Figure 1 - Click on image to see larger version
Figure 2 - Click on image to see larger version
This research was inspired by members of the North Leeward Tourism Association, particularly its Chairman, Mr Clement Derrick. The digital photos were done by Mr Stanley Jocelyn and e-mailed to me via Ms Currel Thompson, both teachers of Petit Bordel Secondary School.
This paper takes a new look at the aboriginal culture site atop the Chateaubelair/Petit Bordel promontory, which was first brought to the attention of scientists and culture historians by resident archaeologist, Dr. Earle Kirby in 1969. His report remains the standard work on Amerindian rock-art in St Vincent. No petroglyphs were identified: the only reference was to "work holes", an adjunct of pre-historic rock-art. Interestingly, while many of the petroglyphs in the report have become well known to local residents, international scholars, and the tourism industry, the site at Petit Bordel has relapsed into obscurity in the archaeology and culture history of the pre-Columbian peoples of St Vincent. The site was not included in the report by archaeologists, Bullen & Bullen (1969), nor by C.N. Dubelaar (1995). Indeed, the Petit Bordel "holes" have remained virtually unknown to the majority of Vincentians and even to most residents of Chateaubelair and Petit Bordel, which lie astride this very intriguing archaeological site.
The archaeology of St Vincent, as indeed, of the rest of the Caribbean, generated little interest during the colonial period. Some archaeological work was done by J. Walter Fewkes, in 1913-14. The findings were discussed in an article by Thomas Huckerby in 1914 (American Anthropologist: 238-48), and by Fewkes himself in 1922. In his report, Huckerby claimed that throughout the West Indies "there is nothing of greater archaeological importance than the St Vincent petroglyphs" (239). Despite this, research capital favoured fieldwork in the Greater Antilles for several decades. St Vincent and the Grenadines received little more than honourable mention in Sven Loven's Origins of The Tainan Culture, 1935. During the late 1950s Fred Olsen conducted a special investigation into a few petroglyphs, as part of a wider project into Amerindian religion in the Caribbean (Fourth Congress: 35-46). Up to that time, the general attitude towards St Vincent archaeology mirrored the comments in the St. Vincent Handbooks from as early as 1911, and by later St. Vincent (Colonial) Reports, that the island's petroglyphs were "peculiar engravings" of a "primitive people" (see Reports 1938 to 1965). Vagueness was also characteristic of the scholarly literature of the period. For example, Irving Rouse frequently referred to the petroglyphs of St Vincent and other islands of the Lesser Antilles as "geometrically carved problematic stone objects" (Handbook 4, 509-10; 516). The first comprehensive survey of the rock-art of St Vincent was undertaken in the 1960s by Kirby, and reported to the scientific community at the Proceedings of the Third International Congress For the Study of Pre-Columbian Cultures of the Lesser Antilles (Grenada, 1969) under the title "The Pre-Columbian Monuments of St Vincent, West Indies." That same year, findings were published by the St Vincent Archaeological and Historical Society as Monuments in Stone Left by the Pre-Columbian Indians in St Vincent, West Indies. It was re-published with an addendum in the mid-1970s as Pre-Columbian Monuments in Stone. Although the island's archaeological status may well have been exaggerated at the beginning of the twentieth century, Bullen & Bullen, who conducted archaeological work in St Vincent and the Grenadines in the wake of the Kirby report, agreed that "St Vincent is very rich in petroglyphs, stationary mortars and sharpening stones", terms used by Kirby himself to classify the rock-art as well as other types of human activity on pre-historic worked stones in the island.
Co-authors, Tacon and Chippindale define rock-art as "human-made marks on natural, non-portable rocky surfaces." Following well-established scholarship, they recognize two classes of rock-art, one of which is called pictographs and considered the more common. This class includes "paintings, drawings, daubings, stencils, prints, beeswax motifs..." all of which are applied "upon (sic) the rock." The other class is petroglyphs "which are cut into (sic) the rock" and include "engravings, incisings, peckings, gougings, symbolic grindings, etchings, and so forth" (1998: 6).
The merits and demerits of the terms "pictographs" and "petroglyphs" were debated within archaeological circles at least since late nineteenth century [Fewkes, 1970: n. on p. 148). In Kirby's reports, the term "rock carvings" is a substitute for pictographs. However, the captions identifying his samples of stone monuments indicate that the term "petroglyph" was used generically to include rock carvings as well as pictographs. His "second class" of stone monuments, generically called "work stones", include stationary mortars, honing stones, sharpening stones and milling stones, all conventional archaeological terms. However, features described as "stationary mortars" and those described as "work holes", "man-made holes" or simply "holes", need to be re-examined in light of the global distribution of similar features, but known by other names, the most common used by English-language archaeologists being "cupules", "cup-marks", "simple cups", "pit marks" and "punctuates" (Dubelaar 1984: 4). Dubelaar himself seems to deploy the term "cupholes" in a generic sense. Indeed, captions identifying the various work stones in Kirby's reports tend to create conceptual problems for the uninitiated. For example, is a "sharpening stone" or "honing stone" a sub-class of "work stones"? Notwithstanding, we can deduce two conceptual terms from a reading of the various descriptions: the first is "work stones" when referring to the rock structure, and the second, "work holes" when referring to the cup-like impressions on such rocks. Cup-marks or cupules are then easier to accommodate in this simplified model. Put another way, it is clear that some categories of Kirby's "work holes" are indeed, "cup marks" or "cupules", distinct from other kinds of work holes.
A commonly shared concept of cup-marks is that of a class of "abstract geometric figures" (Tacon & Chippendale, 1998: 292). Dubelaar, however, makes a distinction between the classic cup-marks and a similar class of holes called "polissoirs" which he defined as "narrow, oblong furrows, or cup-like cavities, mostly to be found in bedrock along rivers" (1986: 4). They may also be found on movable slabs. Polissoirs were created by grinding, sharpening or polishing the cutting edges of stone tools. Although Kirby does not use this term, it is obvious that his "work stones" at various sites are polissoirs (1975: Fig. XI; Fig. XIIa; Fig. XIIIa). Dubelaar, however, admits that it is not always easy to distinguish between polissoirs, cupholes which serve as mortars, and cup-marks whose functions are still a matter of speculation. One criterion applied is diameter, which is smallest in cup-marks (generally not more than 5cm), and greatest in mortars (15cm and above), with polissoirs having at least 10cm (Dubelaar, 1986: 4). From these descriptions, it is clear that at the Petit Bordel promontory we are dealing with the class of holes called cup-marks. Personal measurements confirmed what appears to be a remarkable standardization of diameters, either 2" (5cm) or 3" (7.5cm) - the latter being slightly more than Dubelaar's first class of holes, but definitely much less than his second class. Indeed, Kirby concluded that "This series [at Petit Bordel] is considered the classic type of circular holes [see Figs. 1 & 2 below], with diameter 2½" (6.25cm) and in depth 2 - 7" (5cm - 17.75cm) (Report, 1969: 7).
Figure 1 - Click on image to see larger version
Figure 2 - Click on image to see larger version
Cup-marks may occur in isolation, but are often associated with petroglyphs. It would seem from the archaeological literature that when they appear together with pictographs or petroglyphs they are treated as rock art (Dubelaar, 1986: 4); otherwise, they are generally glossed over. Kirby's reports suggest that much care was taken in arriving at the correct number of holes/cup-marks on each work stone at the Petit Bordel/Chateaubelair site. His conclusion that the "work holes" of Petit Bordel and elsewhere in St Vincent are residual impressions of tool-sharpening activities will be revisited in light of other interpretations which treat with these holes as products rather than by-products of specialised activity.
The Petit Bordel archaeological site lies on the leeward coast, between the town of Chateaubelair and its satellite village of Petit Bordel, almost five miles to the south of La Soufriere mountain. Looking across the Chateaubelair Bay from the site, the volcano stands majestically against the skyline, rising to over 4,000 feet with its peak almost always shrouded in greyish-white clouds, even on sunny days [see Fig. 3(b) below]. The site lies marginally outside of the third class of officially designated "volcanic hazard zones", and indeed suffered heavily from "stones up to half a pound in weight" (volcanic bombs) and clouds of sulphuric dust and ashes during the 1902 eruption (Tempest & Flett: 401-03). In antiquity, this area would have been subject to direct lava flows [St Vincent Handbook, 1938: 3]. The promontory is part of a ridge extending into the centre of the island. According to an oral tradition that persists among the residents of Chateaubelair, the site of the final resting place of the famous 'Carib' warrior and first national hero of St Vincent & the Genadines, Chief Chatoyer, lies along the same ridge, clearly visible from the archaeological site. The gradient along the ridge of the promontory is relatively gentle and easily accessible. It is wide enough to offer a sense of safety up to ten metres beyond the last work stone, but falls away precipitously for about 100 metres into the adjacent bays below.
Figure 3(b)
Altogether there are some sixteen rocks of varying sizes containing from a few to several scores of "holes" or cup-marks above ground. These rocks are distributed within a relatively small area, extending for no more than 32 metres along the ridge, and some five metres down the slope facing Petit Bordel Bay. The work stones are of andesite, a relatively hard, commonly occurring volcanic rock, samples of which were analysed by palaeontologist/volcanologist, Dr. Brent Wilson of the UWI, St Augustine. A sample taken from the first rock reveals two phases in its formation. The first phase consists of a fibre-grained matrix, grey to greenish-grey in places, but stained brown by a mixture of limonite and haematite, and some minerals. The second phase consists of coarser grained, paler coloured feldspar phenocrysts up to 3mm. in diameter, ranging from brownish grey to greyish pink. It is interesting to note that the rocks do not exhibit uniform compactness, a condition probably resulting from changes in the composition of the crystals or from the fusion of different rock types [Wilson].
The first two rocks are very large. One question that comes to mind, particularly when examining the second rock, is whether the holes are haphazard in their distribution, with limits of construction imposed by the structure and hardness of the rock; or whether they represent conscious patterns, yet to be deciphered. The second rock contains the greatest number of holes, some 100 above ground [Fig. 1], while the first contains the greatest variety of features [Fig. 3 (a)]. Not mentioned by Kirby is the existence of several cup-marks of the same kind below the present ground level, the extent of which can only be established from excavation. At the top of the first rock there is a metate-like cavity, 18" long by 12" across (45cm by 30cm) [Fig. 3 (a)]. Substituting for the animal-shaped heads of some portable metates, is a natural prow-like elevation that looks directly north, towards the Soufriere mountain [Figs. 3 (a) & 3 (b) juxtaposed for dramatic effect]. This prow is about 17cm above the level of the rear rim of the bowl. This rock commnds the entrance to the site, and one can only speculate as to its function. There are three more similar-sized basins on this rock but located on the slope and therefore unlikely to have had the same status, unless the rock had occupied different positions in the past.
 |
|
| Figure 3(a) - Click on image to see larger version | Figure 3(b) - Soufriere |
At least three rocks exhibit markings of possible petroglyphs, but not identified by Kirby. These compare with the somewhat ill-defined petroglyph at Mt. Wynne (N) [Fig. IX]. In his first description of the latter, no mention was made of "work holes" (Report, 1975). However, in his presentation of the "recently discovered" monument to the Sixth International Congress For the Study of Pre-Columbian Cultures of the Lesser Antilles (1976), he referred to the holes as "dots" and left it open as to "whether or not they are natural or made by man" (214). Interestingly, his reference to the petroglyph at Yambou includes neither holes nor dots, which are found on either side of the rectilinear figure (Report, 1975: Fig VI). On the third rock from the entrance to the site, there is a faint impression of what appears to be the sun's rays, bordered by three cup-marks [Fig. 5]. This figure is vaguely similar to a Guyana petroglyph described by its first discoverers in the 1870s as "...a sort of rising sun with a human visage..." (Dubelaar and Berrang‚, 1979: 63). Should this interpretation prove correct, it would complement a similar petroglyph at Barrouallie, according to Olsen's interpretation (Fourth Congress, 1973: 36). A second rock displays etches which do not match the natural fault lines of the rock. However, the image, possibly geometric, is difficult to recognize [Fig. 4]. There is another rock with a single cup-mark on its inner face, exhibiting multiple striations running diagonally across the natural fault lines. There is also some evidence of pecking, which raises the possibility that this might also be a geometric petroglyph [Fig. 6]. Perhaps it was this rock which Kirby described as having one "hole" only. Actually, there are two other cup-marks facing Chateaubelair, with all three in a straight line running north to south, that is, in the direction of La Soufriere.
Figure 4 - Click on image to see larger version
Figure 5 - Click on image to see larger version
Figure 6 - Click on image to see larger version
A major distinguishing feature of all of the work stones is the occurrence of fault lines, probably a consequence of cooling of the rocks after eruption (Wilson). Interestingly, the vast majority of cupules are built along these fault lines, or at the intersection of two or more lines, a feature common to cup-marks. Faults would have offered least resistance to the tools used in their construction. Also common to most cup-marks is a distinct wear of one side of the outer edge, which creates a somewhat oblong conical exterior rather than a perfect circle. This feature may be indicative of the process in the making of the holes as well as the type of tool used. It is highly possible that the worn edge served as a sort of fulcrum for scooping out particles from inside of the hole.
Petroglyphs are important markers of pre-historic culture and ethnography. By comparing motifs and forms, it may be possible to deduce common heritage across a wide geographical area. As Fewkes explained, "A study of their forms, geographical distribution, and meanings is an important aid to our knowledge of the origin and developments of Antillean cultures; it affords valuable data bearing on the migration of the race and points the way back to its ancestral continental home" (1970: 148). St Vincent lies along the migration lane from South America into the Greater Antilles. Archaeological evidence indicates that these islands have been colonized and recolonized for some 7,000 years.
Writing early in the twentieth century, Huckerby suggested that "deep" petroglyphs were of Arawakan provenance, while "shallow" petroglyhs were indicative of the workings of late pre-Columbian arrivants (American Anthropologist: 239). To those who subscribe to the now discredited evidence of early Spanish and French chroniclers, Huckerby's "tribe" would be the so-called Island-Caribs, identified by others as Kalinago. Indeed, he went on to infer a ritual function for the various petroglyphs, consistent with conventional Carib cannibalism (American Anthropologist: 241). Although Rouse once assigned craftsmanship of the rock-art of the Antilles to the Igneri whom he identified as "The Arawaks who survived the Carib migrations in Trinidad and the Lesser Antilles" (Handbook 4: 521), he later recognised the seminal contribution of the Saladoids (The Taino: 118). This interpretation, especially as it relates to St Vincent, was probably influenced by Bullen & Bullen, whose reading of the evidence "strongly suggests" that the island's rock-art represents "a phase in the Saladoid tradition" from the late B.C. era into circa 1,000 A.D., after which the Calivigny and Suarez ceramic traditions became dominant (Bullen & Bullen: 50). All of these traditions contributed to the cultural legacy of the island of St Vincent (Bullen & Bullen: 121). However, the dominance of Yocahu images on petroglyphs at Layou and elsewhere should swing the debate on the origins of the island's rock-art in favour of Arawakan culture.
The worldview of the native peoples of the Caribbean was conditioned by aspects of the macro-environment, alien to their ancestral homelands in the South American mainland. The principal new forces they encountered were hurricanes and volcanoes, which confronted them from time to time with spectacles of awesome, destructive power. St Vincent lies directly in the hurricane belt; it also contains volcanoes stretching from La Soufriere in the north to Mt. St Andrew in the south. To these forces of nature their shamans successfully engineered new cosmogony and cosmologies, in which sea and volcano featured prominently.
One possible outcome of this re-engineering could well have been a new imperative to forecast change of seasons, and determine positions at sea. Ancient mariners looked toward the sky for direction, the sun at day and stars at night. This is also true for the Antilles, since the sea was a busy highway of trade, war and other forms of contact among pre-Columbian peoples for thousands of years. Although it is possible to see neighbouring islands from any landmass in the Leewards, on sea, it is a different matter, and small boats go adrift for one reason or another, even in modern times. For this reason, the first sight of land - often, the volcanic peaks - would easily have been assimilated to magic and religious rituals of pre-colonial sea-fearers. In order to navigate the Caribbean Sea, Pre-Columbian canoemen would have had to depend on their knowledge of local winds, ocean currents, actual and relative movements of the sun, and perhaps, even the stars during voyages greater than twelve hours duration. Thus the site on the Petit Bordel promontory, caressed by the Caribbean Sea, in full view of La Soufriere, and easily secured from the inquisitive as well as the hostile, might well have been the perfect location for mapping out maritime and stellar logistics and conducting ritual appeasements to the gods. Indeed, when sections of cup-marks are connected together, some interesting patterns emerge, inviting speculation whether they represent a mapping of constellations or some other kind of route-map, or some mnemo-numeric system [see Fig. 2]; perhaps a combination of all three (see Dubelaar, 1986: 73-74; Williams, 1978: 6; Olsen, Eight Congress: 6-15; Honeychurch: 2002).
Figure 2 - Click on image to see larger version
The validity of such representations may be supported on the basis of archaeologists' interpretations of petroglyphs from the continental homelands of Antillean colonisers as well as some islands of the Caribbean, including other sites in St Vincent. Archaeologists have progressed from stereotypical denial of native Antillean capacity for astronomy to a more liberal (even radical), view of such possibilities. No one better demonstrates this evolution than Fred Olsen. Arising from his 1959 visit to St Vincent, he identified the petroglyph at Barrouallie - described by Kirby as the "Paracas monkey" (Dubelaar, 1995: 110) - as "a petroglyph of the Sun God" (Fig. 4), but doubted his own intuition, stating, "I know of no other example of Arawak concern for astronomical data" (Fourth Congress, 1973: 36). However, twenty years later, he reported to the Eighth Congress that "the Arawaks actually developed considerable competence in scientific techniques, enough for them to have made totally unexpected advances into the field of astronomy...." The new evidence in astro-acheology came from a site in Venezuela, some twenty miles off the Orinoco River. Some of the possible celestial bodies identified included the Pleiades with Sirius (Fig. 45), Orion's Belt (Fig. 47) and the Full Moon (Fig. 50). Olsen believed that this knowledge was functional to an efficient agroeconomy centred on manioc cultivation. The challenge of navigation in the Caribbean and survival in the hurricane belt would have necessitated an expansion of native astronomy.
The conjunction of the pre-historic worldview, ecology and geography of the Windward Islands can justifiably locate our investigation of the Petit Bordel site in the realm of the religio-magical culture of the Saladoids, or later Arawakan stock, while being mindful of the highly visible, unique African wedge whose true origin still begs serious scientific enquiry. There is general consensus among anthropologists that petroglyphs are indicative of ritualistic sites and symbols (Rouse, Handbook 4: 507-08). Although no scientific evidence exists, it is not unreasonable to conjecture that the cup-marks at Petit Bordel may well represent a ritual site with the Soufriere volcano as the main object of ritual activities. In order to correlate ritualism with volcanicity empirically, it would be necessary to investigate the history of Soufriere itself, particularly the history of eruptions dating back to at least the early centuries A.D. However, even when dormant, the Soufriere is a daily reminder of the awesome power of nature. In times of extended activity (rumblings, lava flows etc.), the urgency to appease the gods could have extended across several generations. Further, the ritual use of volcanic rock to appease the gods who dwell in the bowels of the volcano speaks to a theory of spiritual empowerment consistent with Amerindian culture. According to Dubelaar, the cup-marks might have resulted from scouring activities designed to access directly "the elementary forces of the rock" and to partake of them by grinding parts "to a powder to be used for magical purposes" (1986: 5). Other scholars also support this view.
From their cosmology and iconography, we can conclude that both the sea and volcanoes played as central a role in the lives of Arawakan peoples as manioc, their staple food crop. Indeed, the three elements overlap in the divinity of their principal deity, Yocahu, "the Spirit of the Yuca (manioc) and the Sea", whose "logical habitation" was the volcano, at least in the Lesser Antilles (Tavares: 7; Olsen, 1935: 93-95; 118). Research conducted by Olsen and others recovered many "three-pointed" images in sculpture and glyphs, believed to be both pure artistic reproductions of the mountain-landscape as well as icons of Yocahu as God of the volcano (Kirby, Sixth Congress: 66). Although described as a benevolent deity, to locate the home of their creator god in the hellhole of a crater is a most powerful cosmological problematic. It definitely speaks to the overarching importance of the volcano in the lives of these culture groups, and of native peoples in the Lesser Antilles on a whole. All of this brings into perspective the Petit Bordel site and its relation to the Soufriere and the marine environment around. Definitely, from the trail on this promontory, there is a feeling that one is looking at a site of great specialization: either of industry or religio-magic. The paucity of cultural artefacts precludes the drawing of definite conclusions. There is a case, however, for renewed scientific study of this site, perhaps with excavation in mind. Even if this is not forthcoming, these "peculiar engravings" are monuments in their own right that cry out for development and preservation as part of the cultural heritage of all Vincentians.
Anderson, Tempest & John S. Flett. Report on the Eruptions of the Soufriere, in St Vincent, in 1902, &sc (London: Dulau and Co., 1903).
Bullen, Ripley P. & Adelaide K. Archaeological Investigations on St Vincent and the Grenadines West Indies (The William Bryant Foundation, American Studies Report Number Eight, 1972).
Dubelaar, C.N. & Jevan P. Berrang‚, "Some Recent Petroglyph Finds in Southern Guyana" in Journal of the Walter Roth Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology (Georgetown, Guyana: 1979).
Dubelaar, C.N. South American and Caribbean Petroglyphs (Holland: Foris Publictions, 1986).
Dubelaar, C.N. The Petroglyphs of the Lesser Antilles, the Virgin Islands and Trinidad (Amsterdam: 1995).
Fewkes, Jesse W. The Aborigines of Porto Rico and Neighbouring Islands (U.S.A.: Johnson Reprint Corporation, 1970).
Honeychurch, Lennox. "The Leap at Sauteurs: The Lost cosmology of indigenous Grenada" (School of Continuing Studies, the UWI: Country Conferences 2002, Internet Collection: http://www.uwichill.edu.bb/bnccde/grenada/conference/papers/LH.html): 7.
Huckerby, Thomas. "Petroglyphs of St Vincent, British West Indies," in American Anthropologist v. xvi no.2 (April-June, 1914): 238-248.
Kirby, I.A. Monuments in Stone Left by the Pre-Columbian Indians in St Vincent, West Indies (Kingstown: St Vincent Archaeological and Historical Society, 1969).
Kirby, I.A. Pre-Columbian Monuments in Stone (Kingstown: St Vincent Archaeological and Historical Society, 1975?).
Kirby, I.A. "Some Notes of Interest to Archaeology of the Antilles" in Proceedings of the Seventh International Congress for the Study of Pre-Columbian Cultures of the Lesser Antilles, (1978): 65-67.
Kirby, I.A. "The Pre-Columbian Monuments of St Vincent, West Indies" in Proceedings of the Third International Congress for the Study of Pre-Columbian Cultures of the Lesser Antilles, (1969): 114-115.
Loven, Sven. Origins of The Tainan Culture, West Indies (Goteborg: 1935).
Mendez, Eugenio F. Art and Mythology of the Taino Indians of the Greater West Indies (Puerto Rico: 1972).
Nicholson, Desmond V. "Pre-Columbian Seafaring Capabilities in the Lesser Antilles" in Proceedings of the Sixth International Congress for the Study of Pre-Columbian Cultures of the Lesser Antilles, (1978): 98-105.
Olsen, Fred. On the Trail of the Arawaks (University of Oklahoma Press, 1974).
Olsen, Fred. "Petroglyphs of the Caribbean Islands and Arawak Dieties (sic)" in Proceedings of the Fourth International Congress for the Study of Pre-Columbian Cultures of the Lesser Antilles (1973): 35-46.
Olsen, Fred. "The Arawaks - Their Art, Religion, and Science" in Proceedings of the Eight International Congress for the Study of Pre-Columbian Cultures of the Lesser Antilles (1980): 3-42.
Rouse, Irving. The Entry of Man into the West Indies (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1960).
Rouse, Irving. "The Arawaks" in Julian H. Steward (ed.) Handbook of South Amerindian Indians vol. 4: The Circum-Caribbean Tribes (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1948): 507-46.
Rouse, Irving. The Taino: Rise and Decline of the People who Greeted Columbus (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1992).
St Vincent Report, 1954 & 1955 (London: 1956)
St Vincent Report, 1964 & 1965 (London: 1967).
Sutty, Leslie. St Vincent and the Grenadines: an Introduction and Guide (London: Macmillan Education Ltd., 1997).
Tacon, Paul & Christopher Chippindale, "An archaeology of rock-art through informed methods and formal methods" in Paul Tacon & Christopher Chippindale (eds.), The Archaeology of Rock-art (U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 1998): 1-10.
Tavares, Julia. Guide to Caribbean Prehistory (Santo Domingo: Museo del Hombre Dominicano, 1978).
Walderhaug, Eva M. "Changing art in a changing society: the hunter's rock-art of western Norway," in Paul Tacon & Christopher Chippindale (eds.), The Archaeology of Rock-art (U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 1998): 285-301.
Williams, Denis. "Prehistoric Rock Art in Guyana and the Antilles" in The Tenth Annual Conference of the Association of Caribbean Historians, March-April, 1978 (Trinidad & Tobago: UWI Library Collection)
© Claudius Fergus, 2003.
HTML last revised 22nd July, 2003.
Return to Conference papers.