Northwest Coast Archaeology on Gabriola’s petroglyphs
Recently I happened across a few posts about Gabriola on the Northwest Coast Archaeology blog. In this post about Gabriola petroglyphs the writer notes:
I must comment on the destructive practice of rubbing, not so much through cloth but the scraping of the lines to remove weathering patina and lichen in order to take clearer photographs. This is a very unfortunate practice which hastens the disintegration of the rock art. [continue]
Well, that’s good to know.
In another post, Petroglyphs are not lifestyle amenities, the writer has some strong things to say about the Legends of Spirit Rock development:
This is so crass I can’t even begin to express it. Desecrating one of the most significant rock art sites in the Province does not allow you to claim there is
significant spiritual, healing energy of the First Nations history. Have you no shame, Legends at Spirit Rock developers? [read the whole post, and comments]
I like bloggers who express strong views (and righteous anger!) when they judge that to be appropriate. What a refreshing read.
Filed in First Nations,Gabriola Island,history 5 Comments so far
5 Responses to “Northwest Coast Archaeology on Gabriola’s petroglyphs”
NW Coast Archaeology on 14 Jan 2010 at 9:59 am #
Hi gabriolan, thanks for the link. I love your weird things found in the woods series!
I know there was a land deal which many on Gabriola supported — basically increased density at the Bluffs in exchange for the Park 707 (if I recall..). I’m an outsider and don’t want to point fingers at the rationale for this exchange, but from what I saw, the petroglyphs were collateral damage of that land swap and its likely going to get worse.
Interestingly, a series of small, inland shell middens along the bluffs have also been destroyed – they get assessed as lower significance because they are small and shallow compared to coastal ones – but the most plausible reason they were there in the first place in the middle of the rockart-human burial complex above False Narrows was as part of the ‘feeding of the dead’ ceremonies so integral to Coast Salish spirituality. Hence, if it were up to me, they would be assigned the highest significance as they can offer (or could have) unusually direct insight into the long history of ritual and spiritual practice.
It’s really too bad that, ummm, “circumstances conspire” to chip away at the archaeological heritage even on an Island that self-defines as “Petroglyph Island”.
q.
Gabriolan on 14 Jan 2010 at 12:10 pm #
NW Coast Archaeology — You raise so many interesting points that I hardly know where to begin in response. Perhaps I’ll think about this for a few days and then send you some email, or post further comments here.
As for your comment about Gabriola self-identifying as “Petroglyph Island” – this is not something I hear much of from islanders, or from people who publish Gabriola tourism brochures and the like. (Just as well on the latter count, if you ask me.) The pamphlets call Gabriola Isle of the Arts. But of course, that’s probably a Chamber of Commerce/Arts Council decision. Apparently islands need brand identity these days.
Anyway, thanks very much for your comment.
specialk on 14 Jan 2010 at 7:14 pm #
I would not be a supporter of self-identifying Gabe as “Petroglyph Island” – or even supporting the promotion of any of the petroglyphs – the geographical location, or making any money from the petroglyphs located here on Gabe in any way.
I don’t think it would be too hard of a sell to get people to come. I just worry that in my little world, they might… and to be honest, I rather they don’t. Therefore I would put forth the needed identity for the island should read something similar to “Island of Rain and Bugs”.
Interesting in my mind that the petroglyphs look nothing like other First Nations art I have seen elsewhere. I know they are old and perhaps this explains it. Maybe there is a source indicating the different time periods and styles associated with such artwork that I need to read.
NW Coast Archaeology on 14 Jan 2010 at 11:20 pm #
Interesting perspective — again, as an outsider I have always had the sense that Gabriolans (is that the collective noun?) did indeed express a sort of collective stewardship or guardianship of the rock art — at least, that they were more aware of the archaeological material on this island than, say, Penderites are of theirs, or Saltspringians of theirs.
But obviously there is no single Gabriolan view and I probably projected a bit of confirmation bias — when I see archaeology in the public domain I usually notice it whereas “Island of the Arts” would not make an impression.
The rock art is indeed not of the classical formline NW Coast style, the split-U and so forth. But it is comparable to many pieces of portable art found in shell middens, e.g., small bone pins with carved motifs similar to herons. It is hard to find this smaller stuff illustrated, maybe I will scan in a few examples and post them over at my blog.
BCArchaeologist on 23 Feb 2010 at 9:08 pm #
If you ask the government about the act of rubbing petroglyphs the say that it is likely to “alter” the site as defined under the Heritage Conservation Act and therefore a permit is required for making rubbings, regardless of whether the image is somehow being “improved” prior to rubbing.
http://www.tca.gov.bc.ca/archaeology/policies/recording_petroglyphs.htm