This study deals with the rock art site of Peekaboo, one of the many rock art sites in Salt Creek Canyon, Central Utah, USA. The site not only has layers of interesting pictographs, the spot is also part of a natural landscape that in my opinion is considered by the prehistoric peoples to be gendered. Several natural features very near the rock art site may have been interpreted as male and female.

By Maarten van Hoek

*

*

Peekaboo

a Female-Male Rock Art Site

Salt Creek Canyon, Utah, USA

*

*

Maarten van Hoek

*

Introduction

Salt Creek Canyon probably houses the greatest concentration of rock art sites in the Needles District of Central Utah, USA (Figure 1). One of those sites is Peekaboo; a small but interesting rock art site featuring several layers of pictographs. Remarkably, the site is only very briefly described by Kenneth Castleton (1987: 274; Fig. 8.11), and the book by Dennis Slifer (2000: 109 – 110; Fig. 95) offers other useful information about the area. My wife Elles and I visited the site during an extremely hot summer in July 2005 (as well as the Newspaper Rock and several other rock art sites in Indian Creek and Shay Canyon). Although the creation of the pictographs immediately created a cultural landscape, this study does not deal so much with Peekaboo rock art itself, instead it focusses on specific features of the natural landscape of the pictograph site, which – in my opinion – became part of a gendered landscape in a special way.

*

The Peekaboo Pictographs

What immediately catches the eye are the two long lines of white (splashed) dots, running parallel to the surface of the rock shelter. The shorter row (yellow arrow in Figure 2) has been superimposed upon a much older, much faded pictograph of a red-painted anthropomorph of the Barrier Canyon Style (Figure 3). Below the longer line (green arrow in Figure 2) are two shield-like designs (also painted in white) that have – in my opinion – incorrectly been interpreted as “turtles” by Kenneth Castleton (1987: 274). It is more likely that they represent “shield-figures”, as suggested by Dennis Slifer (2000: Fig. 95). Indeed, the figure to the left is clearly anthropomorphic (Figure 4). What is only occasionally mentioned are some other pictographs (mainly painted in red) that are superimposed by the “shields-dots” group. Very faintly visible are at least a small animal, a “sitting” anthropomorphic figure, another Barrier Canyon Style figure and some more, almost unrecognisable pictographs. Other pictographs at Peekaboo include images of (painted or sprayed) handprints (see Figures 2 and 5).

Figure 1. Location of Peekaboo, Utah, USA. Maps © by Maarten van Hoek and © by OpenStreetMap – Contributors, the detail map based on Google Earth.

Figure 2. The pictograph site of Peekaboo, Utah, USA. Note the sprayed handprint at the far left (see also Figure 5). Photograph © by Maarten van Hoek.

Figure 3. Pictograph superimposed by the shorter of the two lines of white dots; Peekaboo, Utah, USA. Photographs © by Maarten van Hoek (the right-hand picture has been digitally enhanced by me). Location indicated with the yellow arrow in Figure 2.

Figure 4. The two shield-figure pictographs at Peekaboo, Utah, USA. Location indicated with the green arrow in Figure 2. Note the “sitting” anthropomorphic figure in between the two shield-figures (of Anasazi manufacture) and the small quadruped above it. At the top of the photo a large Barrier Canyon Style anthropomorphic figure (partially painted in yellow) is just visible, as is the (probably also anthropomorphic) figure (decorated with vertical lines) just to the right of the right-hand shield-figure. Photograph © by Maarten van Hoek.

Figure 5. The pictograph site of Peekaboo, Utah, USA. Note the white-sprayed handprints and the rows of red-painted hands. Photograph © by Maarten van Hoek.

*

The Natural-Cultural Landscape

Salt Creek Canyon is an amazing maze; a confusing labyrinth created by the meandering (yet often dry) river that sculptured often bizarre rock formations of red and white sandstones, including some natural stone arches. The meander we are interested in (see Figure 1; detail map) encloses a long but thin and high ridge of red sandstone, often capped by a thinner layer of white sandstone. The ridge is broken into several individual blocks and pillars. The rock art is only found on the lower parts of the NE facing panels of the ridge. To the NE the pictograph panels overlook the rugged landscape of Salt Creek Canyon and the narrow dirt track that follows the rough Trail Arch Route in the canyon, which is accessible from the north only with a 4×4 or on foot. But this study will demonstrate that also the natural landscape immediately to the SE seems to be part of the cultural landscape of the prehistoric peoples who created the rock art, even though we did not see rock art in that part of the meander (south of the ridge).

Because the pictographs are (as far as I know) only found in a very shallow rock shelter at the north side of the ridge (see Figure 2), the probably intentional decision to only manufacture pictographs at the north side, created an illuminated (south) side and a dark rock art-related side (being in the protective shade).

But the high sandstone ridge and the surrounding natural landscape offer more contrasts that have – in my opinion – intentionally been culturally incorporated without changing the natural landscape. Most impressive is the disparity between an (inverted!) V-shaped opening (white NE- pointing arrow in Figure 1) located directly to the SE of the pictograph panels (yellow SW-pointing arrow in Figure 1) and the enormous pillar (marked “1” in Figure 1) towering almost right above the opening in the ridge (Figure 6). The huge pillar of red sandstone – capped by a bigger portion of white sandstone (another contrast) – definitely looks like a huge erect phallus. Importantly, the V-shaped opening (big enough for an adult to walk through) is possibly not a natural arch, as the flanking stone surfaces are not smooth and rounded (like in wind- or waterworn arches) but angular. It is possible that prehistoric peoples noticed a small opening or a weak spot in the wall and enlarged it, intentionally creating a V-shaped opening (to serve as an inverted vulva?).

Figure 6. Photo showing the big contrast between the huge, naturally phallus-shaped pillar and the relatively small V-shaped opening (symbolising a vulva?) in the ridge at Peekaboo, looking NW. Photograph © by Maarten van Hoek.

But there is more. Looking through the V-shaped opening from the north, interesting “framed” landscapes to the south of the ridge can be observed. However, it depends on the angle with which one looks through the hole which part of the natural landscape south of the ridge is revealed (Figure 7). Also notice that the shape of the frame changes with the angle of observation. The rock formation in the left-hand frame seems to mimic the shape of the frame.

Figure 7. Two views through the opening in the ridge at Peekaboo, looking south towards another ridge. Note the different shapes of the opening. Photograph © by Maarten van Hoek.

Another natural feature in Figure 7 is possibly also linked with the rock art site. It concerns a roughly phallus-shaped pillar in the centre of the right-hand photo of Figure 7 (feature “3” in Figure 1). It is not that obvious, because it almost merges with the larger rock formation directly to its west (right). Only a very narrow slit separates the two rocks (part of a longer ridge similar to the ridge with the rock art).

Figure 8. The freestanding phallus-shaped pillar #2 at Peekaboo, looking SW. Low-quality photograph, made with a digital video-camera © by Maarten van Hoek.

However, there is another freestanding pillar (again of red sandstone with a white sandstone cap) only a very short distance further west (yet not visible in Figure 7; feature “2” in Figure 1) that again is clearly phallus-shaped. Yet, also this pillar is visible through the V-shaped opening (Figure 9), but I only have a photo of only the freestanding pillar (Figure 8). Just north of Phallus #2 is a natural spring, which may also have become part of the spiritual landscape.

Figure 9. The freestanding Phallus #2, viewed through the V-shaped opening at Peekaboo. Drawing © by Maarten van Hoek, based on a photo of an author who is unknown to me.

*

General Observations

In determining in general the rationales of prehistoric peoples which controlled the positioning of rock art sites within the landscape, we will be able to understand the ways in which the creation of a rock art site affected how ancient peoples lived in and understood the ritually charged landscape. One of those rationales is the practise to anthropomorphise the landscape and elements therein, based on the two types of gender in human groups. As a consequence, certain natural features are regarded by (pre)historic peoples all over the world to express male or female gender. However, this practice also continued in historic times, for instance when people ascribe gendered names to natural features. In Scotland, massive, phallus-like rock pillars are called “The Old Man of Hoy” in Orkney and “the Old Man of Storr” in Skye (old men’s wishful thinking?). In Peru is a twin hill just east of Chiclayo, which is – for obvious reasons – called “Cerro Los Dos Tetas”. There most likely are many more examples.

Gendering the landscape starts at a large scale. The earth is female (Pachamama; Mother Earth) and the sun is male. On a smaller scale, caves are often considered to be female, while mountain tops are often regarded to be male. The late Cristóbal Campana Delgado (2013: Fig. 44), rock art researcher specialised in the study of the rock art site of Alto de la Guitarra, northern Peru, also postulated the idea that certain mountain tops are male and the valley (especially when flanked by hill slopes) leading up to that mountain would be female (Figure 10).

Figure 10. The (according to Campana Delgado [2013]) female valley leading up to the extensive rock art site of Alto de La Guitarra, and the male mountain top of Cerro Guitarras, viewed from the rock art site of Los Tres Cerritos. Alto de La Guitarra is at the other side of the high mountain ridge (via the pass indicated by an arrow). Photograph © by Maarten van Hoek.

David Whitley argues that Californian and Great Basin rock art sites in the far west of the USA are – in general – feminine-gendered places (1998: 18). Moreover, in California long cavities in certain large outcrops of stone – called Yoni Rocks – are vulva-shaped and are thus considered to be even more female. Several Yoni-Rocks have been worked at in order to enhance the vulva-shape of the often long, natural opening. Whitley further argues that mountains – especially mountain peaks – were considered to be male (up; sky), and valleys to be female (low; earth) and that for that reason rock art sites were not created at mountain peaks, but at the foot of the mountain, on outcrops, near water sources and in caves, all usually found at lower levels (1998: 23; more much detailed information is available in his instructive work).

Of course there are exceptions, also because there are no strict rules governing the location of rock art. For instance, some rock art sites near Lima, Peru, are found at relatively very high altitudes. Two fine examples are the petroglyph sites of Cerro San Diego (at 1431 masl) and Cerro Colorado (at 2168 masl) (Van Hoek 2022 Fig. 2). In 2022 I advanced a very special weather-related explanation for these atypical elevated locations (Van Hoek 2022: 4, Fig. 4) Also the rock art site of Alto de la Guitarra in Peru (part of an important north-south route in coastal Peru in prehistoric times [Van Hoek 2018]) is found rather high up (at 864 masl), but there is no rock art at or near the surrounding much higher mountain tops.

On a much smaller scale, also small natural holes in the rock surface are often considered to be female and for that reason such holes or cavities are sometimes incorporated into rock art images of female figures to represent the vulva. Two examples (but there are several other examples worldwide) are the small hole in a petroglyph panel at Cedar Point, southern Utah, which functions as a vulva in a menstruating (?) figure (Figure 11A), and the two apparently female anthropomorphic figures on a boulder at Toro Muerto, southern Peru (Figure 11B).

Figure 11. A: Petroglyph of an apparently female figure with a menstrual flow (?) flowing from a natural hole between the legs (Cedar Point, Utah, USA). B: Two petroglyphs of apparently female figures at Toro Muerto, southern Peru, each with a natural cavity between the legs. Note the possible earrings and arm-pit holes. Photographs © by Maarten van Hoek.

*

Conclusions

In the same line regarding the gendering of (rock art) landscapes, also the pictograph site of Peekaboo may be considered to be a Sacred Site where both male and female natural features compose a restricted, yet clearly gendered landscape. There are several reasons why prehistoric people selected this very spot to become a Sacred (Rock Art) Site. First of all, the spot has suitable rock surfaces (a sun-sheltered, shallow rock shelter), which have two contrasting colours: red and white sandstones; red often being a favourite colour in certain prehistoric societies. Secondly, in a small area no less than three sandstone pillars may be regarded to have been interpreted by prehistoric peoples as phalluses. Moreover, the largest phallus-pilar is located almost directly above the relatively V-shaped opening in the decorated ridge (see Figure 6). My question is now “is the V-shaped opening” anthropic?

As I am not a geologist (I am a geographer and an independent rock art researcher) I cannot contest the remark by Michael Paul Firnhaber (2007: 361) that the V-shaped opening in the wall at Peekaboo is a “natural arch”, but I have some comments. The natural arches we have seen in Sandstone-Utah are rather large, but – more importantly – the rock surfaces of those natural arches are smooth and rounded; eroded by water and wind. In contrast, the V-shaped opening at Peekaboo consists of an irregular opening with often angular and flat projections of rock (see Figure 7). Remarkably, one view through the V-shaped (female?) opening focusses on a natural feature that is shaped like a (male) mountain top (see Figure 7 – left), while other views show the two phallus-like pillars (see Figures 7-right and 9). It is therefore my opinion that – also because of the presence of the natural phalluses – it is possible that an original small opening or a weak spot in the ridge was opened and/or widened to finally allow persons to go through the opening, thus offering literally and metaphorically a passage. The opening is roughly triangular and may therefore indeed be perceived as a vulva. It may have intentionally been created to be used in certain (fertility-related) rituals, like “rites de passage” for boys and/or girls.

Finally, there is no doubt in my mind that the gendered landscape around the rock art site of Peekaboo (and possibly some of the art as well) expresses the wish for fertility of animals, plants and humans. The conception of a gendered landscape at Peekaboo possibly started long ago, which is evidenced by the faded images of the Barrier Canyon Style pictographs (see Figure 3). Those Barrier Canyon Style images (dating from about 4000 B.C. to roughly 500 B.C.) have been superimposed by the later Anasazi (also known as the Hisatsinom; “The Ancient People”) shield-like anthropomorphic figures (see Figure 4) dating from 200 B.C. to about A.D. 1540. Unfortunately those dates do not reveal the precise time of the creation of the images at Peekaboo, but they give an indication of how long at least the Peekaboo phallus-pillars were known. Exactly when the V-shaped opening in the ridge at Peekaboo was made or enlarged (if it is indeed anthropic [which is still uncertain]), is unknown to me. Unfortunately, I have no informed knowledge explaining the gendered landscape and the pictographs at Peekaboo, and thus my ideas are just what they are, unverified theories.

Acknowledgements

I am – as ever – very grateful to my wife Elles who assisted me during our survey at Peekaboo, and at several other rock art excursions in Utah, as well for her ongoing support at home.

*

References

Campana Delgado, C. 2013. Una serpiente y una historia del agua. Notas para un estudio del Alto de Las Guitarras. Fondo Editorial de la Universdidad Privada Antenor Orrego. Trujillo, Perú.

Castleton, K. B. 1987. Petroglyphs and Pictographs of Utah. Volume Two: The South, Central, West and Northwest. Salt Lake City.

Firnhaber, M. P. 2007. Experiencing rock art: A phenomenological investigation of the Barrier Canyon tradition. PhD-Dissertation. Department of Anthropology, University College of London.

Slifer, D. 2000. Guide to rock art of the Utah Region. Sites with public access. Ancient City Press, Santa fe, NM.

Van Hoek, M. 2018. The Huacapongo Corridor – Rock Art along a Prehistoric Coastal Route in the Desert Andes. Private Publication. Oisterwijk, Holland. Book (100 pages – 85 illustrations) available as PDF at DropBox and at Academia.

Van Hoek, M. 2022. The Petroglyphs of Cerro San Diego – Carabaylla, Lima, Peru. In: TRACCE – Online Rock Art Bulletin, Italy.

Whitley, D. S. 1998. Finding rain in the desert: landscape, gender and far western North American rock-art. In: The archaeology of rock-art. Pp. 11 – 29. Cambridge University Press. New York.