AN ANALYSIS OF HEAD FORM AND HEAD GEAR OF THE … · AN ANALYSIS OF HEAD FORM AND HEAD GEAR OF THE INVERTED BUCKET-HEAD HEADHUNTERS Following a brief inspection of the Fremont rock

Utah Rock Art, Volume III, Page 67

Jesse E. Warner

AN ANALYSIS OF HEAD FORM AND HEADGEAR OF THE INVERTED BUCKET-HEAD

HEADHUNTERS

Following a brief inspection of the Fremontrock art around Vernal, Utah, it becameobvious that the Classic Vernal Style ischaracterized by many ways of depictingforms of heads and head gear. Many ofthese have more than just passing similari-ties and differences. Among these, there isone very distinctive head shape commonlyreferred to as the "inverted bucket head"(Schaafsma 1971:15). This type of headoften has squares or circles centered at thetop, narrow end (Figures 1 and 2). Withsuch a significant percentage of repetitions,the inverted bucket head may be a means bywhich a unique segment of Fremont societyidentified itself.

In the Vernal area all these different headshapes, head gear, and facial features appearto be part of distinctly different styles andyet, are mixed with other Classic Vernalstylistic representations. A closer examina-tion shows that other figures also share asignificant percentage of inverted buckethead traits. These head shapes, and othershared traits, also appear to be segregatedgeographically (Figure 3). The invertedbucket, circle and square head forms occurprimarily around McKonkie's Ranch, whileother Fremont stylistic forms are concen-trated south of old Merkley Park (Figure 3).Many figures of the inverted bucket type areshown holding what appears to be decapi-tated heads. However, figures with otherhead shapes also hold decapitated heads. Inother panels in the Vernal area most of theother forms of head hunters fall into distinc-tive style groups. Many of these express a

close affiliation with the inverted buckethead group.

There needs to be an in-depth analysis toestablish what these distinctions are. So far,no one has attempted to define the limits ofvariation of shape of the inverted buckethead. There needs to be a definition of whatthe inverted bucket head is or is not beforeany analysis can be complete. This paper isonly part of a preliminary analysis. Asucceeding paper will continue this studyfrom another point of view. This "substyle"of the larger Classic Vernal Style hasenough distinctive features to warrantspecial consideration.

It is acknowledged that sufficient exampleswith similar traits and contexts need to beexamined before any credibility can beplaced on any assumption to support ordiscredit the assumption. Before thedefinition is valid, these distinctions need tobe defined in terms of what is typical orrepresentative and what is extreme. It isalso necessary to consider as many alterna-tives for assessment or significance aspossible.

Even though style affiliation has beenassessed it may be impossible to obtainspecific sources or concepts for the form ofthese distinctions. Many petroglyphs aresymbolic, abstracted, codified or personal-ized. Because of many repetitions ofglyphs, similarities in variation and thecontexts in which they repeat, it is possibleto make statements of their significance and

Jesse Warner, Analysis of Inverted Bucket-Head Headhunters, Page 68

Figure 1.


relationships. Research will ultimatelydefine most of their more obvious concepts,plus some less obvious ones. It may alsoshow possible variation in concepts.

Because of the large number of repetitionsof the inverted bucket form our understand-ing of it and its variations has increased. Ifa glyph has been conventionalized with alarge percentage of similar representations,we know it was important to those whochose it to identify their particular stylegroup. The widespread acceptance of thisconvention is relative to the area over whichit predominates.

Care must be taken since speculationbecomes poor and unforgivable when it isunfounded, unreasonable or illogical andleft as no more consideration necessary.We continually need to maintain an openmind and listen to qualified suggestions.These speculations then need to be consid-ered in light of the evidence to be accepta-ble. When speculation is used with soundand controlled reasoning, appropriateethnographic comparisons and considera-tion of other possibilities, narrow dimen-sions of known facts can be expanded.Progress comes only from an intelligent useof experience. Wrong conclusions, on theother hand, generally result from the lack ofcomprehensive analysis. By asking ques-tions concerning elements expressing bothsimilarities and differences many newavenues of investigation can be opened.

The Prime Form

There is a wide range of different represen-tations of what is accepted as "invertedbucket head". Even though this distincthead form occurs over a wide area ofnortheastern Utah and western Colorado,this cannot be the only reason for such widevariations. Change through an extendedperiod of time probably never had much

effect on this style either. Evidence sug-gests this variant of the Classic Vernal Styleseems to have been relatively short-lived inrespect to the Fremont style in general. Thechanges that occurred seem to have oc-curred quickly and spread equally as fast.Many examples seem to be depicting theshape of the head as a stylistic preference.These occur as inverted bucket, bucket,square and circular in shape. Other exam-ples seem to be a combination of the shapeof the head and head gear, such as a cap orheaddress (Figures 1A, F, H, J, O and V).Others could express distinctive hairtreatments or a combination of hair andheadgear (Figures 1I, J and K). There isalso the possibility that the representations,as drawn, could be symbolic of somethingnot actually visible on theindividual but only represented in rock art.What is visible in rock art is probablysymbolic of an idea or object that was usedfor personal or group identification.

The inverted bucket form itself is the mostdiagnostic feature used to identify theinverted bucket form figures. This formalso has the most variation of any otherinverted bucket trait. It also has the widestdistribution of any other associated trait.The combination of the inverted bucketform with a restricted crown also has a widedistribution. On the other hand, the fore-head spot, itself, has a far more restricteddistribution.

Variations of the Prime Form

Other variants of the inverted bucket forminclude the paddle form (Figures 2I—M)and an unnamed form that has upper ear-like lobes as well as the pendant-like lobes(Figures 2B—G). There are what appear tobe schematized variants of each of theseforms that are borderline on other headforms. In such a case they have not beenused for this study, but they need to be


Figure 2


considered for a more detailed considerationof each variant.

Incorporation of Additional Symbolism

Notice the typical form, repetition of detailand variation shown in Figures 1 and 2.

Also notice the incorporation of additionalsymbolism in the inverted bucket head ofFigure 1A. The head gear of this characterhas a square enclosed above a dividing linewithin a restricted crown. By creating twosections, the line seems to separate the head,head gear or possible symbolic representa-

Figure 3.


tion. This same line repeats in Figures 1A,F, H, J and O. Figure 1A, however, is veryunusual, in that the eyes and mouth areupside-down. Because of this additionalsymbolism and its unusual nature, thisfigure should provide some clues to thesignificance of the inverted bucket formhead. This, and similar examples provideinformation because additions and differ-ences of stressed points in many respectscarry more clues than do similarities (Warn-er 1982a:42, 48).

This reversal seems like an odd situation. Itseems to be important that the neck is onlypartially shown. After a close examination,it is obvious that this is the way the artistleft it. Since this style shows decapitatedheads and other dismembered bodies(Figures 1, 2 and 4), this may also depictdecapitation. An examination of othersimilar examples should illuminate the logicof this situation.

Reversibility

It is the author's view that the head, if notjust the facial features of Figure 1A, hasbeen reversed. Even though reversing thishead must have been a new innovation,other examples do occur (these will bediscussed below). This type of innovationis distinctive of types of changes thatresulted in what is believed to be the rapiddevelopment of the inverted bucket headtype.

If the head as represented (Figure 5A) isturned upright, the partial neck would be atthe top of the head, and the restricted crownand forehead would be on the shoulders(Figure 5B). Apparently the artist con-sciously intended to reverse either the heador the facial features (Figure 5C and D).Even though the reason is not obvious, itmay provide a clue to the symbolism of theinverted bucket head. If reversed, this headwould be a bucket form (Figure 5D). The

Figure 4.

McKonkie RanchAdded to show similarity of incompletebody.

McKee SpringAdded to showelaboration of a non-inverted bucketform.


restricted crown and forehead spot on top ofthe reversed head indicate that this is anentity in itself. This is a compound motifformed by various combinations of thefollowing entities: inverted bucket headshape, restricted crown, dividing line andforehead spot (Figure 5E). Pacing therestricted crown and forehead spot at the topof the reversed face adds more credence tothe idea that the form of the inverted bucketshape of this face is important. If the

restricted crown of theinverted bucket head wasnot a separate entity, itwould have occurredbelow, if the whole headand head gear werereversed (Figure 5B andC). Whether or not it is aninverted or regular buckethead, it seems that theface, if not the entire head,has been removed andreversed.

Compare Figure 1A withthe reversed face-likeform at the side of Figure6D. Notice the dot abovethe reversed face. Thisdot is similar to the one onthe neck of Figure 1A and

the anthropomorph in Figure 6D, if the faceis turned upright. Without head outline thefacial features of Figure 1A have the samearrangement as the facial features in Figure6D. This face provides additional evidencethat heads were reversed or are reversible.

A close inspection shows that even thoughthe facial features in Figures 1A and 6Dhave a different arrangement when reversed,facial features like Figures 1E and 7 are

Figure 5.

Figure 6.


basically the same when they are reversedas when they are upright. If they werereversed, this feature would not be noticea-ble unless other factors were present. Otherexamples of faces without head outlines areshown in Figure 7. Like the facial featuresdiscussed in Figure 6D, some of these couldbe reversed or are reversible. Severalelements that have the same form whenreversed are increasing as more sites arebeing studied (Figure 8 as opposed toFigure 10). Element reversal (whethersymmetrical or asymmetrical) seems to be aconcept drawn from a shared culturalreservoir of accepted ways to express ideas.

The symmetry of these faces and anthropo-morphs seems to indicate that they were

intentionally designed to be the same whenreversed (Figure 5F, G and H). It may bethat it was simply an artistic development tobalance these face forms and create greatersymmetry. If symmetrical features werereversed, it seems logical to assume that in afew examples there would occur someiconic clues to indicate that these werereversed (Warner 1982b: 7-11). Such cluescould be detached radiating lines around therestricted crown of Figure 1A, the eyebrow-like marks under the eyes of the reversedface in Figure 6D, placement of the crownin relation to the reversed face as discussed,or possibly the representation of facialfeatures without head outline (Figure 1N).

There is another important motif that

Figure 7.

Figure 8.


illustrates the idea of symmetry. Theanthropomorphic forms in Figure 8 repeatoften enough to become motifs. For thisanalogy it is important that hands and feetare not represented—indicating that whenreversed they still have an upright appear-ance like the faces in Figure 7.

The following illustration provides furtherevidence for the concept that symmetricalface patterns are reversible. Without muchimagination, Figure 9A could be taken as anoutline of a reversed animal's head withhuman facial features that would be thesame if reversed (Figure 9B). Either way,the face has two eyes, a mouth and two

"earbobs" like the faces in Figure 7. If thisis an animal's head, it was intentionallyreversed to form an inverted bucket head-like form. This then may indicate itssource, or that the animal and the invertedbucket shape are closely related. Thispossibility has more credibility because ofthe number of other associations of eithereared or animal-like features in associationwith the inverted bucket head. This will bethe major emphasis of an additional paper.

For further evidence of reversing heads,consider Figure 10F, which represents twoanthropomorphs interlocked at the head.Notice the horns of the up-side-down figure.Reverse the upper figure and the hornpattern is basically the same as those inFigures 2U—W and 10A.

By turning the top prong inward, the hornpattern was constructed to create a negativeinverted bucket-shaped head outline for thefigure below. Remove this horn headdressand, like those in Figures 1L, M and N and7, the lower figure has no head outline. It isextremely unique that two sets of bilateral

Figure 9.

Figure 10.


antler-like prongs as seen upright take theplace and form of the two sets of feather-like protrusions of many inverted bucket-shaped heads in Figures 1D, F and H andsimilar to B, G, K and L. This positive andnegative form is a fascinating piece ofgraphic ingenuity, which is also symbolic.

Combinations

If figure 1A represents a combination ofmotifs, some of the other inverted buckethead variants may also be compoundmotifs. The inverted bucket head shapes inFigures 2B, C, D, F and G seem to becombinations of the inverted bucket headforms with ears or lobes hanging down(Figure 2A) and ears right-side-up making acombination of both motifs (Warner 1984).It may be that when Figure 2-A is reversedand combined with its original upright formwe may have the source for the"paddle form" inverted bucket variant(Figures 2I—L). The spots on the uprightear-like lobes of Figure 2D and the lowerlobes of Figure 2B are interesting. Thefeatures of Figure 2-B, including the ear-bobs without the head form, would producethe features of Figures like 5-F, 7-B and 9.Likewise the spots on the restricted crownof Figure 2A, without head form, producesome of the various features in Figures 7Aand C. The lower spots on Figure 2B couldpossibly be the source for the position of thelower spots of Figures 7B and 9. Similarspots also occur in Figures 1H and N.These could represent hairbob ties likethose seen on clay figurines. Theycould also represent ear-bobs (Figure1G, H, L, N, R and T).

Stacked Faces

Other interesting examples are implica-tions of stacked faces as illustrated inFigure 11A and C. On Figure 11A

there is the stacked eye, mouth situationsimilar to, but more complex than Figure 9.There are several possibilities of what thesecombinations of features could represent.The mouth of the upper face could be aforehead spot of a lower face like Figure7A. Figure 11C could also represent twostacked faces, or it could also be a rectangu-lar forehead spot, circular eyes and arectangular mouth under two rectangularspots similar to those on Figures 2D, 7Aand 11B. The first face in Figure 7C,however, implies a superimposition of facialfeatures.

There are several other features that showmore identifiable representations of stackedfaces (Figures 6A—C). These providemore support for the possibility of viewingFigures 11A and C as stacked faces. Figure1N could also be two such stacked facesthat have been reversed like Figure 1A. Thefigures previously mentioned in Figure 8may also express a similar situation. Likethe reversal of symmetrical faces, thesefigures have a head, shoulders, arms and aresymmetrically reversed at the waist.Symbolically, the legs may be another set ofarms with a head in between. This stressesthe feasibility for considering the reversingof symmetrical faces idea. Some of thesefigures may represent phallic individuals orother concepts.

The concept of the three dots above the

Figure 11.


shoulders of Figures 1A and 6D may beincluded in one of the following ideas. One,instead of a head outline, some figures haveonly eyes and a mouth (Figures 1L, M andN). The head held by Figure 1H is alsorepresented by three similar marks. Two,

however, the marks may also represent anecklace with three pendants similar tothose in Figures 1D, I and K, and 2B.Three, they may also depict hair-bobs orjewelry.

Another possibility is that some of the setsof three dots in the necklace form couldstylistically represent a decapitated headworn as a necklace similar to the situationof the flayed head in Figure 12 (Kidder andGuernsey 1919). If they do not representstacked faces or facial features similar tothose without body and head outline, theymay represent in some cases, anothermanner in which decapitation is shown.

Besides lacking head outline, figures inthese panels are often lacking other bodyparts. These anthropomorphs have a largepercentage without hands or feet, whilearms and legs are present. Many of thesefigures also lack legs. This is an interestingcultural preference. It may be that anthro-pomorphs without head form or body partswere another innovation or preference for astyle designed for group identification orconcept representation.

In the Ashley and Dry Fork areas the buckethead is mostly represented on shield figuresand anthropomorphs with which they arestylistically associated. The regular bucketforms occur at about the same extent as dothe inverted bucket forms. Both the com-bined square and circular head shapes occurat a slightly higher percentage than thebucket and inverted bucket types (Figure 3).The contexts and relationships of other headforms, mainly those of the "flopped-eared"type (Figure 4) found south of old MerkleyPark, seem to indicate a situation differentfrom that of the inverted forms. Theinverted forms and other types drawn in thatstyle express much more detail and elabora-tion, as well as the majority of decapitation.

South of old Merkley Park there is a majori-ty of different head forms with less elabora-tion and detail. In this area there are alsofewer scenes associated with head hunting.Decapitated heads are often more stylized inform and are generally less elaborate.Individuals holding this style of head oftendisplay less jewelry and elaborate headgear. Among this group, there seems to belittle depiction of arrogance as found amongthe inverted bucket types and Classic VernalStyles. Most of the solidly pecked stylizedheads held by this non-inverted bucketgroup often take the shape of the invertedbucket head. Most of the decapitated headsheld by the inverted bucket headheadhunters are more natural or similar inshape to those who hold them. These

Figure 12. Photo from Albert Reagan’s slidecollection. On file at the Archaeology Dept.,

Brigham Young University, Provo Utah.


headhunters have head shapes that occur assquares, circles, half-circles or invertedbucket shapes.

This brief examination of clues that may berelevant to the significance of the invertedbucket form is only a small fraction of thestory. This study provides evidence forenough repetition and variation to provideinsights into the fact that there are someunique situations being expressed withinthis style. It is also evident that there hasbeen much more stylistic conventionaliza-tion than is found in other Fremont styles.

REFERENCES CITED

Kidder, Alfred V., and Samuel J. Guernsey1919 Archaeological explorations in

North Eastern Arizona. Bureau ofAmerican Ethnology, Bulletin 65.

Schaafsma, Polly1971 The Rock Art of Utah. Papers of the

Peabody Museum, Harvard Universi-ty, Vol. 65. Cambridge.

Warner, Jesse E.1982a The Importance of Determining

the Significance and Relationships ofRock Art Rather than Interpretation.Utah Rock Art, second printing, 1:43-55.

1982b Presence and Absence. Utah RockArt, second printing, 1:5-17.

1984 The Eared Variants of the InvertedBucket Head, and Their Associationwith Bear-Like Elements. Utah RockArt, second printing, 3:91-102.

Documents

AN ANALYSIS OF HEAD FORM AND HEAD GEAR OF THE … · AN ANALYSIS OF HEAD FORM AND HEAD GEAR OF THE INVERTED BUCKET-HEAD HEADHUNTERS Following a brief inspection of the Fremont rock