The physical locations of Canary Island and Saharan "Lybico-Berber inscriptions"

              Mark MILBURN, Groß Gerau
THE PHYSICAL LOCATIONS OF CANARY ISLAND
AND SAHARAN „LIBYCO-BERBER INSCRIPTIONS."
In April 1981 I accompanied members of Institutum Canarium on a short
visit to the Canary Islands. Numerous inscriptions were seen in EI Hierro
and very few in Grand Canary (Barranco de Balos). A light-hearted talk was
given at the annual symposium of Institutum Canarium in May this
year, under the title „Anmerkungen über die Fundorte kanarischer und sa­harischer
Felsinschriften". The following notes arise from a request by In­stitutum
Canarium that I attempt to commit to paper roughly what was
said at the time.
The term „Libyco-Berber" used in the title is thought to be that most
commonly in use, whatever its presumed or actual inadequacy. I mention
in passing other expressions which have been employed, such as Ancient
Saharan (speaking of the Canaries), Tifinagh (also speaking of the Canaries)
and Tifinagh for all Saharan texts and Guanche for all Canary ones. They
will have served to cloud the issue and to confuse the minds of readers,
especially in the Canary Islands.
lt must be stressed that these remarks will be almost exclusively about
Canary Island inscriptions: they will also be based largely upon impres­sions
gained from extremely localized study. Subsequent finds could well
alter them drastically. More finds there certainly will be, especially by fit
and determined parties, willing to undertake systematic research in one
small area at a time.
Canary terrain has impressed me to no small degree, since it is basically
(in the western isles) more precipitous and uneven than almost anything I
have yet encountered in the Sahara. .The sides of steep, inhospitable
barrancos (,,oueds", ,,koris") would require quite enough concentration
per se, without additional hazards to individiuals whose balance is affected
by kit which has to be carried along. Man-made walls and huge quantities
of cactus barriers, plus other scrub, make it even trickier to move around
freely.
Small comfort is to be gained from any supposition that the carvers them­selves
may have been reluctant to scale heights which a modern tarn would
have problems reaching: the caves of Ain, Tarsil, Morocco, were reported
tobe out of reach in the nineteenth century Q. D. Hooker & J. Ball, 1878,
300-301), while 0 . M. Stone compared these with others in Tenerife
(1887, I, 356). The difficulties of physically checking all the available rock
surface are enormous. To attempt to work alone is certainly not without
risk, as I found in La Palma to eastwards of EI Paso.
38
© Del documento, los autores. Digitalización realizada por ULPGC. Biblioteca Universitaria, 2017
Following in late afternoon a barranco which ran on and on, it was sud­drnly
apparent that that daylight was fading: the barranco ended in a steep
rqck wall ahead and it was a matter of deciding whether to return by the
same tortuous route (a time-consuming procedure) or to try to ascend one
side or the other by a raute whose difficulties could not be gauged more
than a few metres ahead amid thick grass and trees. The latter course was
imprudently adopted and heavy rain started to fall when I was only a short
way up the left bank. In a few moments everything became a sea of mud
and only the fortunate appearance of a metal pipe - which I was able to use
as a guide-line as well as a hand-hold - led me to a point from which I was
finally able to gain the summit of the bank.
In retrospect, it was foolhardy to have gone out alone in such country,
the terrain being precipitous in the extreme in places. Injury, with partial ot
total immobilisation, might well have inconvenienced a good many others
in addition to myself, notwithstanding the proximity of the village.
Below are listed some impressions of the positioning of inscriptions seen
in El Hierro, dividing them into two main categories, ,,alphabetic" artd
„ideographic", according to the terminology of P. Hernandez Hernandez
(1977, 173: cf. J. Alvarez, 1964, 69, who suggests „Hbico" and „simb6lico"
for El Julan).
Alphabetic type.
1) Single lines of symbols appear to run mostly „up" or „down" a vertical
surface. They will tend to run „upwards" or „downwards" (rather than
across) on a surface which is nearly horizontal.
2) Parallel lines of symbols, forming a kind of composite block, seem to
occur on vertical surfaces (for type, cf. H. Nowak 1981b, Hoyo Blanco).
3) Inscriptions can occur beneath a marked overhang, i.e., sheltered from
the elements (Candia). This is common in the Sahara, where shelter from
the sun probaly played an important role. And still does.
4) They can be out of reach of humans, other than giants, standing on the
ground below, i.e, on the „portal" of a cave-mouth, as at Tejeleita.
5) They can be adjacent to the mouth of a cave or rock shelter (Fig. 1).
6) Most are not sheltered from the elements, notably the sun. In the Sahara
it is common to find fairly recent texts (Tifinagh translatable inscrip­tions)
in shady spots.
7) I saw none adjacent to rock art, or to what is commonly classed as such.
In the Sahara, rock art and inscriptions are sometimes associated (L. Ga­land,
forthcoming).
8) The symbols are large by comparsion to most seen in the Sahara: some
viewed at La Caleta were between 7 ,5 and 8-9 cm across, measured ver­tically.
39
© Del documento, los autores. Digitalización realizada por ULPGC. Biblioteca Universitaria, 2017
9) Apparent odd symbols were seen on two occasions (Fig. 2). They were
very faint indeed. Ignoring the single „O", the other inscriptions ran ac­ross
a vertical wall in a horizontal plane, its symbols being ca. 5 cm high,
measured top to bottom. May both be unfinished texts? If so, might this
suggest the presence of visiting engravers, forced to depart in a hurry?
Ideographie type.
i) Are far more untidily carved in relation one to another, being jumbled
and out of alignment.
ii) Appear fewer in number in any one context, say three or four only.
iii) Seem !arger generally than those seen in the majority of „alphabetic" ca­ses.
iv) Occur alongside untidy „abstract" rock art to which their relationship,
if any, is unknown to me (EI Julan).
v) Do they appear only on surfaces which are more horizontal than verti­cal?
N. B. In the case of both the above types: -
A) There are very many fewer symbols in any one line than in certain Saha­ran
examples.
B) No relationship of either type to water-points was observed. In the Sa­hara
this relationship is evident.
Third type (?).
While viewing symbols on flattish surfaces running gently downhill to­wards
the sea at EI Julan, in company with J. Krüss though distant from
him by some 80 metres at the time, the very dark line of symbols in Fig. 3
was noticed. Running uphill/ downhill about 65° /115°, the general impres­sion
was one of extreme neatness, though not clear enough for the exact na­ture
of each symbol to be made out. They were smaller than anything else
mentioned hitherto. The composition was partly of symbols I have seen
neither before nor since, thoughJ. Alvarez appears to illustrate examples of
some of them (1964, 21 : 24 : 52) or at any rate of approximations.
A reliable method of copying was not to hand, nor did numerous photo­graphs
produce the desired result. J. Krüss and I therefore attemped to copy
them, working quite independently and without consulting each other: the
results are shown at F ig. 3 and I am grateful to J. Krüss for most generously
making available his own notes.
We had seen two parallel lines of symbols, plus rock art, below and on
the seaward side: on the way uphill, numerous „ideographic" symbols and
prolific rock art occurred. My impression of the symbols in Fig. 3 is that
they might belong to a category apart from the two main types postulated
above. lt is reasonable to suppose that they may - from the inclusion of
40
© Del documento, los autores. Digitalización realizada por ULPGC. Biblioteca Universitaria, 2017
symbols not seen by myself in any other Canary context, other than in lite­ratur~
- contain a message or idea in a different language to that of the so­calledi
„alphabetic" type. This would indicate a Canary Island situation so­mething
akin to that of the Sahara to-day, where Tifinagh (modern) texts
are understandable by Tuareg (not always without difficulty), while the ol­der
„Libyco-Berber"/,,Ancient Saharan" inscriptions are not.
Regarding the scant symbols adorning the rock walls at Barranco de Ba­los,
Grand Canary, I think these occur in positions roughly typical of a
good many Saharan ones, without insisting on the differences between tifi­nagh
and Libyco-Berber/ Ancient Saharan. Here, however, we reach the
major hurdle in attempting to make truly valid comparisons between Cana­ry
Island and Saharan inscriptions.
The reason is very simple; in the seeming absence of any precise break­down
of the type of sites at which Tifinagh and Libyco-Berber/ Ancient Sa­haran
texts are known, dividing them into these two arbitrary categories,
one intelligible to modern Tuareg and the other not being so, extreme cau­tion
is needed, prior to drawing sweeping conclusions. Even though certain
tendencies may seem apparent, a great deal more field work, both in the
Canaries and in the Sahara, is an unavoidable prerequisite to further analy­s1s.
These notes are written in late December 1981. Had it been possible to
delay their submission for publication by even two months, information as
to definite tendencies in the positioning of Saharan inscriptions might well
have been possible to formulate, even in draft format. The sketches used as
figures appear, in each case, to show the general nature of Canary symbols
rather better than available photographs or colour transparencies.
References.
ALVAREZ DELGADO, J.:
1964 Inscriptiones Hbicas en Canarias. Ensayo de interpretadon Hbica.
University, La Laguna.
GALAND, L.:
Forthcoming
Pour un repertoire des inscriptions libyco-berberes, Bulletin Archeo-l~
gique, Paris. ,
HERNANDEZ HERNANDEZ, P.:
1977 Natura y Cultura de las Islas Canarias. LitograHa A. Romero, S. A.,
Santa Cruz de T enerife.
HOOKER, J. D. & BALL, J.:
1878 A Tour in Marocco and the Great Atlas. Macmillan & Co, London.
NOWAK,H.:
1981a Neue Felsinschriften auf der Kanareninsel Hierro, I. C.-Nachrichten,
Nr. 36 (1981), Graz, 5.
41
© Del documento, los autores. Digitalización realizada por ULPGC. Biblioteca Universitaria, 2017
1981b Neue Felsbilderfunde auf der Insel Hierro, I.C.-Nachrichten, Nr.
37 /38 (1981), Graz, 4-6.
STONE, 0. M.:
1887 Tenerife and its Six Satellites. Marcus Ward and Co, 2 vols, London.
\l)
+ n
(?)
t
Fig. 1 A text seen on 3 April 81 while travelling between two barrancos with H. Nowak. lt
is about 1,5 m above ground level and to one side of a rock shelter obscured by mo­dern
masonry. The top symbol is about 4 cm wide and the arrow points up the verti­cal
rock surface.
0 (?) E 1
Fig. 2 Two separate (unfinished?) markings. lt is conceivable that the left-hand symbol
might be „rock art" rather than part of an inscription.
--\.LJ ~ -..c ~ (t) l'?)
i ~ ~ r
'V
i -~ - • •
Fig. 3 Symbols seen at EI Julan with J. Krüss on 2 April 81. The left-hand set is copied by
hand from the handwritten notes of J. Krüss. The right-hand set is my own attempt
to reproduce what was seen. The arrow points to ca. 65°, uphill and away from the
sea.
42
© Del documento, los autores. Digitalización realizada por ULPGC. Biblioteca Universitaria, 2017