hold shells in their hands––PMA9, U7, AI4, PA8 and
(5)M1. A number of the others may well be shells, although the
case is not clear.
One statue, from the Tierradentro statue area––(1)T10––is
unique. This statue was at some unknown point intentionally,
and nearly completely, destroyed. On the left hip, however, we
can still see what seems to be the image of a gourd, complete
with a cross–section view of the entrance–canal down the neck of
the vessel. The ‘bolsa’ or leaf–carrying–bag on the left hip
combines with the ‘poporo’ to ascertain the identification of
this figure as a coquero––both bag and gourd are crosshatch–
decorated, and the bag in particular is almost identical to
those made and used today by the inhabitants of Tierradentro,
the Páez Indians, to carry their coca leaves.
In section C are listed the ten statues which hold or carry
bags. Naturally, a bag could be put to many uses, and some of
these ‘bolsa’–carriers might not be coqueros. But all of the
bags, it is worth noting, are very similar. In addition, they

eak down into four different groups, four different ways of
carrying the ‘bolsas.’
We have seen that U7 and QC5 form the base–line group:
they are surely coqueros, carrying all three items necessary.
Both these figures have their ‘bolsas’ strung around the left
wrist by a cord. A third statue, OU3, is similar in that the
strap or neck of the ‘bolsa,’ held in the left hand, is draped
suggestively over the left wrist.
Another three statues––OU81, OU4 and T7––carry very similar
small round bags on necklaces around their necks. A third
group––LE4 and PMC6––hold their bags over their chests with both
hands.
The final group includes exclusively the two ‘bolsa’–
carrying statues not from the San Agustín area. Both (1)T10 and
(3)Y3 have their ‘bolsas’ strapped over the right hip. Given
the proven coca–association of (1)T10 discussed above, we might
consider this as evidence of the coquero–nature of (3)Y3, and
perhaps of the existence here of a non–San Agustín–area style of
coca–bag use.
If we now group the 23 figures identified as certain or
probable coqueros according to sex, we are faced with a
convincing statistic: not one statue is female, whereas eleven
are male and twelve are undetermined. In other words, whereas
20% of the total statuary appear to be male, here among the
coqueros nearly 50% are; and instead of the 7% verifiable female
figures out of the total, here we have not one. These
statistics strongly suggest that here coca was indeed in
precolumbian times a male prerogative, as is the case in today
among coca-users in much of the Andes.

Part Eleven: MASKED FIGURES
Certain of the San Agustín–area statues represent masked
anthropomorphic figures; PMC4 is an excellent example. A large
flat slab almost two meters high and only 20 centimeters thick,
this stone depicts a figure grasping with both hands over the
chest a long vertical staff which comes up to the figure's chin
and sustains a large mask covering his/her face. The mask in
this case includes different elements shielding the mouth, the
nose and, with a stepped–fret design, the sides of the face.
Only the eyes of the PMC4 figure are visible.
Two other statues––Q1 and U1––copy the structure of this
figure precisely. Both grasp with two hands a staff which
supports a large, face–covering mask. In addition, these two
figures are so similar to each other that they cause us to
wonder if they might not represent a specific personage known to
the ancients. Both masks have only three rectangular slots for
the eyes and mouth; the slots seem to be empty, and we see no
features behind the blank spaces.
When the staff–and–mask design is recognized, we are in a
position to identify other such figures which might not
initially be as obvious as those mentioned above. PMC2 for
example, a statue similar to PMC4 in shape and discovered in the
same site only a few meters away, holds two staffs in its hands–
–note that the staff of PMC4 is also divided in two by a
vertical etched line––and the mask here is also very similar,
rounded and with stepped designs, with only the eyes looking out
from behind the staff–supported structure.
Three other statues also fall neatly into a group in that
all grasp with both hands a staff which comes up to the chin.

The face may look `normal' but we are in a position to see that
a staff–and–mask structure is indicated. Q4, found in the same
site with and only several meters from Q1, holds in front of the
face a fanged mask appearing somewhat like a skull. (4)A1 from
the Aguabonita area and (1)SI3 from Tierradentro are important
in that they extend to the alternative statue areas this staff–
and–mask design known otherwise only from the San Agustín area.
(4)A1 holds an animal–head mask, while that of (1)SI3 is,
somewhat surprisingly, quite a normal anthropomorphic face.
Another three statues are listed here as resembling masked
figures without carrying staff–and–mask structures. LM1 as a
`face' is quite eccentric, but as a mask is similar to the
Mesita C figures and especially to PMC4, with which it shares
the curving lines around the face, the round/square ear–covering
elements, and the rectangular mouth block. And a consideration
of (2)LG3 and PMB(G)17 will show the face already known from U1
and Q1, with rectangular eye– and mouth–slots; the former,
though, is from the Platavieja statue area, while the latter
shows us the same element in the etched `grabado' stones of the
archaeological park near San Agustín.
The recently discovered PE12 enriches our store of Pueblo
Escultor staff-and-mask figures by adding a new flourish: the
staff is not a coherent unity, but rather is suggested by
mushroom-like tumi-shapes held in each hand. And yet the
overall effect, and the way that the upper tumi supports the
face from below, leaves little doubt that here we have another
staff-bearing figure.
Part Twelve: LENGUA/CINTA/CABEZA
There are several unusual San Agustín–area statues, similar

among themselves, which may refer to a personage or perhaps to a
practice or a ceremony; they are very interesting, but are
difficult to understand. This group is called in the present
study Lengua/Cinta/Cabeza; `lengua' is the spanish word for
tongue, `cinta' the word for ribbon or band, suggesting a belt
or long cloth, and `cabeza' designates the head. Call it, if
you wish, Tongue/Band/Head.
The statues in this group are all anthropomorphic figures;
in each case the tongue, or something like a ribbon or a belt
coming out of the mouth, extends downward and terminates in
either a head or an object reminiscent of a head. As we will
see, only three of the eight stones listed in this category
actually are ‘complete’ in that they perfectly meet this
description; the others bear a tangential relationship to these
three.
This figure in its ‘classic’ form is suggestive, yet
remains a mystery. A careful and systematic survey of
precolumbian art would shed a fair amount of light on this
enigmatic personage. Apparently related images are found among
the artifacts of many different cultures.
In South America there are strong links to the art of the
Paracas and Nazca cultures of the southern peruvian coast: the
cloths of the former people and the painted pottery of the
latter show us many figures very similar to the San Agustín–area
Lengua statues. The meaning, in the peruvian context, is
usually said to have to do with `trophy–heads,' the heads of
enemies taken as prizes and as evidence of conquest in war. A
secondary meaning, having to do with sacrifice, is often
suggested as well. The image, though, is hardly restricted to
these peoples, but instead is widespread.

In Mesoamerica to the north of the Pueblo Escultor similar
images may be seen, although not perhaps as strictly related,
suggesting that this motif may in essence be south-american.
The central figure of the Aztec `calendar stone,' the stone of
Tizoc, may be taken as an example: the `tongue' of this
personage extends downward and proves to be a stone sacrifice
knife, marked with a number of details. Such knives were used
in Mexico to remove the hearts of sacrificial victims; at the
same time the meaning is redoubled in that the bleeding, or
self–sacrifice of letting blood from the tongue, is known to
have been an ancient mesoamerican custom.
Another set of related mesoamerican images are those in
which one face emerges from another face or mask through the
mouth, an image known from both archaeological pieces and
ethnographical reports. Significantly, this image also occurs
among the Chorotega statues of Nicaragua, which are perhaps the
closest lithic analogs to the Pueblo Escultor statues.
In this last case, as well as in other cases from both
South America and Mesoamerica, the interpretation most probably
has some relation to the complex of meanings known in this study
as Doble Yo. In the statues of San Agustín as well it would
seem that there is certainly some connection, difficult to pin
down, between these Lengua/Cinta/Cabeza statues and the images,
already discussed, of the Doble Yo. A glance at LM3 will
illustrate the connection, as well as the difficulty: is this a
version of the Doble Yo (see PMA1, PMB9, PMAL2, etc.) or is the
lower face a ‘cabeza’ hanging on a ‘cinta’ from the featureless
upper figure? (see U2, PMB1, PMC7, for example) Apparently it
is both.
This last named trio of statues are those here considered

‘classic’ Lengua/Cinta/Cabeza images. All three figures are
very similar: they are fanged anthropomorphs, each with
different detailed forehead ornaments, grasping the ‘cinta’ with
both hands. The object depending from the ‘cinta’ in the cases
of U2 and PMB1 is most definitely an anthropomorphic head, while
the PMC7 object is very similar to a head, though not
indisputably so.
The three statues which must now be considered––C1, OB3,
and J4––are different from the ‘classic’ trio, and yet they have
a tantalizing similarity. All three have an elongated object
depending from near the mouths of the principal figures, and
both C1 and OB3 grasp their objects in a manner similar to the
above–mentioned stones.
These three figures are, in the popular interpretation,
said to be musicians playing musical instruments; the pattern
for this analysis was set by the discovery of C1 in the past
century. This apparently female figure has since that time been
known as the `Tañedora de Flauta' or `Flute Player,' although
that name was based on a careless appraisal: the `flute' in
question descends not from the figure's mouth, as was originally
assumed, but from her nose. The similarity to the ‘classic’
Lengua/Cinta/Cabeza statues, though, should be apparent.
OB1 is equally similar to the ‘classic’ figures, and bears
a greater resemblance to a flute player. J4 is more unusual,
but still seems related to the other stones in this category.
The final stone to be considered here, OU48, is not properly a
Lengua image at all, but should be looked at for its
relationship to J4 and OB1. The object carried by OU48, though,
is even more similar to that held by PMC1.

Part Thirteen: OTHER IMPLEMENTS IN HANDS
The typical anthropomorphic figure in the statues of the
Pueblo Escultor may be simply and generally described: he or
she stands erect in a block–like form, upper body and head
emphasized, lower body correspondingly de–emphasized, and with
both arms symmetrically folded over the chest or stomach. About
86% of the total statuary (395 of some 460 lithic pieces) show
anthropomorphic figures, and of this lesser number (of 395
reasonably anthropomorphic pieces) 219, or 56%, correspond in
general terms to this stricter definition, of erect human-shaped
figures with arms across the body.
The intent of the present chapter is to focus on the
statues not yet considered which carry objects of some type in
their hands––some 91 of the total of 219 upright human-like
figures do hold some object or objects, while the other 128 do
not, their hands being folded in some version of this `standard'
position, but empty. The 91 object-grasping figures thus form
31% of this human-shaped group, and 20% of the total statuary of
the Macizo. None of the Nariño or Popayán statues hold anything
in their hands.
First we have to take into account the fact that the
majority of the statues which hold objects in their hands have
already been classed, interpreted inasmuch as is possible, and
discussed. This present chapter will deal with the remainder,
those whose objects have not yet been analyzed. Already
considered have been the following groups: those who carry
small figures with ‘cuernos’ or horns; those who hold skulls,
heads or seemingly related objects; those who sustain animals
(in the form of serpents, fish or mammals); those who grasp

‘tumi’–knives; the two female statues gripping cups in their
right hands; coqueros with ‘palos,’ ‘poporos’ and/or ‘bolsas’ in
their hands; Doble Yo upper figures who seem to clutch or
control the head of the lower figures; masked figures who hold
with their hands the staff or pole which sustains the mask; and
the Lengua/Cinta/Cabeza group of figures whose hands grasp the
tongues or tongue–like ribbons issuing from their mouths or, in
some cases, objects which appear to be musical instruments.
Most of the remaining object-holders are figures who hold
staffs, clubs, sticks or scepters, although certainly the
attempt to differentiate between these groups is difficult and
not at all certain; the lines are considerably blurred.
Section A is an attempt to list all those statues which
hold objects that may likely be war apparatus. In practice such
gear consist of 1) clubs or staffs, 2) lances, 3) round objects
that seem to be rocks hefted for throwing, and 4) shields. Many
of these figures are the `guardians' of the large mound–tombs in
the San Agustín archaeological park.
PMA1 and PMA2 are figures who hold clubs upraised over one
shoulder in such an aggressive, menacing fashion that the
observer is swayed from judging them to be scepters or
ceremonial objects and is obliged to see them as instruments of
war, objects intended for use in fighting. PMAL5 and PMB9 are
virtually identical in this sense, and the companion of the
latter stone, PMB10, holding a club in one hand and a rock in
the other, must surely be a warrior image too. This typical
finding of the `guardian' stones in pairs leads one to
conjecture that PMAL5 as well may be one of a matched set of
statues whose twin has not yet been discovered, and the same
comment applies to the statue on exhibit in the British Museum

(OU2).
Three statues, PMB10, PMA7 and PMA8, all hold rocks (or
round objects) upraised in one hand in what clearly appears to
be a threatening, warlike gesture. The first–named holds the
rock in his left hand and, as mentioned, a half–raised club in
the right. The latter pair of statues each hold the rock in the
shoulder–level right hand while the left, at belt level, is out
of sight, gripping a slanting, pointed lance and a polygonal
flat object which perhaps may be some kind of shield. A look at
the British Museum statue (OU2), which is from the San Agustín
area, will disclose a figure with a staff grasped in the right
hand and a very similar shield strapped on to the left arm.
The elaborate Doble Yo figure of PMAL3 is similar to the
British Museum statue in the way that his right hand grasps a
large, vertical staff. The warrior persona of the British
Museum stone, with shield and staff, suggests that PMAL3 too is
a warrior, carrying not a ceremonial, but rather a war,
instrument.
The rest of the section A statues belong to a separate
group from those considered so far, and all seem to be
`guerreros' or warriors. But the following six figures are not
so easy to decipher. Interestingly, five of the six are from
alternative Pueblo Escultor sites, suggesting that they display
a form best-known outside the Magdalena headwaters. The one San
Agustín–area stone (AP5), which is from the northernmost site on
the edge of the principal statue area, is also interesting in
that it seems to straddle the line between ‘guerreros’ and
staff–bearers; that is, the figure seems both to be lifting a
weapon threateningly, and simply holding at his chest a staff—it
is hard to tell.

The rest of this group are not fanged, seem perhaps
consequently less passionate, and one tends toward judging them
as staff-bearers without aggressive intent. They may however be
warriors, and are in essence identical to AP5. The differences
between these other five are minimal, the most visible
discrepancy being that while all their staffs are held
diagonally across their bodies, the Moscopán stones from the San
José site––(3)SJ3 and (3)SJ7––have the top point of the staff on
the left shoulder, while the Aguabonita, Platavieja and
Moscopán–Yarumalito stones––(4)A2, (2)LG1 and (3)Y1,
respectively––have it on the right. It may be worth adding that
this particular Platavieja statue––(2)LG1––is the most finely–
carved and most elaborate stone from that statue area; the staff
this figure carries is ornamented with a round device near the
bottom, which motif is matched closely by (4)A2 from the
Aguabonita area.
This complex of stone figures grasping diagonally–held
staffs is also notably present among the Chontales statues of
Nicaragua.
Section B statues are those which seem to be carrying a
staff, a `vara,' or a ceremonial article of some kind. The
‘vara’ represents an andean concept with roots deep in
precolumbian history; it was noted at the time of the conquest,
is chronicled among the andean communities throughout the
colonial era, and exists and may be seen today, in a more
ceremonial aspect perhaps, at the types of local community
fiestas and ceremonies which many of today's travelers have
witnessed. Basically, it is a `bastón de mando' or a `staff of
command,' essentially a scepter: the ceremonial item, at once
symbolic of his/her power and the right to exercise it, which a

uler holds at any public, official or sacred event, and through
which, on the magical level, that power is effected.
The evidence of the great importance of the ‘vara’
throughout andean history is a strong argument to support the
idea that at least some of these stones represent persons of
rank and position holding the emblems of their power. (2)LG1,
for instance, could be interpreted in this way.
Section B, then, begins with the six stones already cited
as being line–straddlers from section A, as well as PMAL3, which
also is listed in section A. Of the other seven stones here,
three of them––PE9, OU39 and (4)A3––have already been referenced
as possible coqueros, although all three bear eccentric ‘palos.’
Another, PMC2, one of the most beautiful and celebrated of the
Pueblo Escultor stones, has been previously noted as possibly
holding a staff–and–mask apparatus. This figure holds two
staffs, though, and they may also simply be that. A fourth
statue (PA5) holds two eccentric objects in a like manner.
Of the remaining two stones, one (OB1) would find its most
similar analog in PMAL3. The final piece, PMA3, is perhaps one
which most convinces us that the item, here held in the left
hand, is a ‘vara’ of some sort; the right hand grasps a ‘tumi’–
knife. The ‘vara’ held by PMA3 is also very similar to that
held by (4)A3.
There must be great significance in the fact that of all
the 20 stones in sections A and B, which is to say of all of the
`warriors' and staff bearers, an overwhelming 16, or 80%, are
certainly male, while four are undetermined and not a single one
can be said to be female.
Section C has already been dealt with: these are the
figures who hold skulls or heads in their hands, and are

differentiated from those of the Sacrifice Figures–E group
simply in that here such objects are held strictly in the hands,
while among the former group they are sustained by any means––on
a necklace or strap, for instance.
Section D is a catchall grouping––having attempted to
categorize all the objects seen to be displayed in the hands of
the various figures, we still find ourselves with several which
do not come clear; the items they hold refuse to fall neatly
into any group. Many of these statues have already been
discussed, and suggestions advanced as to the identity of the
objects they hold. Q2, for example, holds two large ‘tumi’–
knives, but they are eccentric enough that there may be more to
it than that. OB3 and C1 seem to be playing musical
instruments, but one can hardly be sure of that. ES1 holds what
may be a coca ‘palo,’ but it is of an eccentric shape. PMC14 is
clearly a familiar character, but one still wonders at the round
object or lower figure, and the same may be said of the object
in the hands of another Doble Yo lower figure, PMAL9.
LM4 and PA5 are figures which are similar to each other and
bear a resemblance to stones like PMC2 and (2)L2, but the actual
identification of the objects they bear is elusive. Some other
statues are simply unclear, like LT1, PMD1 and (2)LG3, whose
`objects' are rectangular indentations. OU35, on the other
hand, holds an item that looks somewhat like a fish.
One group of three San Agustín–area statues seems to hold
the key to one intriguing detail of the Pueblo Escultor
mythology. QC1, one of the most `natural' of the human figures
carved by the ancient craftsmen, and CH7, the most `natural'
figure in the area of a monkey and perhaps of any animal, both
hold the left hand partly outstretched and in a position of

gripping something. An actual void or hole is carved out of the
stone and is cradled by the hand, and the implication is clear
that this hole was meant as a way for the hand to hold
something, some object now missing, apart from the stone statue
itself. The third statue, AI13, also a notably `natural' human
figure, offers a clue: he or she sits identically to QC1, with
similar eyes, similar fangless mouth, and with hands identically
folded over the knees. But AI13 is carved in stone holding an
arrow in the left hand. QC1, incidentally, has an upward–
pointed arrow–like motif carved on the chest. The object once
held by QC1, and possibly even by CH7, may have borne some
relation to AI13's arrow.
The four other stones in the D-section (all from the
alternative Pueblo Escultor areas) are interesting, but
difficult to understand. What is the shield–like object held by
(1)TI20, or those in the hands of (2)PV3 and (3)LC3? And
(3)LC2, as we have seen, holds a bird's–head that at the same
time looks like a ‘tumi’ object in his left hand, while gripping
what appears to be a hatchet in his right.
The final stone on the section D list, PMC1, is certainly
one of the most fascinating, and perhaps important, of the known
monuments. One of the very first to be discovered, seen by Fray
Juan de Santa Gertrudis in 1756, this fanged, ‘tumi’–shaped
figure lacks a right arm. The left is held in `standard'
position across the body, but the fingers are rather claws,
perhaps indicating `felinization,' and furthermore are inside a
glove–like shape. Beyond this, an elaborately knotted ribbon–
like object, unique among the Pueblo Escultor statues, is draped
carefully over the left wrist.
The classification of object–holding figures is with PMC1

completed, but two more groups, listed in sections E and F, are
worth looking at: both are classes of statues which hold their
arms, with hands empty, in certain eccentric positions that
contrast with the great majority of figures whose arms, we have
seen, conform to something like a `standard' position, folded
symmetrically across the chest or midsection. The following
chapter 14 will complete this look at arm positions.
Section E comprises a significant list, that of those
figures whose arms are upraised toward their shoulders as if
`reaching for the sky.' There are nine true statues on this
list, because three cited stones (AS1, AS2 and PMB(G)13)
basically show us shadows of this image translated into the
media of petroglyphs and etched `grabado,' while the secondary
figure of PMB13, held upside–down, should probably be
discounted. But these nine form an interesting set.
Taken as a group they are very similar in general figure,
with almost no functional variations. All are fanged, save for
two of the La Chaquira faces (CH2 and CH4).
Many of this group, it is worth noting, are beautiful pieces of
art, admirably designed and skillfully worked. They were almost
all products, then, of master stoneworkers, the best in this
area at their craft. The three La Chaquira faces are carved
into a trio of compass–oriented faces on a massive boulder set
in a magnificent location looking out over the Magdalena canyon
from the very edge of the precipice. This must have been a very
important place to the ancient San Agustín–area people, and
still is so today. The fanged figure (CH1) is in the center,
facing east, flanked by CH2 and CH4. A fourth, smaller figure
(CH5) faces south–east and is seen in profile, and seems also to
have arms upraised; see AG3 as well for something close to this

profile view.
The five remaining stones offer us our best insights into
this group. All are `felinized,' as suggested by their fangs,
but in addition several are actually felines. R1, we know from
the shape of the head, is indicated as a feline, while T2 is
even known popularly in San Agustín as `El Jaguar.' (1)TI4
seems to suggest a feline while at the same time it hints at a
skull, and it is one of the only fanged stones in the
Tierradentro area. (5)M2, difficult to fathom, does not seem
wholly human. T4, on the other hand, is a quite `natural' human
figure. AI7, it should be noted, holds his hands in a unique
position, upraised inside the trunk of his body, rather than
outside the shoulders.
Section F stones––C3, (2)B2 and PMB25––are those which hold
their arms down at their sides, quite unlike the usual positions
and opposite to the `arms upraised' stones. No strict
similarity seems to unite them.
In section H, to complete this hand/arm inventory, are
three stones which seem to deal with hands as a prime element.
OU63, apparently a fragment of a sarcophagus cover, shows a
single anthropomorphic hand. The curious (1)TI20 shows a stray
pair of arms on the back of the statue. VE1 is quite a
mysterious stone, a live rock boulder hidden away in a thick
forest and virtually unknown and unvisited; here we see, in a
curious form of indented petroglyph carving, at least a dozen
human hands. Some, to cap the mystery, have six fingers, while
others have only four, and yet others the normal number of five.
Part Fourteen: DEATH POSTURE
It has often been suggested that while some of the Pueblo

Escultor statues may represent gods and divine personages and
figures of myth, others are images of the dead, the ancestors,
the figures of the underworld.
It is difficult to see any way of knowing whether or not
this is true. A stone like AI7, for example––a sarcophagus–
cover slab which was found over a sarcophagus, and is carved
with an image that seems very much to be a portrait of the dead
man––this, in short, is exactly what we are looking for. U3 is
another stone which looks like a death image, and the figure on
the back of OU4, being carved so oddly, might also be taken as
something in the way of confirmation.
Most of the others, though, are of a piece: the section A
statues are those whose hands are not `standard' (clutched
horizontally across the belly or chest), not upraised or down-
thrust, and not holding anything (with the exception of PMB33
who meets the other criteria but grasps a small ‘poporo’ shell
in both hands). Instead, the arms of all these section A
statues are slanted upward, above the horizontal, and laid
across the chest––AI7 would be the prototype. Do we understand
this grouping? It is difficult to say. Whatever the
significance of this arm–position, here are gathered together
all such statues. Only a few stand out from the norm.
These are in general inferior carvings, less detailed and
at the same time less well crafted. One hand of PMB32 grasps
another. The arms of (1)LC1 and (1)SI5 are out of kilter.
(6)SF1 has the proper position but, unusually and like OU4,
carries a small figure on his back. The PMB12 series of some
25–plus carvings, all basically identical and with one arm
grasping the other (which is down-thrust) at the elbow, are also
included here, although it is hard to say with what

justification. These PMB12 stones are from one single find on
Mesita B, and are difficult to interpret, although their
original architectonic position may have been similar to the
uncarved stones which circle (and contain) another mound–tomb on
Mesita B, only some 20 meters away. For what it is worth, of
the 26 drawn here, 15 grasp with right hand the left elbow, and
11 are the opposite, grasping the right elbow with the left
hand.
Section B lists ten statues that show a different position,
one which with even more justice might be viewed as a funerary
position. These figures are seated and either grasp their
knees––like LT3, R2 and N3––or rest their hands on top of the
folded knees in a similar way. (2)LG3 is more eccentric, but
still may be grasping his knees.
This position is a well known burial position, evidenced by
many different american cultures, and is given a name––`flexed'–
–in the archaeological lexicon. These flexed figures thus even
more strongly suggest themselves as images of dead human beings–
–we have seen that none of them have special attributes or carry
objects. They are just plain, simple human figures.
There is a group of closely analogous statues from the
Recuay and Huaylas cultures of the Callejón de Huaylas in
northern highland Perú. Though found in the general zone of the
central site of the earlier Chavín culture, they apparently
range in date from post–Chavín through Tiwanaku and post–
Tiwanaku times—roughly the same time period as that of the
Pueblo Escultor. We see seated figures grasping their folded
knees, sometimes bearing other articles, and closely resembling
peruvian mummy bundles in shape. These pieces too are found in
funerary contexts, and have been called "...representations of

mummified persons, to judge by their seated positions," and
"...mummified warriors...shown with flexed legs." 25 .
Only one stone––AI24––forms section C. Here we clearly see
a human rib–cage, but the stone lacks both head and legs, so
that any inference is of necessity indirect.
Part Fifteen: SEVERAL OTHER CATEGORIES:
T–SHAPED PECTORALS:
The T–Shaped pectoral is a specific ornamental and perhaps
ceremonial device which is found, among the Pueblo Escultor
statues, exclusively in the Tierradentro area. There are nine
statues that wear the T–shaped ornament, which when taken
against the total of 67 statues in the Tierradentro zone equals
a substantial 13.5%. In every case (although (1)SI4 is
questionable) the T–shaped object appears as a pectoral on the
figure's chest. None of these statues are fanged, which is to
be expected at Tierradentro. Three of the nine––(1)T3, (1)TI11
and (1)TI27––are male, while the other six are undetermined;
none seem female by any criterion.
Three of the statue figures depicted wear their T–shaped
pectorals suspended on necklaces running back around the neck:
(1)T5, (1)HM7 and (1)TI10. Another three have the emblem placed
on their chests, with no neck–cord, but in the same position:
(1)T3, (1)TI25 and (1)TI27. The final trio are varied. (1)SI4
is too fragmentary to be of much use, but seems to be a chest––
with vestiges of chin above and arms below––on which we see an
elegant T–shape. In the case of (1)TI11 we cannot quite tell––

we see the T–shape, but the statue is broken vertically across
it, and across the figure's chest; but compare the fragment to
(1)T3, (1)B4, (1)SI4, etc. The final stone, (1)B4, is the most
unusual of the series, with two T–shaped pectorals, one on each
side of the chest, instead of a single device in the center.
The shape of (1)T5 is the most unusual; and (1)TI25 shows a
similar figure. (1)B4 and (1)TI27 have nearly identical
pectorals. Two of the devices––(1)HM7 and (1)TI10, both with
their objects strung around the neck––seem intended to serve as
‘tumi’–knives, while a third––(1)SI4––is somewhat suggestive of
the ‘tumi’ shape.
We also need to look at this T-shaped device in the light
of two statues from the San Agustín area. The first is a large,
impressive stone at the Mesita B site, where the headband of the
huge triangular PMB7 is composed of interlocking ‘T’ shapes.
And at Alto de las Piedras there is a large tomb-slab (AP(G)1)
deeply engraved with this same Pueblo Escultor symbol. It may
also be worth noting that similar T-shapes, as well as T-shaped
pectorals, are reported from a number of different Mayan sites
and other places as well in southern Mexico and Central America:
we are told, in reference to this symbol, that “It is the
identifying element of the day-sign ‘Ik,’ a term meaning ‘wind,’
‘breath,’ ‘spirit,’ and, by extension, ‘life.’” 26
`WINGED' FIGURES:
The word `winged' is between apostrophes to indicate that
it is not necessarily meant to be taken literally. There are a
series of some seven statues which show variations of a similar

shape on their backs, and since it is vaguely suggestive of
wings, the category has been given that name. The shape is also
sometimes reminiscent of a conventional `heart,' and could as
well have been so labeled.
The two most elaborate examples are PMC2 and AI12, both
standout examples of the San Agustín stone-carving art. The
latter, unfortunately broken, is carved in an elaborate shape
and is etched on top of that. PMC2, an oft–noted stone, has a
low–relief version of the heart–shaped `wings' which envelopes a
design said by some to resemble a bird in flight.
The other two San Agustín–area stones, J7 and OU27, are
similar to each other, taking into account that OU27 is broken.
OU27, like AI12 and (1)TI4, is male, while the other four show
no sure signs of their sex; none are clearly female.
The three stones from alternative Pueblo Escultor areas
which have versions of `wing' shapes on their backs are all
slightly less convincing. (1)VP1 has something like the
rounded, pointed–at–bottom `wings' shape, but here it can be
seen to be very similar to a common back–device, usually formed
of two parallel columns connected at the top, which may be seen
on the backs of many statues from the San Agustín area as well
as from outside the valley. (1)TI4 is backed by a flat `heart'–
shape, but it looks almost as if the shape were casual, and the
intent lay more in the function as a backing, as for example in
C1. The final statue, (6)CO1, from the Popayán statue area, has
only vaguely a `wings' shape, seeming more to be a `shadow' of
the arms seen on the front of the statue.
`FURNITURE' STONES:
This class could just as well be called `Functional

Stones,’ the purpose being to list all the large–scale stone
carvings which seem likely to have been used to do something
functional in an every-day manner.
AI9, for instance, in addition to bearing a circle of 16
faces, is called an altar, and could as easily be considered a
table or a seat. Another stone, a Tierradentro feline––(1)HM6––
is also very similar to a table or an Olmec-style ‘throne.’ And
(1)SA2, the round face–ringed stone most similar in both essence
and form to AI9, also has a circular hole of very curious shape
which passes part way through its center. The meaning seems to
be that this stone is a `joint,' a stone which when coupled with
the properly–shaped projecting object could form a useful
junction, for some reason which is no longer evident.
There are two other stones, PMB19 and AG2, both from the
San Agustín statue area, which also seem to have jointed holes
through the center. In each case the actual shape of the joint–
hole is different. PMB19 has a hole which reduces in size
passing from the front to the back; one edge is flat rather than
rounded. AG2 is similar to PMB19 but has no design carving and
the center hole is jointed but square.
Another pair of stones, (5)M3 in the Saladoblanco area and
(3)LC9 in the Moscopán zone, are among the most provocative
monuments that we know. Both were found in the context of
numerous other, more conventional stone-carvings––
anthropomorphic statues, animal figures, and so on––but both
seem to be pieces of furniture, of a style with which the modern
eye can readily identify. The Saladoblanco stone, square and
with an elevated basin, seems intended to hold liquid and/or
other things, is virtually a `sink' or `washbasin' to the modern
observer. And (3)LC9 is not only seemingly a modern shape but

is carved as a beautiful, curving form which really breaks with
all the other known Pueblo Escultor work. This sculpture, one
concludes, simply had to be a chair. Today in its remote site–
area it is called just that: `La Silla.'
A final stone, listed here, is not really a `furniture'
stone, being itself a flat slab with, as is customary, an etched
`grabado' design: this stone would have been a wall or roof in
a tomb–structure. But the patterns incised on LB(G)1 seem to
suggest some construct, and perhaps, as has been suggested
locally, these are pictures of looms used for weaving, or house–
plan sketches. They could as well be something else.
DECORATED SARCOPHAGI:
Monolithic stone sarcophagi were perhaps not a common
element among the ruins left by many ancient American peoples;
nevertheless, there were a number of cultures for whom such
sarcophagi are registered, beginning at least as early as the
Formative-age Olmecs of Mexico. In the San Agustín area more
than 30 monolithic sarcophagi were found 27 , and quite a few may
be seen today both in the archaeological park and in the second
park, Alto de los Idolos, and in other sites as well. Almost
all are impressive and massive; they are carved in several
different manners.
Among them, though, only three have been found which are
carved with any type of ornamental design (here we are not
considering the pairs of `arms' or `handles' carved at the two
ends of several other stone sarcophagi in the zone, as if to
carry them thereby). None of the three come from either of the

two centers, the archaeological parks, and curiously two of the
three are from (and still may be seen at) sites on the far side
of the Sombrerillos River, at the southern edge of the statue
zone and in an area where relatively few sculptures have been
found. Both of these stones, in fact, are not only beyond the
river but on the far side of the El Pilón mountain to the south.
All three are alike in being carved with figures only at
one end. R4 is near the top of El Pilón; there, along with
several statues, is this sarcophagus carved with the form of a
bird's face, beak and wings. Yet further to the south is the La
Florida site where one (LF1) among several sarcophagi has two
human faces at one end, looking much like the pairs of
sarcophagus–end `handles' already referred to.
The third of the decorated sarcophagi is in the center of
the main statue zone, to the north of the Magdalena River. This
sarcophagus, B1, has a single human face at one end.
`LODGES':
The final two pieces to be considered in this study––(1)SA3
from the Tierradentro area and (2)PV1 from the Platavieja area––
are monolithic images of buildings of the ancient new-world
inhabitants, and they may well be unique objects from the
precolumbian world. They seem so far outside the canon of the
sculpture under study here that one is moved to ask: who were
the individuals, inheritors of a grand sculptural heritage, who
created these two lithic works? What was their purpose for
wanting copies in stone of their buildings? Since they were
found buried in the usual funerary context, they must have
played a role in the legendary, mythical scene which, were all
the parts assembled, would be played out before our eyes.

(1)SA3 seems to be an extremely realistic portrayal of a
lodge or some type of building built also in the `real' world by
the ancients. Looking at the striation–lines on the roof of the
lodge and the soft, rounded form time has given the stone, one
can almost see the thatched roof that surely is intended. The
ends of the roof are realistically marked, and on one long side
at ground level may be seen the entrance–way into the building.
(2)PV1, the stone called `El Rancho' in the Platavieja
area, is a direct analog of the Tierradentro stone; here we have
another lodge, complete with identical entrance–way in the
middle of one long side. There are arcs as ornament–marks over
this door, and stepped decoration all along both long sides of
the roof. And we see at both ends of the roof, with smiling
`baby'–face and hanging, outstretched arms, a pair of very
familiar figures: these two are once again the `Doble Spirits,'
the `Guardians,' the combined supernatural serpent–feline
figures who are in some way representative of the Doble-Yo.
SERPENTS:
*************************************************
A) Serpent Doble
********************************
*****************
LISTS OF CATEGORIES
PMA1 AP1

PMA2 AP5
PMA7 (paint) PMC3
PMA8 (paint) PMC8
PMB9 OU28
PMB10 LA1
PMB14 (1)HM4
PMB20 (2)PV1
PMAL2
B) Bird with Serpent
PMB6
PE1
C) Serpent in Hands
CA2
PMB2
D) Serpent Stone
PMB27 LT4
PMC12 N2
PML2 (1)T13
E) with Many Creatures
PMB18 PML22
PMB19 (3)LC5
F) Serpent `Grabado'
PMB(G)6 OU(G)1
PMB(G)7 AC2
LB(G)1
G) Petroglyph Serpents
AS1 (5)CO1
AS2 (5)CO2
(2)VC4
H) Crosshatch Turban
AI1 PMAL8
AI5 T5
AI10 SA3
AP7 Q2
AP8 QC5
AP11 (1)T6
(1)T9
I) Crosshatch Skirt

T1 SA3
T3 OU35
J) Crosshatch Incision
WOMAN SIGNS:
PMA(G)1 OU35
PMB(G)3 (1)T10
PMB(G)14 (2)VC1
PE1 (5)M2
A) Crosshatch on Woman
AI1 T1
AI5 T3
AI10 T5
AP7 SA3
AP8 OU35
AP11 (1)T6
PMAL8 (1)T9
PMB17 Q2
B) Breasts or Genitals
AI1 OU40
AI16 (1)TI2
LT3
AG1 (1)TI9
PMA12 (2)LG2
OB4
C) Wears Skirt
AI1 T1
AP7 T3
AP8 T5
AG1 C1
PMA4 CA1
PMC5 (1)T2
PE2 (1)T4
SA3 (1)T11
PMB17 J1
PMAL6 AP10
D) Nosering
T5
Q2
(1)T9

E) Crosshatch in Other Context
MALE SIGNS:
PMA1 PMA(G)1
PMA2 PMB(G)3
PMAL2 PMB(G)6
AP1 PMB(G)14
PE1 OU(G)1
CA2 (1)T10
*QC5 (2)VC1
(5)M2
A) Genitals
PMA9 (1)TI3
PMAL2 (1)TI4
AC1 (1)TI13
AI7 (1)TI15
AI12 (1)TI18
AI25 (1)TI22
AP12 (1)TI27
CH2 (2)B1
PE5 (2)B2
PE9 (secondary figure)
OB1 (2)BP1 (on side)
R3 (2)L3
LT2 (2)LG2
S4 (2)VC3
N3 (3)M1
OU29 (3)M2
OU39 (3)LC1
OU81 (3)LC5 (on side)
AP4 (3)Y6
ET1
B) Loincloth
PMA1 LA1
PMA2 LM7
PMA5 J2
PMA7 (appar– QC4
PMA8 ently) QC5
PMA10 OU16
PMB11 OU27
PMB22 OU37
PMB26 OU53
PMC3 (1)T1
PMC7 (1)T3
PMD2 (1)T11

SACRIFICE FIGURES:
PMAL3 (twice) (1)TI23
PMAL5 (1)EP1
PMAL7 (2)L5
AI4 (2)PV3
AI17 (2)LG1
AI22 (3)Y1
AP1 (3)Y3
AP5 (3)LC2
CH1 (3)LC4
PA2 (3)SJ3
PE10 (4)A2
U7 (4)A3
BA2 J1 (?)
J5
A) Sustaining Small Figure with `Cuernos'
PMB13 PE9 (through wound in arm)
PMB21 PE10
U6 OU83 (not sustained)
C2
B) `Cuernos'
AP12
PMAL3
C) Sustaining Strange Figure
PMAL9 (1)TI20
PMC14 (2)PV3
AI10 (3)LC2
PA5 (3)LC3
OU35
D) Sustaining Animal
PMB2 (serpent)
CA2 (serpent)
PMB3 (fish)
AI19 (two fish)
AI12 (mammal)
E) Sustaining Skull, Head, etc.
PMB1 AP12
PMB8 LB1
PMB11 LM3
PMB18 OU90

PMB26 (1)HM2
PMC3 (1)HM3
PMC7 (1)HM10
PMC8 (1)ED1
PMC10 (2)L2
U2 (2)B2
U4 (2)LG3
PA2 (3)LC2
PA6 (3)Y3
CH3 (5)S2 (between legs)
QC4
F) Skull Figure
PMB7 (1)HM1
Q4 (1)SA5
EQ2 (2)B3
LE3
G) Row of Heads or Faces
PMB(G)16 (1)SA2
AI9 (1)P1
LF1 (2)PV1
OU83 ES2
H) Feline Over Smaller Figure
U4 PA6
M2 OU90
I) Sustaining `Tumi' Sacrifice Knife
PMA3 (1)HM7
PMB(G)15 (not sustained)
Q2 (1)TI10
OU53 (3)LC2
AP4 (3)LC4
J) Small Figure on Back
(1)TI9 OU4
(1)TI20 (just arms)
(1)TI26 (6)SF1
(7)I2 (7)B2
K) Sustaining Cup
AI1
AP11

`COQUEROS':
A) `Palo'
PMA9 AI4
PMAL7 AI17 (left–handed)
*U7 AI22
PE9 OU39
*QC5 (1)VP1
ES1 (4)A3
B) `Poporo'
PMA9 AI4
PMB29 AI22
PMB33 PA8
PMAL7 (1)T10
*U7 (1)VP1
*QC5 (5)M1
C) `Bolsa'
PMC6 OU3
*U7 OU4
*QC5 OU81
T7 (1)T10
LE4 (3)Y3
OTHER IMPLEMENTS IN HANDS:
A) War Apparatus
PMA1 AP5
PMA2 (2)LG1
PMA7 (3)Y1
PMA8 (3)SJ3
PMB9 (3)SJ7
PMB10 (4)A2
PMAL3 PMAL5
OU2
B) `Vara' or Staff
PMA3 OU39
PMC2 (2)LG1
PMAL3 (3)Y1
PA5 (3)SJ3
PE9 (3)SJ7
OB1 (4)A2
AP4 (4)A3
AP5 OU2

C) Skull or Head
PMB1 PA2
PMB8 QC4
PMB11 (1)ED1
PMB26 (2)L2
U2 (3)LC2
D) Other Object
PMAL9 ES1
PMC1 LM4
PMC14 LT1
PMD1 OU35
AI10 OU88
AI13 (1)TI20
PA5 (2)PV3
CH7 (2)LG3
Q2 (3)LC2
QC1 (3)LC3
C1 (4)A3
OB3
E) Arms Upraised Towards Shoulders
CH1 PMB13 (secondary figure)
CH2 PMB(G)13
CH4 PML2
CH5 AS1
T2 AS2
T4 (1)TI4
R1 (5)M2
F) Arms Down at Sides
PMB25
C3
(2)B1
G) Staff Held Diagonally
AP5 (3)Y1
(2)LG1 (3)SJ3
(4)A2 (3)SJ7
H) Just Hands
VE1
OU63
(1)TI20 (on back)

I) Arms in Eccentric Pose
`DOBLE YO':
LA1 (1)TI14
OU9 (1)TI20
PMA4 (1)SI5
PMC1 (1)LC1
PMB12 (3)Y3
S3 OB5
A) Definite `Doble'
PMA1 AP1
PMA2 AP5
PMA7 LB1
PMA8 LB2
PMB9 LB3
PMB10 LM3
PMB13 G3
PMB14 R3
PMB20 AS1
PMB22 OU4
PMB(G)3 OU90
PMC3 (1)P1
PMC8 (1)HM3
PMC9 (1)TI9
PMC14 (1)TI26
PML1 (2)L2
PMAL2 (2)L6
PMAL3 (2)LG3
PMAL9 (2)PV1
U4 (4)A4
M2 (6)I2
PA6 (6)P1
CH3 OU9
B) Possible `Doble'
C) Triple
PMB18 AI5
PMB25 LE5
PMB27 LF1
PMC7 OU28
PMC12 (1)TI20
PMC14
PMB(G)6
PMB(G)16
AI26 (1)HM2

PA6 (1)HM10
CH1/CH2/CH4
D) Bird–Serpent
PMB6
PE1
E) `Doble'–Implying Shape
BIRD FIGURES:
AI25 OU14
LA1 OU53
G1 (1)A1
G2 (1)HM4
CH6 (1)HM5
LT4 (1)HM6
QC3 (1)HM9
LE1 PE7
A) `Natural' Bird
AI14 (2)L4
AI20 (3)LC2 (secondary figure)
R4 (3)LC8
BA1 LE1
B) Bird–Serpent
PMB6
PE1
C) `Bird' Emblem
PMB10 (five)
PMB22 (five)
PMB26 (three)
T8 (five)
Q2 (five)
J3 (five)
PE10 (nine)
PE11 (one)
AP4 (ten)
D) `Feathers'
PMA9 CH2
PMB29 CH5
PMC1 (1)HM7
PMD2 (1)SI5

FELINE FIGURES:
PML2 (1)P1
AI12 (1)B4
PE11 (1)TI19
Q2 (3)M1
AP3
A) Feline Procreator
PMB22 AP1
PMAL2 G1
M1 OU14
M2 OU90
U4 (1)HM4
PA6 (1)HM5
CH6 (1)HM9
R3 (6)I2
B) Feline–Serpent
PMA1 PMB9
PMA2 PMB10
PMAL2 PMB14
AP1 PMB20
AP5
C) `Natural' Feline
PMAL4 (1)HM6
R1 (1)HM8
T2 (2)LG2
PA7 (4)A1
CA2
LB2
LE5
`CAYMAN/RANA/LAGARTO':
A) `Cayman' or `Rana'
PMA13 (1)SA6
PML1 (1)HM4
PML2 (1)HM5
PMAL1 (1)HM6
PMAL4 (1)HM8
AI8 (1)HM9
AI21 (3)LC7
M1 (4)A1
J8 (5)M2

B) Relief `Lagarto'
PMB18 PML2
PMB19 (3)LC5
C) Petroglyph `Lagarto'
(5)CO1
(5)CO2
(1)AS1
(2)VC4
OTHER ANIMALS:
A) Monkey
B) Rodent
PMC9 CH7
PMAL4 EQ3
PMAL7
AI2
C) Various Animals
D) Fish
PML2
PMB18
PMB3
AI19
`LENGUA/CINTA/CABEZA':
MASKED FIGURES:
PMB1 J4
PMC7 OB3
U2 LM3
C1 OU4
PMC2 Q1
PMC4 Q4
PMB(G)17 (1)SI3
U1 (2)LG3
LM1 (4)A1

PE12
DEATH POSTURE:
A) Death Posture
PMA14 OU7
PMB4 OU8
PMB12 OU16
PMB16 OU19
PMB28 OU21
PMB31 OU37
PMB32 OU43
PMB33 OU62
PMB(G)13 OU85
PMB(G)17 OU89
PMC13 (1)T6
U3 (1)T12
U8 (1)T14
AI7 (1)B3
PE5 (1)B5
PA9 (1)B7
OB2 (1)LC1
OB4 (1)SI5
S4 (1)TI1
G3 (1)TI3
AG3 (1)TI13
CA1 (3)M2
LT2 (3)Y6
LT5 (3)LC1
LF2 (3)SJ4
LM7 (6)SF1
E2 (6)CO1
OU4 (on back) E3
B) Holding Knees
C) Ribs
PMC6 AI13
S2 LT3
R2 OU32
N3 (2)LG2
QC1 (5)S2
AI24
T–SHAPED PECTORALS:
(1)T3 (1)TI10 (tumi)

`WINGED' FIGURES:
`FURNITURE' STONES:
(1)T5 (1)TI11
(1)HM7 (tumi) (1)TI25
(1)B4 (1)TI27
(1)SI4 (tumi)
PMC2 (1)VP1
AI12 (1)TI4
J7 (6)CO1
OU27 (7)B3
PMB19 (1)HM4
AI9 (1)HM6
AG2 (1)SA2
LB(G)1 (3)LC9
(5)M3
DECORATED SARCOPHAGI:
`LODGES':
B1
R4
LF1
(1)SA3
(2)PV1
*******************************************************
****************
*****

the creation of this catalogue
When I first came upon San Agustín in the early 1970’s, I
knew very little about precolumbian history or ancient history
of any kind. I knew even less about drawing. I had seen enough
during my travels in southern Mexico and Guatemala to realize
that I wanted to come to know more such ruins sites, and I had
heard, on the road, about San Agustín, enough to get me there.
My first glimpse was a very powerful experience, in some ways
determinative. A year or so later, when I was able to find my
way back to the valley of the statues, and to begin to put down
my roots, my interest in the archaeology of the zone and the
statues was only one of a set of reasons and factors for

settling there. Over the course of the next several years this
interest and feeling of connection deepened greatly, and by 1977
I was attempting to systematically continue the notes I was by
then taking, site by site and statue by statue, and to get them
to evolve into something more comprehensive.
By this time, too, I had been able to do some reading on
subjects that would underlie and help me to gain an
understanding of the archaeology of San Agustín and its region:
of what I would eventually come to comprehend to be the vestiges
of the Pueblo Escultor. The reading was spontaneous and never
very formally directed, and waylaid with disturbing gaps. I
rarely lacked for fuel, however, and was always appreciative of
whatever chance might bring into my path; time invested in the
district of book kiosks along ‘la 19’ in Bogotá, for instance,
or among the vast warrens of booksellers surrounding Lima’s
Plaza Grau, or browsing through the kiosks sprawled along
Quito’s ‘24 de Mayo’ or the Avenida Montes in La Paz, could
unveil rich and unexpected veins indeed.
By the late 1970’s I had also been able to take the
opportunity to travel extensively in the Andes and had visited a
great number of archaeological sites in Ecuador, Perú and
Bolivia, as well as many museums housing precolumbian
collections. My eye was always open and searching for whatever
might help me to illuminate the archaeology and statuary of San
Agustín and the Macizo Colombiano.
In about 1978 I began anew with my notes on the statues in
the valley of San Agustín. Taking into account whatever I had
been able to read about the Pueblo Escultor and about
precolumbian history and statuary in general, and perhaps even
more importantly, reordering and collating in my mind all that I

had been able to learn by my growing familiarity with most of
the sites in the valley of San Agustín, and with hundreds of
statues, I began another, more focused, statue-by-statue
description. This draft was carried far enough for it to become
a valuable tool, but was ultimately frustrated by something that
would herald a change in my method of attempting to come to
grips with my own, personal interpretation of these statues. As
I wrote, in words, my description of any given piece (in order
then to be able to discuss it), small drawings began to creep
onto the page, into my flow. Description in mere words seemed
inadequate: here an eye would appear, there a headpiece
ornament, soon after a loincloth or a bracelet, all easier to
attempt to draw than endlessly and fruitlessly describe. By the
end of that stage of the project, I had many pages of text
interrupted by many more detail-drawings, and a dawning idea
that I would have to start again and draw the statues one by
one. I didn’t much like the idea because I had never really
drawn much of anything.
Early on, I had recognized and felt the lack of a
comprehensive catalogue of the statues I was attempting to
study. Had one been available, I would have been glad to buy it
and to be able to get on with what I aimed at: study, analysis
and conclusions leading, hopefully, to some form of
understanding. I had little desire to put myself to the trouble
of drawing them all; it was more than enough work to visit and
observe them all. But the reality was that, even taking notes,
I couldn’t possibly retain enough content and detail to be able
to then sit in my house with memory and notes and other texts
and fruitfully analyze what I had seen hours or days previously.
A catalogue for sale, hopefully with drawings by someone more

talented and experienced than myself, was not available.
Preuss’ seminal (and difficult to obtain) volume, the result of
his 1913-1914 visit to the area, was badly out of date; I had by
now seen great numbers of statues beyond the 110 or so that he
saw and attempted to explain. I reluctantly felt that, if I
wanted to continue this work, I was going to have to take the
next step, and draw the statues myself.
And so I started again, and made drawings of all the
statues that I could find in the valley of San Agustín, where I
lived. I gave little thought to the material I used, acid-free
paper and so on; I simply bought whatever notebooks were
available in the stores in town, measured the statues with my
eyeball, and went at it. By the time I had finished this round
of drawings, in 1980 or soon thereafter, various factors already
made them obsolete, chief among them the need to make better
drawings.
For the next, and final, stage of this project, I now had
the proper materials, as well as some experience in carrying out
my aims. For the most part I worked steadily at this project
through the following years and by decade’s end had basically
finished it to my satisfaction. But several new factors which
entered into play in the 1980’s were essential in shaping the
project, and even moreso my grasp of the context and meaning
behind the statuary.
First, during this decade I became more fully aware of the
literature that existed, the studies of the Pueblo Escultor, and
slowly I was able to ferret out and beg, borrow or buy most of
what had been published, including (although not restricted to)
the important studies carried out by Codazzi, Cuervo Márquez,
Preuss, Hernández de Alba, Pérez de Barradas, Duque Gómez, and

Reichel-Dolmatoff. These volumes would orient both my search,
piece by piece, for the statues themselves, and my path to a
worthwhile analysis of what I was seeing. With these studies in
mind, the concept of a ‘catalogue-plus-key-data’ took on ever
greater and clearer form in my mind.
Second, in the years of this decade I was fortunate enough
to be able to travel much more extensively throughout South
America, and to observe a great number of archaeological sites
and elements in almost all the countries of the continent.
Together, these studies and journeys made possible at least an
attempt at a vision of the overall tableaux of stone sculpture
in precolumbian America, and it is with this essential vision as
a backdrop that I have been able to progress in the study whose
axis is this series of drawings.
A third new factor has had a much more immediate effect in
influencing, and in fact altering in a most basic way, this
catalogue of images. During the previous phases, I was still
drawing what I thought of as the statues of San Agustín. Only
slowly did I come to understand that the statues in the valley
of San Agustín constitute only one---albeit the principal---of a
series of similar nuclei scattered among the mountain-folds
surrounding the Macizo Colombiano in the south of Colombia.
Inevitably the realization came that the monuments in the sites
of these other statue-areas formed part of the same study upon
which I was engaged: I would eventually see that they were all
products of the Pueblo Escultor, living in a series of different
settlements in the Macizo. This being the case, I had no choice
but to begin to draw them all.
In fact, I had been to Tierradentro in the Páez lands years
before, in the mid-1970’s, but at that time I didn’t have the

focus to appreciate the significance of the statues there.
Eventually I would draw more than 65 Tierradentro statues.
Before I had begun to do so, however, in 1980 or soon
thereafter, I had a chance encounter in San Agustín with a
friend from the pueblo (7 hours away by motor vehicle) of La
Argentina, Huila. This led to a visit to that pueblo, my
subsequent awareness of the existence of the Platavieja group of
statues in the area, the first attempts at of drawing those
statues, and finally, the growing understanding that there were
a series of Pueblo Escultor nuclei in these southern colombian
mountains: San Agustín, Tierradentro and now Platavieja were
three such, and they would all have to be reflected in the
catalogue I envisioned.
Thus it was that in the ensuing years I tracked down
subjects for my portraits in the different Moscopán sites as
well as Aguabonita in the La Plata valley, and in Saladoblanco
not far northeast of San Agustín, in addition to the areas
mentioned above. I have also sought out and drawn as many as I
have been able, a sampling in any case, of the statues from the
Popayán area to the west of the Macizo, and from the Nariño area
to the south of the massif. The statues from these last two
areas are substantially different, but in the purview of the
present study, all these separate areas qualify as centers of
statuary of the Pueblo Escultor.
By decade’s end I had done what I could with the drawings
of the statues, both in the valley of San Agustín and in the
other statue areas. No survey like this can ever be complete,
because too much has been lost along the way or is yet to be
uncovered; but this effort, certainly, is substantial, and goes
a long way toward presenting a large body of most important

images. In any case, I had what I needed: with the drawings as
a base, I was able to arrange categories and cross-references,
and to delve into what I felt were the meanings behind them. A
considerable bibliography also came together as a kind of
framework around the study.
By 1990, then, I felt that the work was fairly well
concluded, although one major task still remained; finally, when
I took it seriously enough, I realized that I really couldn’t
avoid it. Preuss, during his WWI-era visit to San Agustín,
carried away a major stash of statues—more than 30—from the
valley, and eventually brought them back to Germany with him.
In addition, a previous British Museum expedition had at the
turn of the century taken a single statue back to London.
Certainly many more statues have over the years been spirited
off to collections in Europe and elsewhere, but these two
removals, at least, had been published and thus were traceable.
My final stone, still-unturned at this point, was to travel to
Europe—my first such trip—and search out these statues,
unmentioned now for decades. I was able to do so in 1992, and
to draw them, thereby essentially completing my version of this
catalogue.
I need to emphasize that from the start I envisioned the
catalogue of Pueblo Escultor images as something that would come
with few strings attached; in other words, my point is not that
I will explain these symbols and images, and that my version is
the one true guide to their understanding. Rather, I wanted to
present them, and to make them as intelligible as possible, so
that each student, bringing whatever he/she may bring to the
table, may understand them in his/her own way, and use this
knowledge accordingly.

I struggle with my own understanding of what lies behind
these statues, and of who the Pueblo Escultor were, and of how
they lived their lives. Hopefully, others will continue to
further enlighten me. I have collected some valuable
information relating to observing and interpreting and cross-
referencing these images, though, and want here to present my
version of this basic data. As far as the accompanying text
goes, I hope that any interested student would take it with as
many grains of salt as necessary: take it, that is, as my best
attempt, with whatever knowledge I’ve been able to marshal, to
illuminate the background and meaning of these astounding
statues. If the reader is knowledgeable to the point where my
discourse seems limited, or erroneous, lay it aside; I would
hope that the real value lies in the images.
It is disappointing to recall the apathy with which the
colombian archaeological authorities responded to my project
over the course of many years—certainly not due to any lack of
knowledge of my efforts, for I tried without success for decades
to penetrate the lassitude and obfuscation that seemed to
dominate the terrain.
But the bureaucratic offices of Bogotá are a world away
from the valley of San Agustín and its inhabitants, and I am
happy to say that the workers and guards in the Parque
Arqueológico never ceased to be of great assistance to me; they
are also my friends and neighbors, and I thank them for that.
The people of San Agustín are remarkable repositories of the
knowledge and history of their valley and its archaeological
treasures. The value of the aid and information and
understanding shared with me by people for whom the valley is

home, as opposed to the sum total of help proffered by the jefes
and doctores in Bogotá, were at opposite extremes of the scale.
The only previous attempt (post-Preuss) to publish a
catalogue of the statuary of the Macizo Colombiano was an effort
published under the auspices of the Instituto de Antropología in
1987 54 , and subsequently savagely criticized in a review 55
representing the views of the same archaeological establishment
which had nurtured the effort in the first place. The
criticisms therein run broad and deep, but I would like to focus
here on one essential element: the authors sketched many of
their outlines not from an actual acquaintance with the statues
themselves, but from previously published photographs and
drawings, which, as method, simply isn’t adequate. The effort
was rushed, and its creators didn’t take the time to master and
become truly enthused by their subject matter.
The present catalogue took so long to complete precisely
because I have seen, analyzed and personally drawn while
studying it, each statue. The material was gathered together
slowly and painstakingly over the course of many years.
Responsibility for these images, for their veracity and for
their defects, is of course mine alone.
A dozen years before the 2004 re-disinterring of this
project, the director of the Museum für Volkerkunde in Berlin,
Manuela Fischer, and her assistant María Gaida, were of great
assistance as I researched the statues taken there by Preuss; my
thanks to them for that and for their friendship as well. In
the cited year I decided on a whim to get in touch with
Dumbarton Oaks in Washington D.C.—faminliar to me since my
visits there in the 1960’s—and was rewarded with the opportunity
to saborear the impressive library of that institution; director

Jeffrey Quilter interested himself in my project and shared
valuable suggestions with me, which I appreciate, as I do the
help given me there by his assistant Juan Antonio Murro and by
librarian Bridget Gazzo. Even moreso do I appreciate the fact
that I was able to store my drawings there, in the type of
facility I had always hoped would house them; perhaps they will
be discovered and utilized by future researchers.
Many friends, far too numerous to mention comprehensively,
helped me along the path of understanding that led to the
completion of this catalogue, and I would be honored to formally
give them my heartfelt thanks. My mother and father, Mary Jane
and John Dellenback, gave me support which no amount of words
could indicate, starting with limitless quantities of love and
affirmation. My brother Richard Dellenback was from the start
my beloved traveling companion, and always had my back; my
sister Barbara Dellenback accompanied me on my journey and was
my never-failing lifeline home, and never let me forget the
things that most matter.
Randy (René) Scott helped me find the way to the road in
the first place, and has been there anew at many turns in the
path. My brother (in-law) Dave Ouellette and his steady hand
and smile have always provided inspiration, and if this project
were handed on to anyone, it would be to my nephews Cy and Van
Dellenback-Ouellette and Jess Martinetti. It was not always
easy going on (and off) the roads and caminos in the mountains
and valleys of the Macizo Colombiano, and the hardships and
frustrations were many; the company of friends such as Christian
Schmalbach, Eleazar Morad, Francisco Maffei, Matu Neira and
Germán Galeano on those caminos made them even at worst a
pleasure and a privilege, and my memories treasures. And

there’s no overstating my debt to my fabled horse, El Viejo, who
accompanied me on all my adventures: bloodline of champions,
legendary in San Agustín, never a misstep. My casa in San
Agustín was home to Ignacio (Nacho) Brahim and his visits were
greatly anticipated, and I was thankful and honored that he made
his (and his brothers’) home in Bogotá mine, as have Matu
(abovementioned) and Luis Enrique (Chacho) Martínez with their
home in Sopó, Cundinamarca.
To many more brothers and sisters, as well, I offer my
greatest most abundant thanks, beyond what I could adequately
express, for the aid and support, for the shared days and years
and intense moments and times, for the ever-open door and the
ever-helping hand, for the mágia of la familia agustiniana:
Carlos (Compadre) Valero, Arturo Mosquera and Helena Fernández
(who shared their house with me and never allowed me to go to
bed hungry), Jano Pinillos, Julio Vargas, Tulio Salcedo, Andrés
Enciso, Gildardo Arboleda, Bolívar and Mayer Ledesma, Luis
(Lucho) and Alex Brahim, Eliecer Ordóñez (the man and the
legend), Carolina Peña, Germán Zuluaga, Bertha Molina, Germán
Vargas, Pedro Martínez, José María Mosquera, Jaime Forero,
Roberto Freeman, Roland Siverson, Blanca Bustos, Elsy Sabogal,
María Teresa Carrasquilla, Lulú Ayda Roberts, Liliana Zapata,
Nelly Schmalbach, Joaquín García, James López, Milena Calderón,
Milciades Martínez, Sidartha and Arturo Andrés and Belisa
Mosquera, and three friends from Platavieja, José Castillo,
Carlos Hernández and Jairo William Gutiérrez. I would also like
to thank Susie Dexter, whose aid and support were beyond the
call; Luz Omayra González, who provided beyond-unusual
connections to other worlds; Mery Wiede, whose care and
comprehension of the aims and purpose, and whose magnificent

archaeological collection, were essential; Conchita Muñoz for
the sharpest intellect and clearest understanding, and for
showing me how (and why) to live in the campo of San Agustín;
Kwaah Lirios for the heart’s inspiration without this catalogue
never would have come to exist; and most importantly to Martha
Gil, who frankly did most of the heavy lifting when this present
computerized version became possible, and for sharing my love
and my life and helping me to make this project live again.

footnotes to text
1. Reichel-Dolmatoff, San Agustín: A Culture of Colombia, p 9.
2. T. López, Compilación de Apuntes, pp. 208-9.
3. Reichel-Dolmatoff, San Agustín: A Culture of Colombia, p 13.
4. see Friede, Los Andakí, pp 35-38, 50-51, 54-56, 66-67 and
map 2.
5. Friede, Los Andakí, p 80.
6. Friede, Los Andakí, pp 56-57, 39-43 and map 2.
7. Friede, Los Andakí, p 50.
8. see Friede, Los Andakí, pp 67-8.
Friede’s sources’ estimates (of number of “indios hombres adultos” or
“male adult indians”) for the San Agustín area are:
conquest (1538) 5 to 7 thousand
1574 3500 to 4500
1597 2000
1613 600
1628 430
1642 250
1669 60
9. see Duque, San Agustín: Reseña Arqueológica, pp 18-19 for
year 1756; Repizo Cabrera, Historia Sintetica del Pueblo de
San Agustín, p 10 for year 1757; and Reichel-Dolmatoff, San
Agustín: A Culture of Colombia, p 21 for year 1758.
10. Hernández de Alba, La Cultura Arqueológica de San Agustín, p
23.
11. Walde-Waldegg, Preliminary Report on the Expedition to San
Agustín (Colombia), p 37.

12. Duque, “Los Últimos Hallazgos Arqueológicos de San Agustín:
Quinchana,” pp 5-6.
13. Lunardi, El Macizo Colombiano en la Prehistoria de
Suramérica, p 5.
14. for references in this paragraph, see Preuss, Arte
Monumental Prehistórico, pp 33-34; and Duque, San Agustín:
Reseña Arqueológica, p 18.
15. Reclus, Nouvelle Géographie Universelle (1893) Vol. XVIII,
Plate XXIII by p 318.
16. Reichel-Dolmatoff, San Agustín: A Culture of Colombia, p
27.
17. Cuervo Márquez, Estudios Arqueológicos y Etnográficos, p 159.
18. Preuss, Arte Monumental Prehistórico, p 199.
19. Cuervo Márquez, Estudios Arqueológicos y Etnográficos, pp
180-183, for: Trujillo, Victor and Bernardo Montealegre,
“Valle de Moscopán—Ciudad Desconocida para los
Conquistadores.”
20. Pérez de Barradas, Arqueología Agustiniana, p 6.
21. Walde-Waldegg, “Stone Idols of the Andes Reveal a Vanished
People” in National Geographic, May 1940, pp 627-647.
22. Reichel-Dolmatoff, Estratigrafía Cerámica de San Agustín.
23. Cháves, Álvaro and Mauricio Puerta, Tierradentro, p 10.
24. Drennan, Robert, ed., Regional Archaeology in the Valle de
La Plata, Colombia.
25. Drennan, Robert, ed., Regional Archaeology in the Valle de
La Plata, p 1.
26. Grieder, The Art and Archaeology of Pashash, p 186.
27. Eliade, Patterns in Comparative Religion, p 232.
28. Grieder, Origins of Pre-Columbian Art, p 132.
29. Eliade, Patterns in Comparative Religion, pp 254-55.
30. Frazer, The Worship of Nature, p 189.
31. Westheim, The Art of Ancient México, p 4.

32. see Pérez de Barradas, Arqueología Agustiniana, pp 44-54.
33. Relación de las Fábulas y Ritos de los Incas by Cristóbal de
Molina, called “el cuzqueño” to distinguish him from
another Cristóbal de Molina known as “el almagrista” or “el
chileno”.
34. see, for example, Raúl Porras Berrenechea, Los Cronistas del
Perú (1528-1650).
35. Original reads:
“Dicen que antes que fuese Señor, yendo a visitar a su
padre Viracocha Inca que estaba en Sacsahuana, cinco leguas
de Cuzco, al tiempo que llegó a una fuente llamada
Susurpuquio, vió caer una tabla de cristal en la misma
fuente, dentro de la cual vió una figura de indio en la
forma siguiente: en la cabeza del colodrillo de ella, a lo
alto, le salían tres rayos muy resplandecientes, a manera
de rayos del Sol los unos y los otros; y en los encuentros
de brazos unas culebras enroscadas…Salíale la cabeza de un
león por entre las piernas, y en las espaldas otro león,
los brazos del cual parecían abrazar el un hombro y el
otro; y una manera de culebra que le tomaba de lo alto de
las espaldas a abajo. Y que así visto el dicho bulto y
figura, echó a huir Inca [Pachacuti], y el bulto de la
estatua le llamó por su nombre de dentro de la fuente,
diciéndole: ‘Venid acá, hijo mío, no tengáis temor, que yo
soy el Sol vuestro padre, y sé que habéis de sujetar muchas
naciones; tened muy gran cuenta conmigo de me reverenciar,
y acordaos en vuestros sacrificios de mí.’ Y así
desapareció el bulto, y quedó el espejo de cristal en la
fuente, y el Inca le tomó y guardó; en el cual, dicen,
después veía todas las cosas que quería. Y respecto de
esto mando hacer, en siendo Señor y teniendo possible, una
estatua figura del Sol, ni más ni menos de la que en el
espejo había visto…”
--[translation by author]
36. see for instance Eliade, Mircea: Patterns in
Comparative Religion, and Campbell, Joseph: Creative Mythology.
37. see Preuss, Arte Monumental Prehistórico, p 80, Plates 30#2
and 33#1; Lunardi, La Vida en las Tumbas, p 110; Pérez de
Barradas, Arqueología Agustiniana, p 68 and Lámina 87.
38. Preuss, Arte Monumental Prehistórico, p 93.
39. Preuss, Arte Monumental Prehistórico, p 118-119.
40. Preuss, Arte Monumental Prehistórico, p 164-166.

41. Preuss, Arte Monumental Prehistórico, p 57.
42. Stirling, Stone Monuments of the Río Chiquito, Veracruz,
México, p 8.
43. Stirling, Stone Monuments of the Río Chiquito, Veracruz,
México, p 19.
44. Grove, The Olmec Paintings of Oxtotitlan Cave, Guerrero,
Mexico, p 6.
45. Reichel-Dolmatoff, San Agustín: A Culture of Colombia, p 84.
46. see Grove, Chalcatzingo, p 113.
47. Roe, A Further Exploration of the Rowe Chavín Seriation, p
23.
48. see Reichel-Dolmatoff, San Agustín, p 111.
49. see note 31, p 136 of Preuss' Arte Monumental Prehistórico;
note is by E. Barney Cabrera who suggests a "stylized eagle,"
while co–editor P. Gamboa Hinestrosa argues for "eagle and
serpents".
50. The reader interested in the beneficent properties of the
coca leaf will find them extolled in the section of Mama Coca
(by Anthony Henman) entitled "the effects of coca chewing" on pp
128–141.
51. Kauffmann-Doig, Manual de Arqueología Peruana, p 418.
52. Sharp, Chacs and Chiefs, pp 5-6.
53. see Reichel–Dolmatoff, San Agustín, p 49.
54. Sotomayor, María Lucía and María Victoria Uribe, Estatuaría
del Macizo Colombiano, 1987.
55. review by Roberto Lleras Pérez in Revista Colombiana de
Antropología, Volume XXVI Years 1986-1988, pp 246-248.

ibliography
KEY BIBLIOGRAPHIC SOURCES
for the
PUEBLO ESCULTOR
1756 (First published in 1956)––Santa Gertrudis, Fray Juan de.
Maravillas de la Naturaleza.
1808 (Published in 1912 and 1942)––Caldas, Francisco José de.
"Estado de la Geografía del Virreinto de Santa Fé de Bogotá con
Relación a la Economía y el Comercio," in Semanario de la Nueva
Granada. (Based on visit in 1797)
1857 (Published in 1863)––Codazzi, Agustín. "Antiguedades
Indíjenas––Ruinas de San Agustín, Descritas i Explicadas por
Agustín Codazzi," in Jeografía Física y Política de los Estados
Unidos de Colombia (Volume II), by Dr. Felipe Pérez.
1892 (Published in 1983)––Cuervo Márquez, Carlos. Estudios
Arqueológicos y Etnográficos. (Based on Tierradentro visit in
1887 and San Agustín visit in 1892)
1929––Preuss, Konrad Theodore. Monumentale Vorgeschichtliche
Kunst; published in spanish in 1931 as Arte Monumental
Prehistórico. (Based on visit in 1913–14)
1940 (First published in 1978)––Hernández de Alba, Gregorio. La
Cultura Arqueológica de San Agustín. (Based on visit in 1936)
1943––Pérez de Barradas, José. Arqueología Agustiniana. (Based
on visit in 1936)
1964––Duque Gómez, Luis. Exploraciones Arqueológicas en San
Agustín. (Based on work in 1940's–50's–60's)
1972––Reichel–Dolmatoff, Gerardo. San Agustín: A Culture of
Colombia. (Based on work in 1966)

Prior to 1800
SELECTED PUEBLO ESCULTOR BIBLIOGRAPHY
1756 (First published in 1956)––Santa Gertrudis, Fray Juan de.
Maravillas de la Naturaleza; Bogotá.
1771 (First published in 1953)––Rodriguez, Francisco. Cited in
Juan Friede, 1953, p 117: based on a document in the National
Historical Archives, Bogotá (Sección Poblaciones, V, 837).
1800 to 1900
1808––Caldas, Francisco José de. "Estado de la Geografía del
Virreinato de Santa Fé de Bogotá con Relación a la Economía y el
Comercio," in Semanario de la Nueva Granada; Bogotá.
1863––Codazzi, Agustín. "Antiguedades Indíjenas––Ruinas de San
Agustín, Descritas i Explicadas por Agustín Codazzi," in
Jeografía Física y Política de los Estados Unidos de Colombia
(Volume II), by Dr. Felipe Pérez, pp 76–106; Bogotá.
1879––Gutierrez de Alba, José María. "Impresiones de Viaje en
Colombia: Les Antiquites de la Valee de San Agustín," in Actas
del III Congreso Internacional de Americanistas, Sesion 3, II, p
143; Brussels, Belgium.
1889––Gutierrez de Alba, José María. "Noticia de un Monumento
Prehistórico: Las Estatuas del Valle de San Agustín," in
Boletín de la Sociedad Geográfica, 27, pp 363–83; Madrid, Spain.
1893––Cuervo Márquez, Carlos. Estudios Arqueológicos y
Etnográficos; Bogotá.
1900 to 1919
1900––Hamy, E. "Une Figurille in Pierre de San Agustín dans le
British Museum," in Journal del Societe des Americanistes,
Volume III, p 207; Paris, France.
1901––Dalton, O. M. "Note on a Stone Figure from Colombia," in
Journal of the Anthropological Institute, XXX, p 64, plates I–J;
London, England.
1912––Posada, Eduardo. "Nombre Primitivo del Magdalena," in
Apostillas, Volume XV, p 189; Bogotá.

1912––Stöpel, Karl Theodore. "Archaeological Discoveries in
Ecuador and Southern Colombia During 1911; And the Ancient Stone
Monuments of San Agustín," in International Congress of
Americanists, Proceedings of the XVIII Session, Part II, pp 251–
258; London, England.
1912––Stöpel, Karl Theodore. Sudamericanische Prahistorische
Tempel und Gottheiten; Frankfurt, Germany.
1914––Rivet, Paul. "Decouvertes du prof. K. Th. Preuss en
Colombie: Statues Monolithiques," in Journal de la Societe des
Americanistes, Volume II, pp 379–380; Paris, France.
1914––Stöpel, Karl Theodore. "Decouvertes Archeologiques en
1911: Monuments en Pierre de San Agustín," in Journal des
Americanistes, Volume XI, p 285; Paris, France.
1916––Posada, Eduardo. "Estatuas de San Agustín," in Boletín de
Historia y Antiguedades, Volume X, p 623; Bogotá.
1918––Trujillo, Victor and Bernardo Montealegre. "Valle de
Moscopán––Ciudad Desconocida para los Conquistadores," in
Boletín de Historia y Antiguedades, Informe Volume XII, pp 251–
254; Bogotá.
1919––Haskpiel, Phifo. "Las Estatuas de Piedra de San Agustín,"
in Boletín de Historia y Antiguedades, Volume XII, pp 275–279;
Bogotá.
1920 to 1929
1920––Preuss, Konrad Theodore. "Bericht über meine
Archäologischen und Ethnologischen Forschungs-Reisen in
Kolumbien," in Zeitschrift für Ethnologie, Volumes 52–53, pp 89–
103; Berlin, Germany.
1922––Posada, Eduardo. "Arqueología Colombiana," in Boletín de
Historia y Antiguedades, Volume XIV, p 365; Bogotá.
1923––Preuss, Konrad Theodore. "Stücke einer Ethnographischen
Sammlung," in Zeitschrift für Ethnologie, Volume 55, pp 91-93;
Berlin, Germany.
1926––Arrubla, Gerardo. "En el Huila Existió un Misterioso
Pueblo Escultor," in Nuevo Tiempo, September 15; Bogotá.
1927—Preuss, Konrad Theodore. “Die Ausstrahlungen der San
Agustín-Kultur in Amerika,” in Zeitschrift für Ethnologie,
Volume 59, pp 111-12; Berlin, Germany.

1928––Arrubla, Gerardo. "La Escultura Prehistórica," in Boletín
de Historia y Antiguedades, Volume XVII; Bogotá.
1928––Preuss, Konrad Theodore. "Die Ausstrahlung der San
Agustín-Kultur (Kolumbien) in Amerika," in International
Congress of Americanists, Proceedings of the 23 rd Session, pp
233-234; New York City, USA.
1929––Arrubla, Gerardo. "Las Ruinas Prehistóricas de San
Agustín y sus Rutas Migratorias," in Boletín de Historia y
Antiguedades, Volume XVII, pp 473–478; Bogotá.
1929––Preuss, Konrad Theodore. Monumentale Vorgeschichtliche
Kunst; Gottingen, Germany.
1930 to 1939
1931––Preuss, Konrad Theodore. Arte Monumental Prehistórico
(Translation of Monumentale Vorgeschichtliche Kunst into
Spanish); Bogotá.
1933––Arrubla, Gerardo, E. Otero D'Costa, and D. Samper Ortega.
"Misión Arqueológica de San Agustín," in Boletín de Historia y
Antiguedades, Volume XX, p 59; Bogotá.
1934––Arrubla, Gerardo. "San Agustín," in Boletín de Historia y
Antiguedades, Volume XXI, p 69; Bogotá.
1934––Hernández R., Octavio. "Riqueza Arqueológica del Huila,"
in Huila Histórico, Volume II, pp 321–337; Neiva, Colombia.
1934––Lunardi, Mons. Federico. El Macizo Colombiano en la
Prehistoria de Suramérica; Río de Janeiro, Brazil.
1934––Lunardi, Mons. Federico. "Estatuas Prehistóricas
Pintadas," in Revista Universitaria, Volume XIX, Numbers 8–9;
Santiago de Chile.
1934––Lunardi, Mons. Federico. "La Arqueología Colombiana de
San Agustín," in Boletín de Estudios Históricos, Volume VI,
Numbers 61–62; Pasto, Colombia.
1935––Acuña, Luis Alberto. "Escultura y Orfebrería de los
Indios Colombianos," in Senderos, Volume IV, p 16; Bogotá.
1935––Anonymous. "Los Monumentos de la Región de San Agustín,"
in Boletín de la Sociedad Geográfica de Colombia, Volume II,
Number 2, pp 129–144; Bogotá.
1935––Lunardi, Mons. Federico. La Vida en las Tumbas; Río de

Janeiro, Brazil.
1936––Lunardi, Mons. Federico. "Costumbres Mortuorios del
Macizo Colombiano," in Revista del Museo Nacional, Volume V, p
52–64; Lima, Perú.
1936––Lunardi, Mons. Federico. "Fauna Monumental Prehistórica
del Macizo Colombiano," in Revista del Museo Nacional, Volume V;
Lima, Perú.
1936––Wavrin Villers au Tertre, Marquis de. "Apport aux
connaissances de la civilisation dite ‘de San Agustín’ et a
l'archeologie du sud de la Colombie," in Bulletin de la Societe
des Americanistes de Belgique, Number 21; Brussels, Belgium.
1937––Hernández de Alba, Gregorio. "La Piedra Tallada en San
Agustín," in Boletín de Historia y Antiguedades, Volume 24, pp
690–695; Bogotá.
1937––Pérez de Barradas, José. "Arqueología de San Agustín," in
Revista de las Indias, Volume II, Number 8, pp 35–50; Bogotá.
1937––Walde–Waldegg, Hermann von. "Preliminary Report on the
Expedition to San Agustín (Colombia)," in Archaeological Series
of Boston College, Volume II, Number 1; Boston, Massachusetts,
USA.
1937––Wavrin Villers au Tertre, Marquis de. "Decouvertes sur la
Civilisation Anteprecolombienne Dite de San Agustín," in
L'Illustration, October 23, pp 237–238; Paris, France.
1938––Guerra, L. Alejandro. "De Arqueología de San Agustín," in
Idearium, Number 10, p 445; Pasto, Colombia.
1938––Hernández de Alba, Gregorio. "De la Música Indígena en
Colombia: La Música en las Esculturas Prehistóricas de San
Agustín," in Boletín Latino Americano de Música, Volume IV, pp
733–737; Bogotá.
1938––Pérez de Barradas, José. "Estudio Antropológico de los
Primeros Dos Craneos Humanos de la Cultura de San Agustín," in
Revista de la Academia Colombiana de Ciencias Exactas, Físicas y
Naturales, Volume II, Number 7, pp 371–376; Bogotá.
1938––Pérez de Barradas, José. "Trofeos de Cabezas en la
Cultura de San Agustín," in Idearium, Numbers 11–12, pp 523–537;
Pasto, Colombia.
1938––Uhle, Max. "Herkunst und Alter der Fruhgeschichtlicher
Denkmaler von San Agustín in Kolumbien," in Ibero–Amerikanisches
Archiv, II, pp 327–332; Berhu, Germany.

1939––Arciniegas, Germán. "San Agustín, Colombia––A New Key to
Prehistoric American Civilization," in Bulletin of the Pan
American Union, Volume 73, Number 8, pp 439–445; Washington,
D.C., USA.
1939––Karpf Muller, Gabriel. "La Cultura Agustiniana," in
Boletín Histórico del Valle, Numbers 57–60, pp 385–396; Cali,
Colombia.
1939––Schottelius, Justus Wolfram. "Bosquejo Comparativo entre
las Deidades Representadas por las Estatuas de San Agustín, las
de Méjico y las de los Chibchas," in Boletín de la Sociedad
Geográfica de Colombia, Volume VI, Numbers 2–3; Bogotá.
1940 to 1949
1940––Hernández de Alba, Gregorio. La Cultura Arqueológica de
San Agustín (First published in 1978); Bogotá.
1940 (Approximately)––Hernández de Alba, Gregorio. "Les
Investigations Archeologiques a San Agustín, Republique de
Colombie," in Internationales Kongress fur Archeologie, Volume
VI, pp 198–203; Berlin, Germany.
1940––Hernández de Alba, Gregorio. "Nouvelles Decouvertes
Arqueologiques a San Agustín et Tierradentro (Colombie)," in
Journal de la Societe des Americanistes, Volume XXXII, pp 57–67;
Paris, France.
1940––Schottelius, Justus Wolfram. "Analogías de las Ideas
Representadas en las Estatuas de San Agustín con las de Centro y
Suramérica," in Revista de las Indias, Volume III, pp 49–85;
Bogotá.
1940––Walde–Waldegg, Hermann von. "Stone Idols of the Andes
Reveal a Vanished People," in National Geographic, May 1940, pp
627–647; Washington, D.C., USA.
1941––Cuervo Márquez, Carlos. "Arqueología Agustiniana," in
Boletín de Historia y Antiguedades, Volume 29, p 750; Bogotá.
1941––Cuervo Márquez, Carlos. "Arqueología Agustiniana," in
Revista de la Academia Colombiana de Ciencias Exactas, Físicas,
y Naturales, Volume IV, Number 14, pp 170–174; Bogotá.
1941––Oppenheim, Victor. "Nueva Cultura Arqueológica en
Colombia," in Boletín de la Sociedad Geográfica de Colombia,
Volume XII, pp 89–95; Bogotá.
1942––Acuña, Luis Alberto. El Arte de Los Indios Colombianos;

Bogotá.
1942––Arroyave, Julio César. "La Gran Cultura Protohistórica
del Alto Magdalena," in Universidad de Antioquia, Numbers 53–54,
pp 69–85; Medellin, Colombia.
1942––Mejía Arango, Felix. "Notas sobre Manifestaciones
Artísticas de los Indígenas de Colombia," in Universidad de
Antioquia, Volume XIV, pp 55–62; Medellin, Colombia.
1942––Tovar Ariza, R. "Magdalena, su Nombre Antiguo," in
Boletín de Historia y Antiguedades, Volume XXIX, p 825; Bogotá.
1943––Arango, Luis. Recuerdos de la Guaquería en el Quindío;
Bogotá (1943 edition includes supplement with section on San
Agustín; original 1924 edition does not contain San Agustín
section).
1943––Friede, Juan. Los Indios del Alto Magdalena––Vida, Lucha,
y Exterminio, 1609–1931, Bogotá.
1943––Hernández de Alba, Gregorio. Guía Arqueológica de San
Agustín, o del Macizo Central de los Andes; Bogotá.
1943––Hernández de Alba, Gregorio. "La Interpretación de lo
Indigenista en el Siglo XX," in Revista de las Indias, Epoca 2a,
Number 50, pp 369–386; Bogotá.
1943––Pérez de Barradas, José. Arqueología Agustiniana; Bogotá.
1943––Reichel–Dolmatoff, Gerardo. "Las Urnas Funerarias en las
Cuencas del Río Magdalena," in Revista del Instituto Etnológico
Nacional, Volume I, Number 2, pp 209–281; Bogotá.
1944––Rivas P., José Ignacio. "Arqueología del Alto Magdalena,
Cumbre de la Civilización Precolombina," in Boletín de Historia
y Antiguedades, Volume XXI, p 675; Bogotá.
1944––Trimborn, Hermann. "Tres Estudios para la Etnografía y
Arqueología de Colombia," in Revista de Indias, Number 16, pp
199–226; Madrid, Spain.
1945––Friede, Juan. "La Toponimía del Alto Magdalena," in
Boletín de Arqueología, Volume I, Number 5, pp 431–433; Bogotá.
1945––Guhl, Ernesto. "El Macizo Colombiano: Zonas Regionales
con Carácter Geográfico Individual," in Boletín de Arqueología,
Volume I, Number 5, September–October, pp 435–443; Bogotá.
1945––Sánchez, Luis Alfonso. "Moldeado de Estatuas
Prehistóricas de Piedra," in Boletín de Arqueología, Volume I,
Number 1, February, pp 49–51; Bogotá.

1945––Anonymous. "Notas y Noticias," in Boletín de Arqueología,
Volume I, Number 5, September–October, pp 453–461; Bogotá.
1946––Bennett, Wendell. "San Agustín" and "Tierradentro," in
Handbook of South American Indians, Volume II, pp 848–850;
Washington, D.C., USA.
1946––Duque Gómez, Luis. "Los Últimos Hallazgos Arqueológicos
de San Agustín: Quinchana," in Revista del Instituto Etnológico
Nacional, Volume II, pp 5–42; Bogotá.
1946––Friede, Juan. "Migraciones Indígenas en el Valle del Alto
Magdalena," in Boletín de Historia y Antiguedades, Volume
XXXIII, pp 96–100; Bogotá.
1946––Hernández de Alba, Gregorio. "The Archaeology of San
Agustín and Tierradentro, Colombia," in Handbook of South
American Indians, Volume II, pp 851–859; Washington, D.C., USA.
1946––López, Tiberio. Compilación de Apuntes Arqueológicos,
Etnológicos, Geográficos, y Estadísticos del Municipio de San
Agustín; Bogotá.
1947––Friede, Juan. "Nuevos Documentos sobre la Fundación de la
Villa de Timaná y del Pueblo de San Agustín," in Boletín de
Historia y Antiguedades, Volume XXXIV, Numbers 387–389, pp 59–
65; Bogotá.
1948––Friede, Juan. "Los Indios Andaquí y el Folclór del Alto
Magdalena y Caquetá," in Revista de las Indias, Number 6, pp 43–
58; Bogotá.
1950 to 1959
1950––Bennett, Wendell C. “Review of Pérez de Barradas’
Arqueología Agustiniana,” in American Antiquity, Volume 15,
Number 4, Part 1, pp 352-354; Salt Lake City, Utah, USA.
1950––Friede, Juan. "Historia de los Indios Andakí del Valle de
Suaza," in Revista de la Universidad Nacional, Number 13;
Bogotá.
1950––Gómez Picón, Rafael. "San Agustín, Santuario de América,"
in Revista Americana, Volume XXI, Number 65, pp 179–183; Bogotá.
1952––Oteiza, Jorge. Interpretación Estética de la Estatuaría
Megalítica Americana; Madrid, Spain.
1953––Friede, Juan. Los Andaquí (1538–1947): Historia de la

Aculturación de una Tribu Selvática; Mexico City, Mexico.
1953––Nachtigall, Horst. Guía de la Arqueología Agustiniana;
Bogotá.
1953––Wavrin Villers au Tertre, Marquis de. Chez les Indiens de
Colombie; Paris, France.
1954––Friede, Juan. "El Arte Precolombino del Alto Magdalena,"
in Revista Bolívar, Number 32, August, pp 247–255; Bogotá.
1954––Gil Tovar, Francisco. "Para una Interpretación Estética
del Arte Agustiniano," in Revista Bolivar, Number 31, July, pp
162–165; Bogotá.
1954––González, José Ignacio. "San Agustín y la Crisis en la
Cultura Antigua," in Universidad de Antioquia, Volume XXX,
Number 119, November–December, pp 594–602; Medellin, Colombia.
1955––Burke, Malcolm K. "Parque de Monolitos," in Americas (de
la Unión Panamericana), Volume VII, Number 6, pp 20–23;
Washington, D.C., USA.
1955––Duque Gómez, Luis. Colombia: Monumentos Históricos y
Arqueológicos; Mexico City, Mexico.
1955––Gil Tovar, Francisco. Estatuas Agustinianas (Colección El
Arte en Colombia); Bogotá.
1956––First–ever publication of Maravillas de la Naturaleza,
written in 1756 by Fray Juan de Santa Gertrudis (contains first
known written mention of the ruins of San Agustín); Bogotá.
1957––Giraldo Jaramillo, Gabriél. "El Verdadero Descubridor de
la Cultura Agustiniana," in Boletín de la Sociedad Geográfica de
Colombia, Volume XV, Number 56, pp 159–168; Bogotá.
1958––Cabrera, Miguel. "Apuntes Monográficos de San Agustín,"
in Revista Huila, Volume II, Number 12; Neiva, Colombia.
1958––Nachtigall, Horst. Guía de la Arqueología Agustiniana;
Bogotá.
1958––Nachtigall, Horst. Die Amerikanischen Megalithkulturen:
Vorstudien zu einer Untersuchung; Berlin, Germany.
1958––Ortíz, Sergio Elías. "Agustín Codazzi y su Estudio sobre
las Ruinas de San Agustín," in Revista Colombiana de
Antropología, Volume VII, pp 289–293; Bogotá.
1958––Ramirez Sendoya, Pedro. "La Cultura Megalítica de San
Agustín," in Revista Huila, Volume II, Number 11, pp 11–20;

Neiva, Colombia.
1960 to 1969
1960––Gostautas, Estanislao. Arte Colombiano, Arte Aborigen;
Bogotá.
1961––Nachtigall, Horst. Alt–Kolumbien: Vorgeschichtliche
Indianer Kulturen; Berlin, Germany.
1961––Pérez, Guillermo. "San Agustín: Tesoro Prehistórico," in
Actualidad Turística, Volume II, Number 3, pp 21–27; Bogotá.
1962––Rengifo, Luis Angel. El Águila Monolítica Agustiniana;
Bogotá.
1962 and 1966––Ziegert, Helmut. "Zür Chronologie der
Tierradentro–und–San Agustín–Kultur (Kolumbien)," in Zeitschrift
für Ethnologie, Volume 87 (1962) and Volume 91 (1966);
Braunschweig, Germamy.
1963––Duque Gómez, Luis. San Agustín: Reseña Arqueológica;
Bogotá.
1964––Barney Cabrera, Eugenio. El Arte Agustiniano: Boceto
para una Interpretación Estética; Bogotá.
1964––Duque Gómez, Luis. Exploraciones Arqueológicas en San
Agustín; Bogotá.
1964––Nachtigall, Horst. "Zür Chronologie der Tierradentro–und–
San Agustín–Kultur," in Zeitschrift für Ethnologie, Volume 89,
Number 1, pp 78–81; Braunschweig, Germany.
1965—Silva Célis, Eliecer. “Movimiento de la Civilización
Agustiniana por el Alto Amazonas,” in Revista Colombiana de
Antropología, Volume XII, pp 389-400; Bogotá.
1965––Acuña, Luis Alberto. "La Escultura Agustiniana (en la
Escultura Colombiana)," in Historia Extensa de Colombia, Volume
XX, Number 4; Bogotá.
1965––Duque Gómez, Luis. "Ethnohistoria y Arqueología," in
Historia Extensa de Colombia, Volume I; Bogotá.
1965––Patterson, Thomas. "Ceramic Sequences at Tierradentro and
San Agustín, Colombia," in American Antiquity, Volume 31, Number
1, pp 66-73; Salt Lake City, Utah, USA.
1966––Reichel–Dolmatoff, Gerardo. "Jungle Gods of San Agustín,"

in Natural History, Volume LXXX, Number 10, p 42–49; New York
City, USA.
1966––Rengifo, Luis Angel. La Proporción Armónica en la
Estatuaría Agustiniana; Bogotá.
1967––Reichel–Dolmatoff, Gerardo. "Recientes Investigaciones
Arqueológicas en San Agustín," in Revista Razón y Fábula
(Univesidad de los Andes), Number 2, pp 35–38; Bogotá.
1968––Silva Célis, Eliecer. "Arqueología y Prehistoria de
Colombia," in Prensas de la Tecnológica y Pedagógica de
Colombia; Tunja, Colombia.
1970 to 1979
1970––Barney Cabrera, Eugenio. "Arte Lítico de San Agustín," in
Revista de Divulgación Cultural (Universidad Nacional), Number
6; Bogotá.
197?––Duque Gómez, Luis. San Agustín: Reseña Arqueológica;
Bogotá.
1971––Gamboa Hinestrosa, Pablo. "La Escultura Agustiniana," in
Revista de Divulgación Cultural (Universidad Nacional), Number
9; Bogotá.
1972––Gamboa Hinestrosa, Pablo. "El Trabajo Artístico en la
Sociedad Agustiniana," in Revista Aleph, Number 4, September;
Manizales, Colombia.
1974––Barney Cabrera, Eugenio and Pablo Gamboa Hinestrosa.
Introduction, editing and notes to new edition, first and only
re–issue, of 1931 Spanish translation of K. Th. Preuss' Arte
Monumental Prehistórico, with prologue by translator Hermann von
Walde–Waldegg; Bogotá.
1975––Gamboa Hinestrosa, Pablo. San Agustín (of the "Colombia:
Arte y Cultura" series); Bogotá.
1975––Reichel–Dolmatoff, Gerardo. Contribuciones al
Conocimiento de la Estratigrafía Cerámica de San Agustín,
Colombia; Bogotá.
1975––Reichel–Dolmatoff, Gerardo. The Shaman and the Jaguar;
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA (1978 Spanish translation, El
Chamán y el Jaguár; Mexico City, Mexico).
1976––Barney Cabrera, Eugenio. La Fauna Religiosa en el Alto
Magdalena: Reseña Estética y Significados Religiosos; Bogotá.

1977––Fajardo, Julio José. San Agustín: Una Cultura Alucinada;
Bogotá.
1978––Henman, Anthony (under pseudonym Antonil). Mama Coca;
London, England (1981 Spanish translation, same title; Bogotá).
1978––Gregorio Hernández de Alba. La Cultura Arqueológica de
San Agustín; Bogotá (first publication, 38 years after it was
written).
1978––Hernández T., Tito and Hernán Tello Cifuentes. "Estudio
Geológico de San Agustín," in Boletín del Museo del Oro, Año 1,
May–August, pp 50–55; Bogotá.
1979––Duque Gómez, Luis and Julio César Cubillos. Arqueología
de San Agustín: Alto de los Idolos, Montículos y Tumbas, Banco
de la República Series; Bogotá.
1980 to 1989
1980––Cubillos, Julio César. Arqueología de San Agustín: El
Estrecho, El Parador, y Mesita C, Banco de la República Series;
Bogotá.
1981––Duque Gómez, Luis and Julio César Cubillos. Arqueología
de San Agustín: La Estación, Banco de la República Series;
Bogotá.
1981––Gómez Picón, Rafael. Timaná de Belalcázar a La Gaitana;
Bogotá.
1982––von Daniken, Erich. The Gods and their Grand Design; New
York City, USA (1982 Spanish translation, La Estrategía de los
Dioses; Barcelona, Spain).
1982––Bruhns, Karen. "Dating the Sculpture of San Agustín: A
Correlation with Northern Perú," in Precolombian Art History;
Palo Alto, California, USA.
1982––Gamboa Hinestrosa, Pablo. La Escultura en la Sociedad
Agustiniana; Bogotá.
1983––Duque Gómez, Luis and Julio César Cubillos. Arqueología
de San Agustín: Exploraciones y Trabajos de Reconstrucción en
las Mesitas A y B, Banco de la República Series; Bogotá.
1983––Llanos Vargas, Hector and Anabella Durán de Gómez.
Arqueología de San Agustín: Asentamientos Prehispánicos en
Quinchana, Banco de la República Series; Bogotá.

1983––Plazas, Clemencia. "Gold Objects from Primavera, Links
between Calima, San Agustín and the Cauca Valley," in Procalima,
Number 3, pp 40–42; Basel, Switzerland.
1985––Drennan, Robert, editor. Regional Archaeology in the
Valle de la Plata, Colombia: A Preliminary Report on the 1984
season of the Proyecto Arqueológico Valle de la Plata; Ann
Arbor, Michigan, USA.
1985––Repizo Cabrera, Carlos Ramón. Historia Sintética del
Pueblo de San Agustín, Capital Arqueológico de Colombia; Bogotá.
1986––Cubillos, Julio César. Arqueología de San Agustín: Alto
de El Purutal, Banco de la República Series; Bogotá.
1987––Jaramillo, Luis Gonzalo. "Reconocimiento Regional
Sistemático en el Municipio de La Argentina, Huila," in Boletín
de Arqueología, Año 2, Number 2, May; Bogotá.
1987––Llanos Vargas, Hector. "Pautas de Asentamiento
Agustinianos en el Cañon del Río Granates––Saladoblanco," in
Boletín de Arqueología, Año 2, Number 2, May; Bogotá.
1987––Sotomayor, María Lucía and María Victoria Uribe.
Estatuaria del Macizo Colombiano; Bogotá.
1988––Llanos Vargas, Hector. Arqueología de San Agustín:
Pautas de Asentamiento en el Cañon del Río Granates––
Saladoblanco, Banco de la República Series; Bogotá.
TIERRADENTRO SOURCES
1893––Cuervo Márquez, Carlos. Estudios Arqueológicos y
Etnográficos; Bogotá (Reprinted 1956).
1936––Wavrin Villers au Tertre, Marquis de. "Apport aux
connaissances de la Civilization dite `de San Agustín' et a
l'archeologie du Sud de la Colombie," in Bulletin de la Societe
des Americanistes de Belgique, Number 21, pp 107–134; Brussels,
Belgium.
1936––Burg, Georg. "Descubrimientos Arqueológicos en Inzá," in
Revista de las Indias, Volume 1, Number 2, August, pp 40–49;
Bogotá.
1937––Wavrin Villers au Tertre, Marquis de. "Decouvertes sur la
Civilization Anteprecolombienne dite de San Agustín," in

L'Illustration, October 23, pp 237–38; Paris, France.
1937––Pérez de Barradas, José. Arqueología y Antropología
Precolombinas de Tierra Dentro; Bogotá.
1937––Pérez de Barradas, José. "La Máscara de Oro de Inzá," in
Revista de las Indias, Volume 1, Number 5, pp 3-7; Bogotá.
1938––Hernández de Alba, Gregorio. "Investigaciones
Arqueológicas en Tierradentro," in Revista de las Indias, Volume
II, Number 9, p 29; and Number 10, pp 91–101; Bogotá.
1938—Hernández de Alba, Gregorio. “Descubrimientos
Arqueológicos en Inzá,” in Revista de Indias, Volume II, No. 2,
Bogotá.
1938––Burg, Georg. "Beitrag zür Etnographie Südkolumbiens auf
grund eigener Forschungen," in Iberoamericanisches Archiv, pp
333-375; Berlin, Germany.
1942—Schottelius, Justus Wolfram. “Cerámica de la Región de
Pedregal, Cauca,” in Publicación de la Escuela Normal Superior,
Vol. IV, Marzo-abril, pp 332-341; Bogotá.
1943––Pérez de Barradas, José. Colombia de Norte a Sur; Madrid,
Spain.
1943––Silva Célis, Eliecer. "La Arqueología de Tierradentro
(1)," in Revista del Instituto Etnológico Nacional, Volume 1,
No. 1, pp 117–130; Bogotá.
1944––Silva Célis, Eliecer. "La Arqueología de Tierradentro
(2)," in Revista del Instituto Etnológico Nacional, Volume 1,
No. 2, pp 521–621; Bogotá.
1946––Hernández de Alba, Gregorio. "The Archaeology of San
Agustín and Tierradentro," in Handbook of South American
Indians, Volume II, pp 851–859; Washington, D.C., USA.
1946––Bennett, Wendell. "Tierradentro," in Handbook of South
American Indians, Volume II, pp 849–850; Washington, D.C., USA.
1953––Wavrin Villers au Tertre, Marquis de. Chez les Indiens de
Colombie; Paris, France.
1955––Nachtigall, Horst. Tierradentro: Archäologie und
Ethnograpie einer Kolumbianischen Landschaft; Zurich,
Switzerland.
1955—Nachtigall, Horst. “The Cave Tombs of Tierradentro,” in
Ethnos, Vol. 20, Numbers 2 and 3, pp 167-176; Stockholm, Sweden.

1956––Nachtigall, Horst. "Tierradentro," in Revista Studia (de
la Universidad del Atlántico), Volume I, Number 10, pp 21–55;
Barranquilla, Colombia.
1957––Rowe, John H. "Review of Nachtigall's Tierradentro...,"
in American Anthropologist, Volume 59, No. 3, pp 568–69;
Menasha, Wisconsin, USA.
1959—Reichel-Dolmatoff, Gerardo. “Review of Nachtigall’s
Tierradentro…” in American Antiquity, Vol. 22, No. 4, Part 1, p
429; Salt Lake City, Utah, USA.
1959––Lehmann, Henri. "Reseña a Nachtigall's Tierradentro...,"
in L'Anthropologie, Volume 63, Numbers 3 and 4; Paris, France.
1961––Rodríguez Lamus, Luis Raúl. "Aspectos Arquitectónicos en
las Tumbas de Tierradentro," in Revista Colombiana de
Antropología, Volume X, pp 227–236; Bogotá.
1962 and 1966––Ziegert, Helmut. "Zür Chronologie der
Tierradentro–und–San Agustín–Kultur (Kolumbien)," in Zeitschrift
für Ethnologie, Volume 87 (1962) and Volume 91 (1966);
Braunschweig, Germany.
1964––Ayala, Leonardo. "Las Tumbas de Tierradentro," in Revista
Arco; Bogotá.
1964––Nachtigall, Horst. "Zür Chronologie der Tierradentro–und–
San Agustín–Kultur," in Zeitschrift für Ethnologie, Volume 89,
Number 1, pp 78–81; Braunschweig, Germany.
1965––Patterson, Thomas. "Ceramic Sequences at Tierradentro and
San Agustín, Colombia," in American Antiquity, Volume 31, Number
1, pp 66-73, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA.
1967—Long, Stanley. “Formas y Distribución de Tumbas de Pozo
con Cámara Lateral” in Revista de la Universidad de los Andes,
No. 1, Mayo; Bogotá.
1970–71––Long, Stanley and Juan Yángüez. "Excavaciones en
Tierradentro," in Revista Colombiana de Antropología, Volume XV,
pp 9-127; Bogotá.
1973––Cháves Mendoza, Álvaro and Mauricio Puerta Restrepo.
"Conservación Arqueológica en Tierradentro," in Informe al Banco
de la República; Bogotá.
1973––Puerta Restrepo, Mauricio. "Excavaciones Arqueológicas en
la Región de Tierradentro," Tesis de Grado, Universidad de los
Andes; Bogotá.
1974––Cháves Mendoza, Álvaro and Mauricio Puerta Restrepo.

"Hipogéos de Tierradentro," in Informe al Banco de la República;
Bogotá.
1974––Groot, Ana María. "Excavaciones Arqueológicas en
Tierradentro: Estudio sobre Cerámica y su Posible Uso en la
Elaboración de la Sal," Tesis de Grado, Universidad de los
Andes; Bogotá.
1975––Ayala, Leonardo. "Las Tumbas Pintadas de Tierradentro,"
in Historia del Arte Colombiano, Volume I, pp 189–212; Bogotá.
1976––Cháves Mendoza, Álvaro and Mauricio Puerta Restrepo.
Tierradentro (in the series "Colombia: Arte y Cultura");
Bogotá.
1977—Tello, Hernán. “Investigación Geológica en el Parque
Arqueológico de Tierradentro (Cauca),” Informe al Banco de la
República; Bogotá.
1978––Henman, Anthony (under pseudonym Antonil). Mama Coca;
London, England (1981 Spanish translation, same title; Bogotá).
1978––Cháves Mendoza, Álvaro and Mauricio Puerta Restrepo.
"Excavaciones Arqueológicas en Tierradentro y la Hoya del Río La
Plata," in Boletín del Museo del Oro, Año I; Bogotá.
1980––Cháves Mendoza, Álvaro and Mauricio Puerta Restrepo.
Tierradentro; Bogotá.
1980––Cháves Mendoza, Álvaro and Mauricio Puerta Restrepo.
Arqueología de San Agustín: Entierros Primarios de
Tierradentro, Banco de la República Series; Bogotá.
1981––Cháves Mendoza, Álvaro. Los Animales Mágicos en las Urnas
de Tierradentro; Bogotá.
1981 and 1986––Cháves Mendoza, Álvaro and Mauricio Puerta
Restrepo. Monumentos Arqueológicos de Tierradentro; Bogotá.
1984––Cháves Mendoza, Álvaro and Mauricio Puerta Restrepo.
Tierradentro; Bogotá.
SOURCES FOR OTHER PUEBLO ESCULTOR AREAS
1918––Trujillo, Victor and Bernardo Montealegre. "Valle de
Moscopán––Ciudad Desconocida para los Conquistadores," in
Boletín de Historia y Antiguedades, Informe Volume XII, pp 251–
254; Bogotá.

1934--Trujillo, Victor. “Curiosidades Prehistóricas: Estatuas
del Valle de La Plata,” in Huila Histórico, No. 2, pp 596-598;
Neiva, Huila.
1935—Valencia, Cenón. “Documentos Importantes: Estatuas del
Valle de La Plata,” in Huila Histórico, No. 3, pp 679-682 and
704-707; Neiva, Huila.
1936––Wavrin Villers au Tertre, Marquis de. "Apport aux
connaissances de la Civilizacion dite `de San Agustín' et a
l'archeologie du Sud de la Colombie," in Bulletin de la Societe
des Americanistes de Belgique, Number 21, pp 107–134; Brussels,
Belgium.
1937––Wavrin Villers au Tertre, Marquis de. "Decouvertes sur la
Civilization Anteprecolombienne dite de San Agustín," in
L'Illustration, October 23, pp 237–238; Paris, France.
1943––Lehmann, Henri. "Arqueología de Moscopán," in Revista del
Instituto Etnológico Nacional, Volume II, pp 657–670; Bogotá.
1943––Silva Célis, Eliecer. "La Arqueología de Tierradentro
(1)," in Revista del Instituto Etnológico Nacional, Volume I, pp
117–130; Bogotá.
1945––Lehmann, Henri. "El Museo Arqueológico de la Universidad
del Cauca en Popayán," in Boletín de Arqueología, Volume I,
Number 3, May–June, pp 229–239; Bogotá.
1946––Lehmann, Henri. "The Archaeology of the Popayán Region,
Colombia," in Handbook of South American Indians, Volume II, pp
861–864; Washington, D.C., USA.
1953––Lehmann, Henri. "Archeologie du Sud–ouest Colombien," in
Journal de la Societe des Americanistes, Volume XLII; Paris,
France.
1955––Nachtigall, Horst. Tierradentro: Archäologie und
Ethnographie einer Kolumbianischen Landschaft; Zurich,
Switzerland.
1964–65––Ortíz, Sergio Elías. "Estatuas Prehistóricas de Piedra
del Valle de Chimayoy," in Revista Colombiana de Antropología,
Volume XIII, pp 215–226; Bogotá.
1978––Cháves Mendoza, Álvaro and Mauricio Puerta Restrepo.
"Excavaciones Arqueológicas en Tierradentro y la Hoya del Río La
Plata," in Boletín del Museo del Oro, Año I; Bogotá.
1978––Cháves Mendoza, Álvaro and Mauricio Puerta Restrepo.
"Hallazgo de Vivienda Prehispánica en Moscopán (Cauca) y
Monserrate (Huila)," Boletín del Museo del Oro, Año I,

September–December, pp 64–67; Bogotá.
1985––Drennan, Robert, editor. Regional Archaeology in the
Valle de la Plata, Colombia: A Preliminary Report on the 1984
Season of the Proyecto Arqueológico Valle de la Plata; Ann
Arbor, Michigan, USA.
1987––Jaramillo, Luis Gonzalo. "Reconocimiento Regional
Sistemático en el Municipio de La Argentina, Huila," in Boletín
de Arqueología, Año II, Number 2; Bogotá.
1987––Llanos Vargas, Hector. "Pautas de Asentamiento
Agustinianas en el Cañon del Río Granates––Saladoblanco," in
Boletín de Arqueología, Año II, Number 2; Bogotá.
1987––Sotomayor, María Lucía and María Victoria Uribe.
Estatuaria del Macizo Colombiano; Bogotá.
1988––Llanos Vargas, Hector. Arqueología de San Agustín:
Pautas de Asentamiento en el Cañon del Río Granates––
Saladoblanco, Banco de la República Series; Bogotá.
PUEBLO ESCULTOR SOURCES IN FRENCH
1879––Gutierrez de Alba, José María. "Impresiones de Viaje en
Colombia: Les Antiquites de la Vallee de San Agustín," in Actas
del III Congreso Internacional de Americanistas, Sesión 3, II, p
143; Brussels, Belgium.
1900––Hamy, E. "Une Figurille en Pierre de San Agustín dans le
British Museum," in Journal de la Societe des Americanistes,
Volume III, p 207; Paris, France.
1914––Rivet, Paul. "Decouvertes du Prof. K. Th. Preuss en
Colombie: Statues Monolithiques," in Journal de la Societe des
Americanistes, Volume II, pp 379–380; Paris, France.
1914––Stöpel, Karl Theodore. "Decouvertes Archeologiques en
1911: Monuments en Pierre de San Agustín," in Journal des
Americanistes, Volume XI, p 285; Paris, France.
1936––Wavrin Villers au Tertre, Marquis du. "Apport aux
connaissances de la Civilization dite `de San Agustín' et a
l'archeologie du Sud de la Colombie," in Bulletin de la Societe
des Americanistes de Belgique, Number 21, pp 107–134; Brussels,
Belgium.
1937––Wavrin Villers au Tertre, Marquis du. "Decouvertes sur la
Civilization Anteprecolombienne dite de San Agustín," in

L"Illustration, October 23, pp 237–238; Paris, France.
1940 (Approximately)––Hernández de Alba, Gregorio. "Les
Investigations Archeologiques a San Agustín, Republique de
Colombie," in Internationales Kongress für Archeologie, Volume
VI, pp 198–203; Berlin, Germany.
1940––Hernández de Alba, Gregorio. "Nouvelles Decouvertes
Archeologiques a San Agustín et Tierradentro (Colombie)," in
Journal de la Societe des Americanistes, Volume XXXII, pp 57–67;
Paris, France.
1953––Lehmann, Henri. "Archeologie du Sud–ouest Colombien," in
Journal de la Societe des Americanistes, Volume XLII; Paris,
France.
1953––Wavrin Villers au Tertre, Marquis du. Chez les Indiens de
Colombie; Paris, France.
1959––Lehmann, Henri. "Reseña a Nachtigall's Tierradentro,
Archeologie et Ethnographie de une Contree de la Colombie," in
L'Anthropologie, Volume 63, Numbers 3–4; Paris, France.
PUEBLO ESCULTOR SOURCES IN GERMAN
1912––Stöpel, Karl Theodore. Sudamericanische Prahistorische
Tempel und Gottheiten; Frankfurt, Germany.
1920––Preuss, Konrad Theodore. "Bericht über meine
Archäologischen und Ethnologischen Forschungs-Reisen in
Kolumbien," in Zeitschrift für Ethnologie, Volumes 52 and 53, pp
89–103; Berlin, Germany.
1923––Preuss, Konrad Theodore. "Stücke einer Ethnographischen
Sammlung," in Zeitschrift für Ethnologie, Volume 55, pp 91-93;
Berlin, Germany.
1927––Preuss, Konrad Theodore. "Die Ausstrahlungen der San
Agustín-Kultur in Amerika," in Zeitschrift für Ethnologie,
Volume 59, pp 111-12; Berlin, Germany.
1928—Preuss, Konrad Theodore. “Die Ausstrahlung der San
Agustín-Kultur (Kolumbien) in Amerika,” in International
Congress of Americanists, Proceedings of the 23 rd Session, pp
233-234; New York City, USA.
1929—-Preuss, Konrad Theodore. Monumentale Vorgeschichtliche
Kunst; Gottingen, Germany.

1938––Uhle, Max. "Herkunst und Alter der Fruhgeschichtlicher
Denkmaler von San Agustín in Kolumbien," in Ibero–Amerikanisches
Archiv, II, pp 327–332; Berhu, Germany.
1938––Burg, Georg. "Beitrag Zür Ethnographie Sudkolumbiens auf
Grund eigener Forschungen," in Iberoamericanisches Archiv;
Berlin, Germany.
1955––Nachtigall, Horst. Tierradentro: Archäologie und
Ethnographie einer Kolumbianischen Landschaft; Zurich,
Switzerland.
1958––Nachtigall, Horst. Die Amerikanischen Megalithkulturen:
Vorstudien zu einer Untersuchung; Berlin, Germany.
1961––Nachtigall, Horst. Alt–Kolumbien: Vorgeschichtliche
Indianer Kulturen; Berlin, Germany.
1962 and 1966––Ziegert, Helmut. "Zür Chronologie der
Tierradentro–und–San Agustín-Kultur (Kolumbien)," in Zeitschrift
für Ethnologie, Volume 87 (1962) and Volume 91 (1966);
Braunschweig, Germany.
1964––Nachtigall, Horst. "Zür Chronologie der Tierradentro–und–
San Agustín-Kultur," in Zeitschrift für Ethnologie, Volume 89,
Number 1, pp 78–81; Braunschweig, Germany.
PUEBLO ESCULTOR SOURCES IN ENGLISH
1901––Dalton, O. M. "Note on a Stone Figure from Colombia,
South America," in Journal of the Anthropological Institute,
Volume 30, p 64, plates I–J; London, England.
1912––Stöpel, Karl Theodore. "Archaeological Discoveries in
Ecuador and Southern Colombia during 1911; and the Ancient Stone
Monuments of San Agustín," in International Congress of
Americanists, Proceedings of the XVIII Session, Part II, pp 251–
258; London, England.
1937––Walde–Waldegg, Hermann von. "Preliminary Report on the
Expedition to San Agustín (Colombia)," in Archaeological Series
of Boston College, Volume II, Number 1; Boston, Massachusetts,
USA.
1939––Arciniegas, Germán. "San Agustín, Colombia: A New Key to
Prehistoric American Civilization," in Bulletin of the Pan
American Union, Volume 73, Number 8, pp 439–445; Washington,
D.C., USA.

1940––Walde–Waldegg, Hermann von. "Stone Idols of the Andes
Reveal a Vanished People," in National Geographic, May, pp 627–
647; Washington, D.C., USA.
1946––Bennett, Wendell. "San Agustín" and "Tierradentro," in
Handbook of South American Indians, Volume II, pp 848–850;
Washington, D.C., USA.
1946––Hernández de Alba, Gregorio. "The Archaeology of San
Agustín and Tierradentro, Colombia," in Handbook of South
American Indians, Volume II, pp 851–859; Washington, D.C., USA.
1946––Lehmann, Henri. "The Archaeology of the Popayán Region,
Colombia," in Handbook of South American Indians, Volume II, pp
861–864; Washington, D.C., USA.
1950––Bennett, Wendell C. “Review of Pérez de Barradas’
Arqueología Agustiniana,” in American Antiquity, Volume 15,
Number 4, Part 1; Salt Lake City, Utah, USA.
1955—Nachtigall, Horst. “The Cave Tombs of Tierradentro,” in
Ethnos, Vol. 20, Numbers 2 and 3; Stockholm, Sweden.
1957––Rowe, John H. "Review of Nachtigall's Tierradentro...,”
in American Anthropologist, Volume 59, No. 3, pp 568–569;
Menasha, Wisconsin, USA.
1959--Reichel-Dolmatoff, Gerardo. “Review of Nachtigall’s
Tierradentro…” in American Antiquity, Vol. 22, No. 4, Part 1, p
429; Salt Lake City, Utah, USA.
1965––Patterson, Thomas. "Ceramic Sequences at Tierradentro and
San Agustín, Colombia," in American Antiquity, Volume 31, Number
1, pp 66-73; Salt Lake City, Utah, USA.
1966––Reichel–Dolmatoff, Gerardo. "Jungle Gods of San Agustín,"
in Natural History, Volume LXXX, Number 10, pp 42–49; New York
City, USA.
1972––Reichel–Dolmatoff, Gerardo. San Agustín: A Culture of
Colombia; London, England and New York City, USA.
1978––Henman, Anthony (under pseudonym Antonil). Mama Coca;
London, England.
1982––Bruhns, Karen. "Dating the Sculpture of San Agustín: A
Correlation with Northern Perú," in Precolombian Art History;
Palo Alto, California, USA.
1983––Plazas, Clemencia. "Gold Objects from Primavera, Links
between Calima, San Agustín, and the Cauca Valley," in
Procalima, Number 3, pp 40–42; Basel, Switzerland.

1985––Drennan, Robert, editor. Regional Archaeology in the Valle
de la Plata, Colombia: A Preliminary Report on the 1984 Season
of the Proyecto Arqueológico Valle de La Plata; Ann Arbor,
Michigan, USA.
*******************************************************
*********************
*****