The Numic Spread: Great Basin Cultures in Competition

Abstract

The rapid spread of Numic peoples into the Great Basin about 500-700 years ago is a major anomaly in the prehistory of that region because, according to current interpretations, it occurred in the absence of major adaptive change. A review of existing evidence suggests that this view is incorrect; we propose an alternative notion of important contrasts between Prenumic and Numic adaptation in terms of the relative reliance on large game and small seeds. These contrasts explain why the Numic speakers were consistently able to expand at the expense of Prenumic groups.

Scratched Petroglyphs in the Bennett Hills, Idaho

“…Formalism is significant in that it has led to the identification of rock art styles and traditions assigned to specific cultures and chronologies (Schaafsma 1985). Studies using formal rock art research help determine cultural boundaries, interaction, and isolation (Bettinger and Baumhoff 1982;Castleton and Madsen 1981;Curtis 1990;Keyser 1975;Lee and Hyder 1991;Monteleone 1998;Quinlan and Woody 2003).…”

“…The first hypothesis suggest superimposition of scratched petroglyphs over earlier pecked petroglyphs serves to obliterate earlier rock art Heizer and Baumhoff (1962) and Bettinger and Baumhoff (1982). Superimposition appears to be a significant association between scratched and pecked petroglyphs.…”

“…Data collected concerning temporal order suggests scratched petroglyphs are later than and always superimposed over earlier pecked petroglyph styles, consistent with this hypothesis. However, there is no evidence suggesting scratched petroglyphs were superimposed over earlier pecked petroglyphs to obliterate earlier rock art (Heizer andBaumhoff 1962, Bettinger andBaumhoff 1982).…”

“…The first hypothesis suggest superimposition of scratched petroglyphs over earlier pecked petroglyphs serves to obliterate earlier rock art and any power or significance it may possess Heizer and Baumhoff (1962) and Bettinger and Baumhoff (1982). Although superimposition can be easily identified, interpreting its behavioral intention is not straightforward.…”

“…The first hypothesis suggest superimposition of scratched petroglyphs over earlier pecked petroglyphs serves to obliterate earlier rock art and any power or significance it may possess Heizer and Baumhoff (1962) and Bettinger and Baumhoff (1982 The second hypothesis recognizes that scratched petroglyphs are often added to pecked or abraded petroglyphs as an embellishment. Its possible that these scratches were added after pecked or abraded petroglyphs were manufactured to alter the original purpose of the design either in a positive or negative manner (Hedges 1973).…”