07.06.2022 Views

Pre-Colombian Jamaica: Caribbean Archeology and Ethnohistory

by Phillip Allsworth-Jones

by Phillip Allsworth-Jones

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

106 / Chapter 8.<br />

have been excavated from below a 2- m- deep deposit of fossil bat guano in an<br />

entrance chamber. At Potoo Hole (CC22) “surface fossil guano” was dated to<br />

950 ± 50 b.p. (a.d. 1000 ± 50 uncalibrated). Obviously no definite relationship<br />

can be established between these dates <strong>and</strong> the petroglyphs or pictographs, <strong>and</strong><br />

therefore they are of uncertain relevance. But the age range is not incompatible<br />

with that suggested by Roe for the petroglyphs <strong>and</strong> pictographs in Puerto Rico<br />

at Maisabel, Caguana, <strong>and</strong> the Cueva de La Mora (Roe 1991a, 1991b, 1999).<br />

Nature of the Images<br />

The 24 sites mapped by Lee include several where only one glyph was observed.<br />

Others have one “principal carving” <strong>and</strong> “a few smaller or less well done<br />

efforts.” Then there are “clusters.” The one best known to him, <strong>and</strong> painfully<br />

recollected because it had been destroyed, was Canoe Valley (MC1), which did<br />

possess about 30 images (Appendixes 12, 13, 14, 15). Other multiple glyphs<br />

were reported from Jackson Bay (CC2), Warminster (EC15), <strong>and</strong> Kempshot<br />

(JC1). Worthy Park #1 (SC6) was said to contain two “very minor” pictographs<br />

as well as some petroglyphs. Elsewhere, the pictographs are always multiple,<br />

at Spot Valley Cave (JC7), Mountain River Cave (SC1), <strong>and</strong> Potoo Hole<br />

(CC22). Thus, according to Lee, at Spot Valley Cave there were about a dozen<br />

poorly preserved pictographs, applied to the cave wall in black pigment, in the<br />

same style as those at Mountain River Cave. They were partly obscured by dirt,<br />

dust, or smoke. His illustration is at Appendix 41. It is not too clear what these<br />

figures represent, but as so often they seem to have both zoomorphic <strong>and</strong> anthropomorphic<br />

characteristics.<br />

By far the most common petroglyph motif, as Lee put it, is a simple oval face,<br />

incised by a continuous line, with three circular or oval depressions to represent<br />

eyes <strong>and</strong> mouth. Four such faces are illustrated from Coventry (AC1) (Appendix<br />

17). One such figure, from Pantrepant East (TC2), has long been known,<br />

since it was first illustrated by Duerden (1897:Figure XVII) (Appendix 21).<br />

The “sloping narrow eyes” on one of the heads from God’s Well Junction #2<br />

(CC10) (Appendix 37) were compared with the “mask motifs” found on some<br />

pottery h<strong>and</strong>les. One of the three illustrated heads from Gut River #1 (MC6)<br />

is “ heart- shaped” (Appendix 38), whereas the one from Cuckold Point Cave<br />

(MC5) has tear lines streaming from the eyes (Appendix 36). The figures from<br />

Milk River (CC1) are somewhat enigmatic (Appendix 39), <strong>and</strong> it might be<br />

thought that the same goes for the figure from Reynold Bent (EC19) (Appendix<br />

40). Lee thought that the “haloes” around this head might represent “hair or

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!