148

Americal.t Anthropologist

165, 19631

and G. Ekholm, published as Aspects of Primitive Art (New York, 1959), H. Haselbergers Method of Studying Ethnological Art and comments to it (Cwrent Anthropology 2:341-384, 1961), and, most recently, G. Kublers The Shape o j Time (New
Haven, 1962), the strategy for studying primitive art, ethnologically, that is, becomes
clear. Primitive art, and perhaps folk art as well, is to be assumed to be a medium of
communication, and the first task of the ethnographer is to determine both the structure and the meanings within a general theory of signs. More than anything else, this
symposium demonstrates the essential sterility, for anthropologists a t least, of taking
off from such universalistic philosophical and psychological positions as those espoused
by Sir Herbert Read.

Clzavin Art: A n Inquiry into its Form and Meaning. JOHN HOWLAND
ROWE.New York:
The Museum of Primitive Art, Distributed by University Publishers, Inc., 1962. 53
pp., bibliography, drawings, map, notes, photographs, rubbings. $2.00.
Reviewed by GEORGEKUBLER,Yale University
The art of Chavin in Peru, lasting from about 700-200 B.C. (plus revivals), is the
subject of this remarkably successful essay in seriation and decipherment. It is based
upon parallels, between the sculpture of the type-site in Ancash and the dated series of
similar forms from Ocucaje pottery in the Ica variant of Paracas style as well as upon
building history a t Chavin de Hukntar itself.
Four phases are defined-AB (represented by the Zanz&z), C (Tello Obelisk), D
(Portal columns and frieze), and E F (Raimondi monolith)-in terms equivalent to
early, middle, and late phases of one style. Two principles of interpretation govern the
explanation of the forms and the chronology. Modular widths, (as named by Dawson), are seen to govern the composition by bands with increasing frequency as time
passes, while kennings, analogous to the literary comparisons by substitution which
characterize Norse poetry, govern the symbolic system. The kennings, such as body
parts =protruding tongues, or cats mouths =deities, are taken to mark the presence of
divine natures, such as the Smiling God, the Staff God, or the cayman deity, all defined
here with full objectivity and for the first time. These brilliant extensions from literary
history (kennings and allegory) illuminate large portions of ancient Andean art and
they provide a firm groundwork for further interpretations of matter from other styles,
such as Nazca and Tiahuanaco art.
While agreeing gladly in principle, the reviewer has several reservations. Rowe
stresses body appendages as the subjects of the kennings, while the reviewer sees bodyjoints as their site. Rowe stresses the extension; I prefer to see the kennings as occupying the body-joints. A comparative study of animal faces a t the body joints, as in Hellenistic body-armor or Asiatic demon-figures, might enlarge our understanding of the
theme. Perhaps Rowes insistence upon body appendages conceals from us the importance of the body-joint as a n area for symbolic enrichments. Rowe equates hair only
with snake, while I would extend the possible system of substitutions farther, to arrows,
feathers, and curls of smoke. Rowe speaks of organic misunderstanding in the representation of the cayman deity (p. 19), where I have proposed metaphorical substitutions since 1938.
I also question the chronology of Cupisnique pottery in the captions: Fig. 44,called
Middle, I date Early Cupisnique; Fig. 45 (Late), I call Middle Cupisnique; Fig. 47
(Middle), I call Late Cupisnique, all because of parallels to Mochica stirrup-spout
profiles. (Rowe writes me that he agrees, and that unapproved editorial interventions
altered his plan for the illustration of the book.)

Book Reviews

149

The point affects Rowes view of Chavin chronology: he evidently accepts Cupisnique as coeval with only Chavin, while I equate it with both Chavin and Mochica, as a
long duration persisting in force until about 800 A.D. on the north coast. He favors a
theory of the archaizing revival of Chavin forms; I would prefer the notion of coexistent
but regionally diverse styles as in the Teotihuacan and Maya representational systems
found in the same Kaminaljuyu tomb in Guatemala.
Rowe fuses compositional pattern and iconological interpretation more than an art
historian would, and he leaves some forms, such as the scrolls or tendrils (smoke kennings?) on the Raimondi monolith inadequately explained as hair forms with snake
metaphors. The reversible design of the Raimondi monolith also weakens Rowes interpretation of it as an exterior upright slab. Possibly a gallery ceiling emplacement would
best have displayed its anatropic property.
Unlike most recent art books, this one offers a text much richer than the illustration.
The deficiencies are the editors more than the authors. The Raimondi monolith is
illustrated only by a photograph of a cast. The portal cornice is confusingly shown with
six figures plus an unexplained and inverted repeat. There is no view of the interior
setting of the lanzdn in the subterranean gallery although the author submitted one.
Several types of Chavin sculpture are not illustrated a t all (e.g. eagle cornice slabs). Yet
it is a great treat to have illustrations for the first time of so many sensational new
pieces, like the Raimondi-type textiles said to be from Callango.
Rowes text is a model of clear and instructive exposition, setting forth many original and powerful ideas. Though he describes it as a survey, this essay will remain
fundamental for ancient American art studies. His extension of the literary device of
kenning to Chavin art is not only brilliant but it is exactly right, as when an old tool, for
which a new and satisfying use has been discovered, comes back into wider use than
ever before.

Die Kolonisation der Mennoniten im Paraguayischen Chaco. H. HACK.Foreword by

(Konigliches Tropeninstitut, Amsterdam, No. 138.) (Abteilung
R. A. M. BERGMAN.
fur kulturelle und physische Anthropologie, No. 65.) Amsterdam: Koninklijk Instituut voor de Tropen, no date. 232 pp., bibliography, 22 charts, footnotes, 6 maps,
12 plates, summary in English, 65 tables. n.p.
Reviewed by EGON SCHADEN, Universidade de SZo P a d o
The Mennonites are a pacifist Christian sect, with a Baptist background, founded
by Menno Simons in Holland, in the first half of the 16th century. Persecuted for their
religious beliefs and because they refused to meet military service obligations, they were
forced to migrate frequently from one country to another in the course of their history.
They sought refuge successively in Prussia, the United States, and Russia, later establishing themselves in Canada and, more recently, in Latin-American countries. Their
population comprises, today, hundreds of thousands of, predominantly, petty farmers.
I n the Paraguayan Chaco there are (or were in 1956) close to 9,000 Mennonites,
distributed among three colonies-Menno, Fernheim and Neuheim-founded respectively in 1928, 1930-32, and 1947-48. They are the first immigrants of European origin
who succeeded in earning a living through intensive agriculture and cattle raising in
that region. Hack has attempted to determine the factors accounting for the remarkable
differences observed in the development of the colonies. His particular emphasis on
environmental and ecological conditions leads him to label his study as sociographic
or social-geographic. However, in the analysis proper, greater importance is given to
historical factors which refer to what could be called the integrative pattern of the