This study deals with images of anthropomorphic figures in rock art and geoglyph art that clearly have been depicted with a Detached Head. It focusses on two rock art sites; Miculla in the desert of southern Peru, and La Proveedora in the NW of Mexico. Both sites feature specific anthropomorphic figures that have intentionally been drawn without the heads being attached to the body. Also geoglyphs with Detached Heads (in Peru and Chile) will be discussed. It will (very tentatively) been attempted to explain the differences between the two sites, while also the (general) problem of interpretation will be considered.

By Maarten van Hoek

*

*

Detached Heads in Rock Art

The Case of La Proveedora

Maarten van Hoek

*

Introduction

To start with, in many cultures the head is considered to be the most vital part of the human body. Therefore, in rock art images of humans usually have been depicted complete with (four) limbs and one head (see however Van Hoek 2020 for many examples of polycephaly in global rock art), which all are firmly attached to the body. Instances of missing limbs (especially arms) occur more frequently, but only in very rare instances the complete head is missing. An example is the (anthropomorphic?) petroglyph recorded somewhere in Utah, USA (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Petroglyph of a headless figure at an undisclosed site, but probably in Utah, USA. Drawing © by Maarten van Hoek, based on a photograph by an author unknown to me.

It is now a fact that especially the shape of the head (and the attachments) may reveal much about certain aspects of the image. For instance, specific adornments may indicate that we are dealing with a high-status personage, or even a deity. But also gender and/or sex may become evident, like the differing shapes of the round (male) and rectangular (female) heads in Navajo images (Schaafsma 1980: Fig. 260), or the hair-style in female Pueblo figures, both present in the rock art of the SW of the USA. Thus sex can definitely be revealed by the shape of the head.

Also convincingly revealing sex are the heads of two couples of copulating anthropomorphs recorded by Jesus Gordillo Begazo (2010) on a boulder at the enormous petroglyph site of Miculla in the desert of southern Peru (Figure 2). Those two scenes unambiguously show a male and a female. However, which part of the couple is female and which is male? Although in one scene the presence of the male organ is a help, the distinction can be best made by situating the two scenes within the regional rock art context (for a full explanation of this context see Van Hoek 2016). In both cases the right-hand figure (with the Ù-shaped head) is the female.

Figure 2. Petroglyphs on a boulder at Miculla, southern Peru (the two sets are not in the relative correct position). Drawing © by Maarten van Hoek, based on an unnumbered photograph by Gordillo Begazo (2010).

However, the shape of the heads in those copulating couples not only reveals the sex of each figure, it also shows that there are two types of male heads, round (often with one single appendage) and triangular (often with several appendages). The female head is mainly “mushroom” shaped (sometimes round). However, what is most important in the context of this study, is that three (or all four?) of the heads have been drawn detached from the bodies. Again, it is the context of the regional rock art tradition that confirms that the practice to draw human heads separated from the bodies is intentional and – moreover – rather widespread. Later on I will more fully discuss the regional Miculla Style regarding the Detached Head Icon.

However, this study does not deal with rock art images depicting just detached heads in isolation (there are numerous depictions of isolated heads in rock art globally), but with anthropomorphic heads that are firmly associated with – but detached from – the nearby body. This approach also excludes “Trophy” Heads and figures (both zoomorphic and anthropomorphic) that are carrying “Trophy” Heads (images that nevertheless also firmly confirm the “vital” importance of the human head).

There are more exceptions, mainly involving doubtful or limited examples. For instance, on the summit of the rock art site of Gum Tree Valley in the Pilbara Region of western Australia, only one petroglyph of an anthropomorphic figure with a Detached Head (on Panel GTVT-90; Lorblanchet 2018: 663) is known to me. Its head is detached indeed, but only just (Figure 3A). However, in my opinion this single example (among many anthropomorphic petroglyphs) is not an instance of an intentional, meaningful detachment (the head still being in an anatomically correct spot). This Gum Tree Valley Detached Head is not a distinguishing Style Element in this area.  Moreover, images may also be unfinished. For instance, of the probably hundreds of anthropomorphic petroglyphs in the Mascota Region of Jalisco, Mexico, so far only one image – recorded at the site of Cañón del Ocotillo – seems to have been drawn fragmented with a Detached Head, although it may represent an unfinished image (Figure 3B).

Figure 3. A: Anthropomorphic figure on Panel GTVT-90 at the Gum Tree Valley Site, Australia. B: Part of the outcrop panel at the site of Cañón del Ocotillo, Mexico, showing the fragmented anthropomorphic petroglyph with apparently a detached head. Also note the possible copulation scene. Drawings © by Maarten van Hoek, A: based on an illustration in  Lorblanchet (2018: 663; Fig. 7-100); B: based on Fig. 26 in: Mountjoy (2018). Please note: all visible petroglyphs illustrated in his work have been painted-in in white (Mountjoy: 2018: 10).

There are more examples of isolated rock art images featuring a Detached Head; many possibly expressing a different symbolism. A few examples. At the rock art site of Río Caravelí in the Department of Arequipa, southern Peru, among the many anthropomorphic figures only one small anthropomorph features a Detached Head (Van Hoek 2023a: highlighted in yellow in Fig. 84B). At the “neighbouring” site of Chillihuay is a most complex, possibly anthropomorphic petroglyph that is completely fragmented and thus also the purported head is detached (Van Hoek 2025: Figure 4B). At the same site is also a completely fragmented face petroglyph (Van Hoek 2025: Fig. 5). Also at Chillihuay is the petroglyph of an anthropomorph, possibly showing Paracas influence. It has been illustrated by me twice (Van Hoek 2024: Fig. 11C and 12C) based on the inaccurate drawing by Damaso Wile Huashuayo Chávez (2022: Calco 38), as if it concerns an instance of a figure having a Detached Head. But the photo by Huashuayo Chávez (2022: Fotografía 38) shows a short, fully pecked neck linking the head to the body. This case shows how easily incorrect information is copied and published (thus also by me: Van Hoek 2024: Fig. 11C and 12C are incorrect; my apologies).

East of Chillihuay is the enormous rock art site of Toro Muerto (Majes Valley, Arequipa) with numerous petroglyphs depicting all sorts of anthropomorphic figures, where at least one Skeleton Anthropomorph seems to have a Detached Head (Van Hoek 2019a: Fig. 49.F). Some petroglyphs of Skeleton Anthropomorphs recorded at the west coast of Canada also seem to have Detached Heads or (when the head-contour is missing) detached faces (Van Hoek 2019a: Fig. 24.A-B-C).

The numerous pictographs recorded at the enormous rock art complex of Brandberg, NW Namibia, Africa, include many images of anthropomorphs that are (almost) fully fragmented (Ernst Rudolf Scherz called them “Menschendarstellungen mit ‘abgetrennten’ Gliedern” [1986: Abb. 96]). This means that (sometimes) feet, lower legs, upper legs, bodies, buttocks, shoulders and arms are all painted separately (see for instance: Lenssen-Erz and Erz 2000: Fig. 78). Yet, only very rarely such figures also show a Detached Head and thus it is not likely that these scarce instances picture a (regional) tradition (but it is not impossible).

The same is true for the two (possibly three) petroglyphs of fragmented anthropomorphs on outcrop Panel ARQn-082 at Ariquilda, Quebrada de Aroma, northern Chile (Figure 4). The heads and the arms are clearly intentionally drawn in a detached position (and possibly the badly visible legs as well). However, these  three images are the only examples known to me to have been recorded at Ariquilda (or – as far as could check – anywhere else in the Atacama), and thus those three examples are not a case of a regional tradition; not even of a local custom.

Figure 4. Panel ARQn-082 at Ariquilda, northern Chile, showing the three (?) petroglyphs of anthropomorphs with a Detached Head; best visible in the detail photo: #1. Note the circle on each thorax. Photograph © by Maarten van Hoek; detail photograph © by Mike McQueen.

A final example that I would like to present has been recorded for the first time by Mario Giorgetta at a complex of panels with numerous rock paintings at a site near Vilama (north of San Pedro de Atacama in northern Chile). There are many anthropomorphic images at this site, but only one is fragmented. The spotted body is not outlined, and the arms (one carrying a “Trophy” Head?) and the legs and the head are detached (Figure 5). But again, it does not involve a local or regional tradition.

Figure 5. Pictograph panel near Vilama, northern Chile. Photographs © by Mario Giorgetta.

*

The Tradition of the Detached Head

So far it seems that there are no regions with a Detached Head Tradition. However, without claiming that I have scanned the (rock) art of every region globally, it is certain that some areas may claim to have a tradition of intentionally depicting anthropomorphs with a Detached Head. The first area involves the enormous concentration of geoglyphs near Nasca and Palpa in coastal southern Peru. Although geoglyphs are officially by no means a form of rock art, they certainly represent an art form that is often mirrored in the regional rock art. Especially the geoglyph art near the town of Palpa yields some most interesting examples of fragmented anthropomorphic figures, most of them also having a Detached Head (Figures 6 and 7A).

Figure 6. Geoglyphs near Palpa, southern Peru. Photograph © by Maarten van Hoek.

Figure 7. A: Geoglyphs near Palpa, southern Peru. B: Geoglyphs in the Lluta Valley of northern Chile (relative position incorrect). Drawings © by Maarten van Hoek, A: based on an illustration by SV-Arqueólogos – Arequipa (Facebook); B: based on Google Earth.

Many of the geoglyphs near Palpa – most likely having been created by the Formative Period Paracas Culture – have also been drawn without arms, while sometimes the legs are fragmented. In one case (Figure 7A) an anthropomorphic geoglyph seems to carry an object (a “Trophy” Head?) in the only “hand” it has (was that arm added later?), while two more possible “Trophy” Heads are in isolated positions to its right (left for an observer). “Trophy” Heads are abundant in Paracas iconography (especially in textiles, geoglyphs and – to a lesser extent – in rock art).

Surprisingly, the custom in Palpa geoglyph art to draw segmented figures, and to often include Detached Heads, has not been repeated in the regional rock art (which is most abundant in the Paracas-Nasca Territory). For instance, at the extensive rock art site of Huancor (located at the northern end of the Paracas-Nasca Territory), Núñez Jiménez (1986: Fig. 1651) includes a simple anthropomorphic petroglyph with a circle representing a Detached Head. However, its layout cannot be compared with Palpa geoglyph art. Moreover, I have not seen this petroglyph during the several surveys by my wife Elles and me at Huancor. Therefore, the drawing by Núñez Jiménez may well be inaccurate or even incorrect. Unfortunately, at least 25 % of all his illustrations in his 1986-book are inaccurate, incomplete or incorrect (see Van Hoek 2011 for a lengthy – and still incomplete! – account of  his [unintended!] flaws).

More interesting is a small, yet complex petroglyph on Panel HCR-S-047A at Huancor. I concur with Núñez Jiménez who correctly argues that the horizontally arranged anthropomorphic figure seems to be in a floating or flying position, while wearing a triangular, fully pecked mantle, the whole suggested by Núñez Jiménez to belong to the Paracas Culture (1986: Fig. 1759). What is more important, is that an outlined, fully frontally depicted  head (having facial features and hair or headgear) is clearly detached from the body, while its (fully pecked) neck is still attached to the chin area of the head (Figure 8). South of Huancor there are only very few, isolated instances of anthropomorphs with a Detached Head in the rock art of the Paracas-Nasca Territory. Two examples are the petroglyphs at La Caseta (Núñez Jiménez 1986: Fig. 1827) and at La Cabañita (Núñez Jiménez 1986: Fig. 1991), both sites near the town of Palpa. Concluding, there is not a Detached Head Tradition in the rock art of the Paracas Territory.

Figure 8. Petroglyphs on Panel HCR-S-047A at Huancor, southern Peru. Photograph © by Maarten van Hoek.

*

The Case of Miculla

The Formative Period Paracas Geoglyph Tradition near Palpa to create large, arm-less, fragmented anthropomorphic geoglyphs, seems to be paralleled in the geoglyph art of the Lluta Valley in the extreme north of Chile. However, it is (almost) certain that there is no cultural or graphical relationship between the two cultures, located some 685 km distant and hundreds of years apart. Thus, diffusion between the two areas is possible, but most unlikely. There are several panels with Detached Head geoglyphs in the Lluta Valley. Figure 7B shows two examples of such huge (armless!) anthropomorphic geoglyphs (about 55 m in height); both clearly having a Detached Head (also notice the detached feet or shoes), while  also the adjacent fox (or dog?) geoglyph features a Detached Head; a true exception. As far as I could check, there are no exact parallels in the rock art of the Lluta Valley, nor in valleys further south.

However, certain aspects of the Lluta Geoglyphs (the Detached Head and having no arms), are paralleled in the Miculla Rock Art Tradition. Miculla is an enormous petroglyph site (with only boulders) in the far south of Peru (63 km north of the Lluta Geoglyphs; see Figure 11) where numerous petroglyphs of camelids have been manufactured, but also many anthropomorphs. Various of those anthropomorphs show the Detached Head and/or are armless. Several images have been illustrated in my 2024-book about Miculla. It concerns (mainly male or sexless) figures apparently playing a wind instrument (Van Hoek 2024: Fig. 24 and 25), or holding a bow-and-arrow (Van Hoek 2024: Fig. 28); a figure that holds a “snake” in each hand; at least two petroglyphs of personages with snakes attached to the armpits (Van Hoek 2024: Fig. 43B); figures that seem to be copulating (see Figure 2) or dancing (Van Hoek 2024: Fig. 39B); at least one one-armed figure; and a rafter (Van Hoek 2024: Fig. 33C). Several female figures  clearly have a Detached Head (see also Figure 2) and/or are armless (Van Hoek 2024: Fig. 21 and 25).

Figure 9. A simple anthropomorph, a complex figure and a small (male) archer; all showing a Detached Head (Boulder MIN-026 at Miculla). Photographs © by Maarten van Hoek.

The following drainages (see Figure 11) have rock art sites that belong to the Miculla Rock Art Style Group. Most of them feature examples of  anthropomorphs with a Detached Head: the Locumba Drainage (forming the northernmost limit of the Miculla Rock Art Style); the Sama Drainage with the rock art sites of Coropuro (Van Hoek 2021: Figs 4 and 10A) and Anajiri; the Caplina Drainage (Peru) with Miculla (see also Figure 2), Challatita and Capilla de Lluta; the Lluta Drainage (Chile) with its geoglyphs (see Figure 7B) and the rock art site of Rosario (see Figure 15); The Azapa Valley with – for instance – Las Animas; the Codpa Drainage with Calaunsa, Ofragía and La Ladera; and – finally – the Camarones Drainage (forming the southernmost limit of the Miculla Rock Art Style) with Taltape and Huancarane (Figure 10). However, each drainage has several more rock art sites belonging to the Miculla Rock Art Style Group.

Figure 10. Archers apparently fighting each other; one with a Detached Head, recorded at the rock art site of Huancarane in the northern branch of the Camarones Drainage. Drawing © by Maarten van Hoek, based on an illustration by Niemeyer and Schiappacasse (1963: Fig. 13d).

Figure 11. Map showing a selection of rock art sites featuring the  Miculla Rock Art Style. The yellow squares approximately mark the sites where Miculla Style Detached Head petroglyphs have been recorded. The blue square marks the location of the Lluta Valley Geoglyphs. Map © by Maarten van Hoek, based on the Map © by OpenStreetMap-Contributors.

The area where the Miculla Rock Art Style predominates, covers a huge area of about 220 km from north to south, stretching from the Locumba Drainage (Peru) via Miculla to the northernmost branch of the Camarones Drainage (Chile). This expanse strongly contrasts with the relatively small area in NW Mexico where the rock art site of La Proveedora (only 9 km²) features some instances of enigmatic anthropomorphic petroglyphs having a Detached Head.

*

The Case of La Proveedora

La Proveedora – a huge rock art complex (yet concentrated on a surface of only 9 km²) – is located on an isolated rocky hill near the town of Caborca in the NW of Mexico, roughly 180 km inland. The hillock (estimated by me to be about 250 m in height) has numerous petroglyphs on many outcrops and boulders, most of which (but not all) have extensively been discussed and illustrated by Dominique Ballereau (1988). The rock art at La Proveedora is mainly characterised by numerous petroglyphs depicting quadrupeds (most purportedly pregnant), relatively many turtles, as well as abundant abstract motifs and (often most complex) geometric patterns (see for instance Figure 13; for more details see Ballereau 1988).

The site also has several small, fully pecked anthropomorphic figures, showing very little detail (but sometimes with a simple circle representing the head), as well as a small group of often much larger personages (some of them most likely male, judged by a small phallic element in some figures), often with only the head outlined. There are several types of those complex anthropomorphic figures (mainly distinguished by the shape of the head and its appendages), one of which is the subject of this study.

It concerns frontally depicted images with thin lines representing the arms and legs (often showing digits) and thin, pecked bodies that in only a few cases are outlined. The relatively large, outlined heads usually feature a mouth (sometimes indicated by two short, parallel lines [lips?]), two eyes (sometimes with eyebrows) and a nose. However, each facial element may be absent. Ballereau illustrates at least eleven of such figures, five of which clearly show the Detached Head. Some other figures (one superimposed) may be related and possibly imbued with the same symbolism. But there are a few more (often only slightly different) petroglyphs (not recorded by Ballereau) that also have a Detached Head.

In several instances the head is still attached to the (fully pecked) body, but – important in view of this study – in at least seven cases the Detached Head is clearly hovering a short distance over the (sometimes outlined) body (see Figure 14). In those cases, a small pecked area attached to the chin area of the Detached Head may represent the neck. In a few petroglyphs the neck is still connected by a relatively long line to the body (symbolising blood, or part of the spine?), as if the head is being pulled off, but not completely (Figures 12C and D).

Figure 12. Petroglyphs of anthropomorphs at La Proveedora with a Detached Head (A and B) or with the head “being pulled out” (C and D). Photographs © by Earl Maynard.

It is unknown to me what may explain the meaning of the Detached Head of those anthropomorphs at La Proveedora. It may be local custom to “just” draw a complete image with a Detached Head. However, in at least two cases (Figures 13 and 14-3) the head is positioned in such an “awkward” position that it seems to rather depict a severed head, or – the whole – perhaps a complete dead person.

Figure 13. Petroglyph of an anthropomorph with a Detached Head at La Proveedora. Photograph © by Earl Maynard.

Figure 14. Petroglyphs of anthropomorphs at La Proveedora with a Detached Head. Photographs © by Earl Maynard.

There seems to be another indication that we are dealing with deceased persons here. Several of those Detached Head figures have small circular pecked areas enhancing the knee-joints and in some cases the elbow-joints (indicated by the arrows in Figures 13 and 14).

A similar custom is seen at several petroglyphs depicting the “Carcancha” (the Skeleton-Anthropomorph) in the rock art of the Majes Region in southern Peru (fully discussed in: Van Hoek 2013). Yet, apart from the Detached Head and the enhanced joints, the La Proveedora anthropomorphs do not show any other indication of depicting dead people, like skeletal ribs and/or a sternum. I claim that the Majes “Carcanchas” functioned as Sacred Messengers to the ancestors residing on the summit of Coropuna, the Sacred Volcano of the area. In contrast, the La Proveedora personages more likely express a more mundane symbolism.

There namely are a few scanty indications that either a personal fight took place locally, or that a regional conflict once occurred in the area. At La Proveedora there are several bow-shaped petroglyphs (comparable with a similar bow-shaped petroglyph in Figure 1), often associated with large pecked roughly triangular shapes that might represent quivers (my interpretation). As far as I know, the “bow-and-quiver” may even be a motif that is exclusive to La Proveedora. In one case an apparently male individual is surrounded by three “bow-and-quiver” petroglyphs (one “quiver” [intentionally?] linked by a thin line to the person’s neck), while on the panel next to it is a locally unique (?) image of an (unfinished?) figure with a Detached Head (Figure 12A – left-hand top corner) that is shaped like the goggle-eyed Tlaloc Head (Tlaloc was an important Rain God in ancient Mexico), which is characteristic for the rock art in a much larger area in the SW of the USA and in the north of Mexico.

At least one person with a Detached Head at La Proveedora is clearly associated with a simple bow-and-arrow petroglyph (Figure 12B), while two other anthropomorphic figures – of a different type, though – seem to have the (still attached) head pierced by an arrow. Another anthropomorphic figure (of the Detached Head Type having a thin line between the neck and the body) seems to hold an axe in one hand, while the other hand is associated with a “bow-and-quiver” petroglyph (Figure 12C); a warrior perhaps? There are a few more images of anthropomorphs with a thin line between the neck and the body (Figure 12C and D). In my opinion, all those features may symbolise death or a conflict. It may namely be important that at La Proveedora – despite the large number of petroglyphs depicting quadrupeds, of isolated bows and of “bow-and-quiver” images – no hunting scenes have so far been recorded. Instead, the “pregnant-looking” quadrupeds seem to express fertility, rather than death. And perhaps it is this (possible) contrast that conveys a life-death symbolism at La Proveedora. But of course this all is my subjective interpretation, an issue to which I will return.

*

Conclusions

In order to prepare this study I have scanned literally thousands and  thousands of illustrations  showing rock art images from all around the world (but definitely not all; I certainly will have missed many). As a result I tentatively would like to conclude that rock art images of anthropomorphic figures clearly showing a Detached Head are either very rare or – in certain areas – even absent. For instance, in her lavishly illustrated book about Indian rock art of the Southwest (USA) Polly Schaafsma offers only one image of a personage with a clearly Detached Head (1980: Fig. 205). Also in the rock art of Utah (USA) and the Hawai‘i Islands (Lee and Stasack 1999: for instance Figs. 3.30, 3.31, 3.48, 3.51 and 6.11) only a few instances of anthropomorphs with a Detached Head occur, but too few and too widely scattered to represent a regional tradition or local specialty. If, in any case, the Detached Head really stood out in a rock art region, it would probably have been noticed by a rock art researcher.

It also seems that – as far as I could check – the distinctive La Proveedora Detached Head Icon did not diffuse to other “nearby” rock art regions (like the Hohokam Rock Art Region further north; see also Figure 3B for an isolated, yet dissimilar example in the Jalisco Region of mountainous west Mexico, south of La Proveedora). Much further south, in Nicaragua, I know of only one unambiguous petroglyph of an (obviously female) anthropomorphic figure depicted with a Detached Head. It has been recorded at the rock art site of El Retablo de “El Güiste” (Hildeberto 1965: Page 122; Fig. 7). Again it clearly represents no local or regional tradition.

Also at other Mexican rock art regions relatively “near” La Proveedora, like Chihuahua in northern Mexico, I could find only one example of a rock art image of a person with a Detached Head (Schaafsma 1997: Fig. 17b). Yet it may be important that this figure seems to be engaged in a fight (although Schaafsma argues that they are hunters [which – although no animals are involved in the scene – is possible, of course]).

So far this study could only distinguish one area with unambiguously a regional tradition to draw rock art images of anthropomorphs with a Detached Head. It concerns the Miculla Rock Art Style in the north of the Atacama in South America (see Figure 11), where relatively many examples have been recorded. Especially (always male!) flute-players and archers are involved (Figure 15; the appendage from the belt-area is part of the attire; it is not a phallus), as well as “scenes” that clearly distinguish between males and females (Figure 16; see also Figure 2).

Remarkably, some female figures with a Detached Head (mainly [only?] present at Miculla) have intentionally been drawn without arms; a custom that is reflected in the Geoglyph Art of the “nearby” Lluta Valley (see Figure 7B). Other armless geoglyphs have been recorded in the much earlier Paracas Geoglyph Art near Palpa in southern Peru (see Figure 7A), but I am convinced that those (often fragmented) geoglyphs express a different symbolism. Moreover, similar (intentionally) armless figures or persons unambiguously depicted with a Detached Head, are not present in the regional (Paracas-Nasca) rock art.

Figure 15.  Petroglyphs of anthropomorphs with a Detached Head at Rosario in the Lluta Valley. A: Panel ROS-014; B: Panel ROS-027B. Drawings © by Maarten van Hoek.

Figure 16. Part of Boulder MIN-041 at Miculla. Anthropomorphs of the Miculla Rock Art Style with a round head can be male or female (shooting an arrow at a female may symbolise the fertilising of the woman; see Van Hoek 2019b). Photograph © by Rainer Hostnig.

The large area where the Miculla Rock Art Style is found (see Figure 11), strongly contrasts with the relatively miniscule space that the rock art site of La Proveedora in NW Mexico occupies (9 km² against 15 km² for Miculla alone). It thus proves that the custom to draw personages with a Detached Head at La Proveedora represents a most localised “tradition”, with, moreover (compared with the Miculla Tradition), only an extremely limited number of rock art images featuring the Detached Head.

This may indicate that the Miculla images with a Detached Head represent “just” a matter of a drawing style (thus possibly without expressing a specific meaning), while the examples at La Proveedora seem to communicate some specific cultural, possibly religious or bellicose message (despite their limited numbers).

La Proveedora is also the only site – that I know of – where this type of anthropomorph has been recorded and, moreover, where only two of those figures show the Detached Head intentionally located at an “impossible”, “awkward-looking” spot, clearly separated some distance from the body (see Figures 13 and 14-3). Thus, their positions cannot be explained as bloopers. Positioning the Detached Head that far from the body must have been an intentional choice. It rather convincingly symbolises death. And although there are no confrontation-scenes involving anthropomorphs at La Proveedora, it is still possible that these Detached Head figures (and some other personages and objects [the bows, for instance]) represent signs of violence in the region. Further research may reveal more background information and details, but interpretation will often be an impassable barrier, and often a matter of debate and controversy.

*

The Problem of Interpretation

Indeed, almost every explanatory study discussing rock art images will often be frustrated by the problem of interpretation. Western scientists (including academic archaeologists) often jump at conclusions that cannot be corroborated. Several examples of such – in my opinion – unscientific and dubious interpretations have been described by me earlier (Van Hoek 2023b: 6-10). Moreover, without reliable informed knowledge we only have the image itself, the local and regional rock art context, and – if present – the often scant archaeological data (objects, textiles, ceramics etc.) that may help us to reveal the meaning of an image.

Making interpretation even more difficult, is the fact that many rock art images have been damaged (by natural causes [like weathering and erosion] and/or anthropic factors [like vandalism]) and thus photographs (even excellent ones) and – even more so – drawings (which in fact are interpretations as well) may show the image different to what the prehistoric artist has in fact manufactured. Thus especially details may have been blurred or destroyed. And often it is the detail that matters when it comes to interpreting a rock art image. In this study I now will describe two examples that show that some of my earlier published readings may be erroneous. Thus also my interpretations of the Detached Head at La Proveedora may be wrong.

Figure 17. A: petroglyph at Lunche, San Juan Valley, southern Peru. B: Petroglyph at Bou Oudrouc, High Atlas, Morocco. Drawings © by Maarten van Hoek, A: based on a photograph in a video by Cristofer Quispe; B: based on a drawing by Alain Rodrigue (1999: Page 253).

*

The Case of Lunche

In his video called: Los Petroglifos de Lunche, Cristofer Quispe included a photograph of a most complex anthropomorphic figure (recorded by him at a rock art site about 10 km east of Huancor in southern Peru; a site that we never checked in the field). Based on his photo I made and published a B&W drawing of this figure (Van Hoek 2023a: Fig. 90E). It (then) proved to have a Detached Head (Figure 17A). However, checking the correctness of my drawing when preparing this study, I noticed a small dot that just possibly connects the head with the body. That dot does not show in my drawing, and thus my drawing may be incorrect, although my reading may still be correct. In my opinion the figure still depicts a high-status warrior, as it seems to hold a spear-thrower in one hand (an atlatl) and (a group of) spears in the other hand. Depicted this way the figure seems to be related with the Andean Staff God or – to be more precise – the Decapitator God, which – if I am correct – may have triggered the manufacturer to separate the head and headgear from the body. However, similar complex petroglyphs at nearby Huancor (some with a “Trophy” Head) do not show the Detached Head.

*

The Case of Bou Oudrouc

The second example is more complicated. It again concerns a petroglyph (found on the Yagour Plateau of southern Morocco) that we have not seen during our surveys in the High Atlas. A drawing of the image – found at the rock art site of Bou Oudrouc on the Yagour Plateau in the High Atlas – has been published by rock art researcher Alain Rodrique from France. It depicts a most complex anthropomorphic figure surrounded by pointed daggers and some other petroglyphs (Rodrigue 1999: Page 253). At first sight the head seems to be missing. Moreover, at the spot of the missing neck and head is a gaping hole (highlighted in blue in Figure 17B). Importantly, hovering over that opening is an oval-shaped element with a rather long extension (highlighted in brown in Figure 17B), which represents – in my opinion – a possible body part (Van Hoek 2019a: 76). It thus might be a Detached Head, and the whole image might be interpreted as an anthropomorph that has been decapitated (during a conflict?); the knives and the (externally) exposed ribs also hinting at violence.

However, in the photos that I have, I could not spot the two dots (details!) that Rodrigue included in his drawing (the two light-green dots in Figure 17B), which could be seen as eyes. Thus, if indeed there are not two dots, then the impression of a head becomes less plausible. Interpretation of that oval-shaped element (brown in Figure 17B) and thus of the whole “scene” becomes even more problematic when it proves that such oval-shaped elements are found in isolation as well, for instance at Oukaimeden; another important site in the High Atlas (see for instance Rodrigue 1999: Pages 146 and 161).

Importantly, Rodrigue (1999: Fig. 12-II) interprets such oval-shaped elements as axes. If that is correct, then the oval-shaped element (#1 in Figure 17B) could well be the instrument used to decapitate the anthropomorph (after having been killed by a dagger?). But if that is the case, then the head is absent. And if that is indeed the case, then my earlier interpretation would be incorrect (Van Hoek 2019a: 76; Fig. 52A).

But if the oval-shaped element is not an axe, it may well be interpreted as a severed head or a “Trophy” Head; the long extension possibly being part of the spine or neck. Importantly, the anthropomorph has a second oval-shaped element dangling from its right hand (#2), which could (again) be interpreted as either an axe (which I doubt) or as a “Trophy” Head.

However, there are several petroglyphs of such isolated (not-associated) oval-shaped elements at sites in the High Atlas (for instance at Oukaimeden; Rodrigue 1999: Page 146) that – in my opinion – are most doubtful candidates to depict an axe, in particular because the handles are of different lengths, or are too much curved to be handled with ease. Also, the handles are often too short in relation to the often “too” large blades, that – moreover – do not have a standard size or shape. Moreover, High Atlas petroglyphs of actual axes, arrows and daggers are drawn realistically and have a more or less standard shape (with straight hafts, for example), while the oval-shaped element, and especially its appendage, do not appear to represent a realistic axe (see for instance Rodrigue 1999: Page 148; O-II-30).

In only one case I know of a combination of an oval element superimposed by (or upon) a true axe petroglyph. We recorded it just east of the village of Oukaimeden in the High Atlas (Figure 18). Now I tentatively would like to interpret this combination as a “Trophy” Head (the oval-shaped element) severed from the (missing) body by the axe. Concluding, only when convincing archaeological evidence will be put forward (like an excavated object shaped like the oval-shaped rock art image) then I would be willing to accept that the oval-shaped element represents an axe. If not, then my interpretation of a severed head or a “Trophy” Head is as good as any other reading. This example demonstrates how difficult interpretation can be.

Figure 18. The petroglyphs on Panel O-II-51 – M 102i at Site II, Oukaimeden, High Atlas, Morocco (the broad V-shaped groove most likely is not part of the combination). Photographs and drawing © by Maarten van Hoek, the drawing (rotated and slightly altered) based on the drawing by Rodrigue (1999: Page 150; O-II-51 – M 102i).

*

Final Conclusions

The Miculla Rock Art Tradition convincingly demonstrates that the Detached Head Style is a premeditated way to draw anthropomorphic figures. It is seen in a large number of definite male figures (purported flute players, [confronting] archers and some other male-gendered persons) as well as (often armless) female figures (like the ones engaged in a copulation scene) and unsexed figures with a Detached Head and with snakes attached to the armpits, thus replacing the arms. Also important is the fact that the Miculla Rock Art Tradition is found in a very large area. In contrast, at La Proveedora, Mexico, I sketched a situation of a very small number of anthropomorphic petroglyphs with a Detached Head, involving moreover only possibly male and unsexed figures. Those figures may be conflict-related and may express dead or dying persons. Finally, this study demonstrates that – in general – the Detached Head is a rare phenomenon globally and that it is often very hard to correctly interpret in each case.

*

Acknowledgements

Above all I am much obliged to rock art researcher Earl Maynard for his kind permission to use his photographs of La Proveedora that he generously shared with me. I am also grateful to Rainer Hostnig from Cusco, Peru, for sharing with me numerous photographs of Miculla; as well as Mike McQueen and Mario Giorgetta for their permission to use their photos. I also thank archaeologist Gordillo Begazo from Tacna, Peru, for confirming the authenticity of the petroglyphs on Boulder MIU-032 shown in Figure 2 (now at display at the Miculla Site Museum [among many fakes]). Finally, as ever I am grateful to my wife Elles for her assistance during our surveys at Miculla and many other sites in the Desert Andes (like Huancor, Rosario and Ariquilda) and in the High Atlas of Morocco, as well for her ongoing support at home.*

References

Ballereau, D. 1988. El arte rupestre en Sonora: petroglifos en Caborca. Trace. Vol. 14; pp. 5 – 72; CEMCA. Mexico.

Gordillo Begazo, J. 2010. Petroglifos de Miculla. Magia, Arte y Cultura. (Resumen práctico para su difusión). Tacna. Internet paper – no longer available.

Hildeberto, M. 1965. Estas piedras hablan. Estudio preliminar del arte rupestre en Nicaragua. Nigaragua, Editorial Hospicio.

Huashuayo Chávez, D. W. 2022. Ubicación, identificación e importancia de los petroglifos de Chilliguay 1 Sector “D” del Distrito de Río Grande de la Provincia de Condesuyos-Arequipa. B.A. Thesis. Universidad Católica de Santa María, Arequipa, Perú.

Lee, G. and E. Stasack. Spirit of Place: Petroglyphs of Hawai‘i. Easter Island Foundation. Los Osos, California.

Lenssen-Erz, T. and M-T. Erz. 2000. Brandberg. Der Bildberg Namibias. Kunst und Geschichte einer Urlandschaft. Jan Thorbecke Verlag, Stuttgart.

Lorblanchet, M. 2018. The Summit of Gum Tree Valley. In: Archaeology and Petroglyphs of Dampier (Western Australia), an Archaeological Investigation of Skew Valley and Gum Tree Valley, ed. Graeme K. Ward and Ken Mulvaney, chapter 7, with addenda by Jacques Evin and George Kendrick, pp. 557 – 668. Technical Reports of the Australian Museum, Online. Vol. 27; pp. 1 – 690.

Mountjoy, J. B. 2018. Los petroglifos del valle de Mascota, Jalisco. Descripción, análisis e interpretación. Universidad de Guadalajara; Puerto Vallarta, Jalisco, México.

Niemeyer, H. and V. Schiappacasse. 1963. Investigaciones arqueológicas en las terrazas de Conanoxa, Valle de Camarones. In: Revista Universitaria. Vol. 48; pp. 101 – 166; Santiago, Chile.

Schaafsma, P. 1980. Indian Rock Art of the Southwest. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Schaafsma, P. 1997. Rock Art Sites in Chihuahua, Mexico. Office of archaeological studies; Archaeology Notes 171. Museum of New Mexico. Santa Fe.

Scherz, E. R. 1986. Felsbilder in Südwest Afrika. Teil III: Die Malereien. Köln, Wien.

Van Hoek, M. 2013. The Carcancha and the Apu. Rock Art in the Death Valley of the Andes. Oisterwijk, The Netherlands. Book available at DropBox (PDF-002).

Van Hoek, M. 2016. It’s all about the head: Morphological basis for cephalic differences in male and female anthropomorphic imagery in Desert Andes rock art. Expression. Vol. 11; pp. 76 – 81.

Van Hoek, M. 2018. The Saluting Anthropomorph in the Rock Art of the Americas. In: TRACCE – Online Rock Art Bulletin, Italy.

Van Hoek, M. 2019a. The Book of Bones – ‘Carcanchas’ in Global Rock Art. Oisterwijk, Holland. Book available as PDF at Academia and DropBox (PDF-050).

Van Hoek, M. 2019b. The Book of Bows – The Archer in Desert Andes Rock Art. Oisterwijk, Holland. Book available as PDF at DropBox (PDF-104)

Van Hoek, M. 2021. Petroglyphs and a New Geoglyph in the Sama Valley – Tacna, Peru. In: TRACCE – Online Rock Art Bulletin, Italy.

Van Hoek, M. 2020. The Book of Janus. Polycephalic Creatures in Rock Art. Oisterwijk, Holland. Book available as PDF at DropBox (PDFva-007).

Van Hoek. M. 2023a. “Trophy” Heads in the Rock Art of North and South America”. Book available as PDF at Academia and DropBox (PDF-018).

Van Hoek, M. 2023b. Majes Rock Art: Evaluating Scaffidi’s 2018-Thesis. In: TRACCE – Online Rock Art Bulletin, Italy.

Van Hoek, M. 2024. A Petroglyph Panel at Chillihuay (Ocoña Drainage – Peru) within a larger context. In: TRACCE – Online Rock Art Bulletin, Italy.