Phalli and vulvae as apotropaic geoglyphs in a sacred plain south of Albacete (Spain)

              ALMOGAREN 48-49/2018MM35
48-49/2017-2018
ICDIGITAL Separata 48-49/2
36MMALMOGAREN 48-49/2018
ICDIGITAL
Eine PDF-Serie des Institutum Canarium
herausgegeben von
Hans-Joachim Ulbrich
Technische Hinweise für den Leser:
Die vorliegende Datei ist die digitale Version eines im Jahrbuch "Almogaren" ge-druckten
Aufsatzes. Aus technischen Gründen konnte – nur bei Aufsätzen vor 1990
– der originale Zeilenfall nicht beibehalten werden. Das bedeutet, dass Zeilen-nummern
hier nicht unbedingt jenen im Original entsprechen. Nach wie vor un-verändert
ist jedoch der Text pro Seite, so dass Zitate von Textstellen in der ge-druckten
wie in der digitalen Version identisch sind, d.h. gleiche Seitenzahlen (Pa-ginierung)
aufweisen. Der im Aufsatzkopf erwähnte Erscheinungsort kann vom
Sitz der Gesellschaft abweichen, wenn die Publikation nicht im Selbstverlag er-schienen
ist (z.B. Vereinssitz = Hallein, Verlagsort = Graz wie bei Almogaren III).
Die deutsche Rechtschreibung wurde – mit Ausnahme von Literaturzitaten – den
aktuellen Regeln angepasst. Englischsprachige Keywords wurden zum Teil nach-träglich
ergänzt. PDF-Dokumente des IC lassen sich mit dem kostenlosen Adobe
Acrobat Reader (Version 7.0 oder höher) lesen.
Für den Inhalt der Aufsätze sind allein die Autoren verantwortlich.
Dunkelrot gefärbter Text kennzeichnet spätere Einfügungen der Redaktion.
Alle Vervielfältigungs- und Medien-Rechte dieses Beitrags liegen beim
Institutum Canarium
Hauslabgasse 31/6
A-1050 Wien
IC-Separata werden für den privaten bzw. wissenschaftlichen Bereich kostenlos
zur Verfügung gestellt. Digitale oder gedruckte Kopien von diesen PDFs herzu-stellen
und gegen Gebühr zu verbreiten, ist jedoch strengstens untersagt und be-deutet
eine schwerwiegende Verletzung der Urheberrechte.
Weitere Informationen und Kontaktmöglichkeiten:
institutum-canarium.org
almogaren.org
Abbildung Titelseite: Original-Umschlag des gedruckten Jahrbuches.
 Institutum Canarium 1969-2018 für alle seine Logos, Services und Internetinhalte
ALMOGAREN 48-49/2018MM37
Inhaltsverzeichnis
(der kompletten Print-Version)
Franz Trost
Tierfabeln und Tiergeschichten der Twareg
(Kel-Ahaggar und Kel-Adrar) ........................................................................ 7
Hans-Joachim Ulbrich
Phalli and vulvae as apotropaic geoglyphs in
a sacred plain south of Albacete (Spain) ..................................................... 39
Alain Rodrigue
Note sur le gisement paléolithique
de Tibasksoutine (Zagora, Maroc) ............................................................... 79
Friedrich Berger
Neue Überlegungen zur geographischen Lage von Jam ............................... 87
Andoni Sáenz de Buruaga
Notas y reflexiones acerca del proceso de la investigación
arqueológica en el Sahara Occidental: hitos históricos, implicaciones
políticas y orientaciones teóricas de futuro en la gestión patrimonial ......... 125
Enrique Gozalbes Cravioto & Helena Gozalbes García
Jebabra (región de Asilah), un nuevo centro megalítico
y de cazoletas (cupules) en el Norte de Marruecos ..................................... 159
Hans-Joachim Ulbrich
Zum Thema Trockenstein-Technik:
ein kleiner Rundbau bei Máguez (Lanzarote) ............................................. 189
Hartwig-E. Steiner, Paz Fernández Palomeque,
María Luisa Morales Ayala, Marcos Sarmiento Pérez
Islas Salvages de José Agustín Álvarez Rixo
del legado del erudito canario universal ..................................................... 199
Paul Horley & Hartwig-E. Steiner
Face petroglyphs in Easter Island caves
as a possible sign of their special status ...................................................... 253
Hartwig-E. Steiner
Ana Mata eine Höhle mit Make Make-Petroglyphen
beim Nordkap der Osterinsel / Rapa Nui, Polynesien ................................. 303
•
38MMALMOGAREN 48-49/2018
Ulbrich, Hans-Joachim (2018): Phalli and vulvae as apotropaic geoglyphs in a sacred
plain south of Albacete (Spain).- Almogaren 48-49 / 2017-2018 (Institutum
Canarium), Wien, 39-78
Zitieren Sie bitte diesen Aufsatz folgendermaßen / Please cite this article as follows:
ALMOGAREN 48-49/2018MM39
Hans-Joachim Ulbrich
Phalli and vulvae as apotropaic geoglyphs in a
sacred plain south of Albacete (Spain)
Keywords: Albacete, Algeria, Canary Islands, dry-stone technique, fertility cult, Great
Mother Goddess, Iberian Peninsula, Jordan, La Mancha, Mediterranean, Mother Earth,
Near East, phallus, pre-history, pubic geoglyphs, Spain, U-shaped monument (USM), vulva
Abstract:
In the south of the Spanish city of Albacete (Castilla-La Mancha) there is a plain which is
cultivated only partially by farmers. Striking are the irregular, not angled fields which have
an apotropaic protection by big geoglyphic phalli which are added to them. In the savannah
between the fields there are hundreds of U-shaped monuments (USM) which have to be
interpreted as vulvae. Phalli and vulvae represent two fertility cults which had a similar
development and – regarding symbolic power – have big overlaps. The main appearance of
the monuments seems to have been in the early or middle Bronce Hispano.1/2
Zusammenfassung:
Im Süden der spanischen Stadt Albacete (Castilla-La Mancha) befindet sich eine savannen-artige
Ebene, die nur zum Teil landwirtschaftlich genutzt wird. Auffallend sind unregelmäßi-ge,
nicht eckig angelegte Felder, zu deren apotropäischem Schutz große, geoglyphische Phalli
angefügt sind. Zwischen den Feldern befinden sich hunderte "U-shaped monuments" (USM
= U-förmiges Monument), die als Vulven-Symbole interpretiert werden müssen. Phalli und
Vulven gehören zwei Fruchtbarkeitskulten an, die aber eine ähnliche Entwicklung genommen
haben und bezüglich der Symbolkraft große Überschneidungen aufweisen. Das Hauptauf-treten
der Monumente scheint im frühen oder mittleren Bronce Hispano zu liegen.1/2
Resumen:
Al sur de la ciudad española de Albacete (Castilla-La Mancha) se encuentra una planicie
tipo sabana parcialmente explotada para la agricultura. Resultan llamativos los terrenos
dispuestos de forma irregular, no angular, para cuya protección apotropaica hay añadidos
grandes falos geoglíficos. Entre los terrenos se encuentran cientos de los denominados
"monumentos en forma de U" (USM, por sus siglas en inglés) que han de interpretarse
como símbolos vulvares. Falos y vulvas forman parte de dos cultos a la fertilidad que, no
obstante, han tenido un desarrollo similar y muestran considerables coincidencias en
cuanto a la fuerza simbólica. Las principales apariciones de los monumentos parecen
situarse en el antiguo o avanzado Bronce Hispano.1/2
Almogaren 48-49 Wien 2018 39 - 78
1Please contact me if you find additions or corrections: hjulbrichinstitutum-canarium.org
2ME [jn the text] = maximal extension of a monument, field or artefact in cm/m
40MMALMOGAREN 48-49/2018
 
Fig.1 - The dark parts south and south-west of the circles with pivot-irrigation represent
the savannah-like plain near Albacete (Arab. al-Basit = plain) [Photo: Google Earth].
2 km
ALMOGAREN 48-49/2018MM41
The field of research. When I published in December 2016 an article about
the U-shaped monuments (USMs) in Jordan (Ulbrich 2016) I mentioned also
the existence of these on the Canary Islands, in the Mediterranean area [incl.
North Africa and the Sahara – the latter reported by Y. & C. Gauthier 1999,
2004] and in the countries around the Black Sea, to name only a few regions.
First I found USMs on the Canary Islands (Fig. 19), researching their pre- and
proto-history being my core activity. Starting from there I looked for parallels.
I knew that North Africa had a rich repertoire of USMs but it was quite aston-ishing
to find them also in countless other living environments – in a variety
and number which grew and still grows constantly.
In this context it is time to focus also on the Iberian Peninsula. Modern
Canarian scholars tend to see the origin of the colonizing islanders only in
North Africa with its proto-Berber ethnics. These people indeed made a big
contribution to the Canarian aborigines – but not alone. Many cultural charac-teristics
point besides North Africa to the Iberian Peninsula and the central
Mediterranean islands. For example the USMs: North Africa as well as the
Iberian Peninsula have places where hundreds of these monuments are com-bined
in geoglyphic rows. To underline that I present here a (once) sacred plain
south of Albacete, the capital of the Spanish province of the same name. The
latter belongs to the region known as La Mancha. The beeline between Alba-cete
and Alicante at the Spanish levant amounts to not more than 142 km.
Thereby Albacete belongs to the zone of influence of natural and human Medi-terranean
processes – particularly the wide range travels of seafaring people.
When I checked La Mancha via Google Earth3 for USMs the terrain south
of Albacete (Fig. 1) caught my attention. There the usual agrarian net of quad-rangular
cultivated land and big circles for pivot-irrigation was interrupted by
strange, irregular formed fields. They look like sickles, snakes, cucumbers,
aubergines, melons or the silhouettes of amoebae (Fig.2) – totally contrary to
that what a mediaeval or modern farmer would logically lay out having effi-cient
work in mind. All that in a kind of stony savannah or shrub with a loose
or non-existent tree vegetation (Fig. 2) where the flat or undulating terrain
does not require that the form of the fields is adapted – for instance – to nar-row
meandering valleys or small eroded mesas.
3Finding places: In this paper only the UTM references (e.g. 30SWJ9873300137) are used, not
the geographical latitude and longitude. The form of the latter – e.g. 47°50'29.08"N 9°21'39.208"E
– is in file names for computing and in text writing not as simple to handle like UTM data. So
one can easily use the UTM reference as a kind of "picture number" in file names of aerial
images. Readers who want to apply the here mentioned UTM coordinates should switch on the
highest resolution possible in Google Earth Pro (4800 x 2417) when copying/saving a location.
42MMALMOGAREN 48-49/2018
Fig.2 - One of the characteristic irregular fields south of Albacete (30SWJ9873300137)
whose origin is probably pre-Hispanic. We can assume that many of these were taken
over in mediaeval times. But today the most uneconomic ones are abandoned like
this "amoeba". ME of the field: 526 m
	
 
	
 
 
 
  


 
ALMOGAREN 48-49/2018MM43
Many of these fields have a visible limitation by a line-up of low, mostly
less than leg-high stones (Figs. 3/4/140) arranged in a distance of ca. 1-5 m
around the complete ploughing zone, quasi a little wall out of bright geologic
material. Which modern farmer submits himself to such an effort which ap-parently
has nothing to do with flagging the beginning or end of a property or
with keeping someone off (e.g. enemies, thiefs, animals)? Unpractical fields
with abnormal, ineconomic – if not wasteful – forms can be found elsewhere
in Spain, there either without or with a surrounding wall, but the latter with-out
a geoglyphic function. Extremely crazy field patterns exist – for example
– between the river Ebro and Valmuel (Aragón). Have such fields perhaps a
long tradition which reaches back to pre-Hispanic times when big angled fields
were not necessary to nourish a family or a clan? Regarding Fig. 2: Was the
purpose of this strange field combination a non-agrarian one? Its four pseudo-paths
allow even more to challenge a mere agrarian usage. Historic fields with
no visible access and no settlement nearby – whose presence would point to a
daily use – can have a geoglyphic aim: Perhaps they were meant to be visible
from above, for the gods in the sky.
Fields south of Albacete without a stone-row belong either to a chronologi-cally
different group or were expanded in recent times so that ploughing de-stroyed
the row (Fig.4); or the stones were displaced by heavy storms. Often
a path or a drivable piste was added in mediaeval or younger times at the
inner or outer side of the little wall to be able to manage the field; the brighter
area in the southeastern corner of Fig.2 shows such pistes. The most likely
older "amoeba" in Fig.2 lacks surrounding farming pistes.
Fig.3 - Geoglyphs or long rows of stones
respectively surround the fields – pro-bably
a cultic measure to protect them
from evil (read paragraph on phalli).


Fig.4

 


 
!  
  

 " " 

 	
 #$%&'()(&*)+  	

44MMALMOGAREN 48-49/2018
Those fields – their inner part and the stone boundary – together with the
savannah between them play a big role in this paper: In this environment we
find hundreds of pre-Hispanic stone monuments which justify to speak of a
sacred area, as we will see. Its monument density is extremely high, probably
the highest of the entire Iberian Peninsula, higher than the density of mega-lithic
monuments in the northern Ampurdán, Catalonia (Ulbrich 2015: 71).
Furthermore we can assume that the construction of the giant circle fields
with pivot irrigation destroyed many pre-Hispanic monuments.
The local forms of U-shaped monuments (USMs) and their derivates
in the flatlands south of Albacete, Spain
Plate
1






 
 
 

  

 
	 	 	

  
 
 
   
 
  
 
	 	!

 "
The female connotation of the eastern La Mancha USMs (vulvae) is obvious.
The forms, their appearance in mirrored rows and the dependencies among each
other show also that the USMs are no simple windbreaks. Rules for the direction
of a monument did apparently not exist. But within a line-up the monuments have
more or less the same direction! "Albacete 3" is a combination of two "Albacete 2"
USMs with opposite – or mirrored – direction; ditto with "Albacete 4" and "Albacete
5". The numbers 1-6 give a vague and speculative hint on the chronology:  the
most original form, " the longest and last used one.
White was in many old cultures a holy colour; in Egypt it was the colour of Isis
and the sun, used for the plaster of sacral buildings. Maybe that a similar idea
applies for the chalked "Albacete 1" monuments.
Generally USMs have a long lasting tradition with occurrences up to the presence. In
the case of Albacete the Plate-1-types accompanied the phallus geoglyphs during their
appearance with special construction techniques and more or less uncommon forms.
# 	$
% 	$
 	$
& 	$
 	$
' 	$
 	$
Mirroring an USM can result in or .  


Re "Albacete 3" & "Albacete 5":

	 Or in , . 	

 % 
 '

 # 
	
	


() *+, -	 &.
ALMOGAREN 48-49/2018MM45
U-shaped monuments (USM). To learn something about USMs – and on
the arguments against an interpretation being the result of bulldozing – I
recommend to read first Gauthier (2004) and Ulbrich (2016). Especially in the
case of the small, grey USMs near Albacete bulldozing can be no explanation
because the different versions (Plate 1) can only be built by human hands as
the high-resolution photos of Google Earth Pro clearly show. Contrary to many
other USMs in the Mediterranean, Africa and the Near East the Plate-1-types
have no distinguishable "mound" and "wings"; they are built as one piece of a
slim curved or angled wall (Figs. 8-14, 16-17), using a compact dry-stone tech-nique.
Their ME amounts to 2-12 m.
The more USMs are found all around in the mentioned regions the more
their interpretation as vulva symbol solidifies [Figs. 5, 6, 18, 21, 22 here; Ulbrich
2016: 44-48; compare also the forms in Plate 1 with the idols and rock-art
motifs in Ulbrich (1997: 60-67)]. The versions in Plate 1 show also that there
was a process from curved to angled; the latter monuments are easier to con-struct
(Figs.11-13; Jordan example in Fig.20). We have the same phenomenon
with rock engravings; Libyco-Berber epigraphy on the Canary Islands for ex-ample
changed in some cases from  to .
The most striking fact about the Albacete USMs is their organisation in 92
rows (probably even more) which represent a total of 1087 monuments; these
line-ups constitute the geoglyphic character. The rows (Fig.17; Tables 1-3) fea-ture
nearly all even numbers of USMs between 2 and 18; a row of 16 USMs
seems to have been the standard. For the few odd exceptions we can assume
destruction at one of the ends when modern pistes and fields were built or when
violent storms unloosed the structures over time. Most of the line-ups are more
or less curved but some are perfectly straight over hundreds of meters! Quite a
Fig. 5 – Egyptian Red Sea coast: A line-up
of phalli with an USM (type "Albacete
4") including a center point.
 	
 + #"/0/'#%1&"1"
Fig. 6 – Lake Urmia coast (Iran): A dou-ble-
USM (type "Albacete 3"). It shows once
more that no bulldozing was involved.
 	
 + #234*&"&&%&"
5 -35 2  5  
46MMALMOGAREN 48-49/2018
 	

Fig.7 - The main region of the USM-rows south of Albacete (Spain), emphasizing 65 of 92
routes. We see that several lines (white) run parallel or even cross each other. These can be
ALMOGAREN 48-49/2018MM47
considered as pairs with opposite USMs. This indicates that such pairs were either built by the
same people or that there was a design consense among different groups ( H.-J. Ulbrich 2018).
 
48MMALMOGAREN 48-49/2018
few rows appear as pairs where the respective USMs are built mirror-imaged
(Figs. 7 /14). Why rows at all? The idea is simple: The doubling and all the more
the higher multiplication of a monument strengthens its transcendent impact –
more symbols = more protection, fortune etc (read also Ulbrich 2016: 42-43).
The partly continuation of rows (positive geoglyphs4) into fields and the
ploughing around USMs, creating a kind of oasis or island in a field (Fig. 10),
shows that USMs were respected at all times and that both can have a certain
symbolic relationship. Furrows were – from prehistoric to modern times –
associated in rural regions with the penis, the latter being the plough which
fertilises Mother Earth (Fig.24). Fertility cults were therefore practiced near or
directly on fields. Mythology delivered the paragon: Demeter – the Greek god-dess
of fertility, seeds and seasons – abandoned herself to the cereals god and
inventor of the plough Jasios on a three times ploughed fallow (Hesiod, Homer).
Type "Albacete 2" can also be integrated in long walls (Fig. 16). This dem-onstrates
that irrational buildings in the middle of a field – thus interrupting
and disturbing the ploughing, seeding and harvesting – had probably a cultic
purpose, especially when they were combined with an apotropaic vulva. Inter-pretating
an USM as vulva is supported not only by the design of the monu-ments
but also by the ability of respective pubic symbols and the genitals them-selves
to avert the evil. Presenting a nude vulva in the public was in ancient
times a measure of calculated exhibitionism (anasyrma) which aimed at keep-ing
off enemies, bad spirits and sinister eyes. Accordingly apotropaic signs,
gestures and activities meant also to stimulate health, fortune and fertility; all
that is helpful for the farmer with regard to his fields and harvests.
Other USMs. The common Atlantic, Mediterranean etc. type of USM ex-ists
too in the Albacete region what demonstrate some single monuments
which are not part of a row or occur only in small groups (30SWH9778984186,
30SWH9820987916). These USMs are built not so compact and joined as the
ones in Figs.8-17. Their sometimes desolate condition could point to an age
higher than that of the better preserved Plate-1-specimens and their rows. Fur-thermore
several USMs indicate the classic "mound & wings" structure like in
Figs.18/19/21; for the southern Albacete region visit 30SWH9940395833 and
30SWH8462091541 (basic information also in Ulbrich 2016: Fig. 4).
4Cultic geoglyphs were first recognised as lines or areas where the uppermost layer of
debris and/or vegetation was removed to achieve a pattern brighter than the natural ground
(negative geoglyph / in German "Scharrbild"). But today we have also the term "positive
geoglyph" (similar to a petroform) where material was accumulated on the ground to
reach a 3-dimensional effect by the colour and form of the object and by its shadow. In the
Albacete region we have both: pseudo-paths and fields which have no practical purpose
and geometrically designed stone patterns like the USM rows and the phalli.
ALMOGAREN 48-49/2018MM49
) ,#
,
,'
,,
&
,(
,+
,-
#&30*222#1"'2 #&30*1"1%1'&
#&30*12%2"'#
#&30*12%1''"
#&30*1&2%2' #&30*111'2''" #&30*1%212&%
#&36*&&&21'1'# #&30*1'2"1
 +
 *
  

 
 -
.$/    %  + .$/
 '  (
 ,  0
 
7!2+  	

7! + -35  
 
 8
 #8 	  	$ #&30*12#11''#! 3  
  7!&!
50MMALMOGAREN 48-49/2018
Algerian Sahara ( 30SYD0193723150): two
USMs with mound, wings and center-line.
ME 20 m (Google Earth).
An USM line-up in the Jordan desert (type
"Albacete 4"), Northeast of this row there
are more of this kind. ME of group 71 m.
+# 1 2 +,
Jordan (Google Earth - 37SCR2058663553):
a small USM of the classic type combined
with a big geoglyphic phallus (ME 104 m).
,)
Old part of Bou Cra, ter-ritory
of Western Sahara
(SADR), occupied by Mo-rocco:
three USMs with
center-line, type "Albacete
1" (28RGQ1567417277).
ME ca. 33 m each. Per-haps
younger construc-tions,
but basing on time-less
traditions.
++
*$3	#*),'-&,'
El Jable, Lanzarote (28RFT3111017256): a
classic USM with mound and slim wings
(ME 15 m) – not a windbreak because the
prevailing tradewind blows from NE.
,&
 
ALMOGAREN 48-49/2018MM51
Table 1 USM rows south of Albacete (Spain)
/ 	! 9  -35: ;
  	$ 4	  
 -95 
	
 -95 
 *+, -	 & < ;
 	=
 < :>	
 


#
%
'
"

2
1
&


#
%
'
"

2
1
&


#
%
'
"

2
1
#&
#
#
##
#%
#'
#"

  %&  # #&30*22""1""'2 #&30*222'1"''%

  #&  & #&36*&%#2%1##"& #&36*&%"21#'#

  %&  1 #&30*1'"1"#% #&30*122'1%%

  '&&  ' #&36,&%##&&&# #&36,&%"&&"&&

  '#  " #&30*1"1& #&30*12&12#

  "#"   #&36*&&'2'1""%2 #&36*&'1"%%

  "'2  " #&30*11"&%1#'2 #&36*&&#&1"

  ""  " #&30*12##&1#2% #&30*121&1#"&&

  ""#  # #&36*&"212"' #&36*&##1'

  %  " #&36*&&&'21'& #&30*11#"11%11

  '  # #&30*12
'#1 #&30*12&1"1'&1

    # #&36,&'%%&&%" #&36,&'#&&#

  '  ' #&36,&''&& #&36,&'1"%&&'%

  "'  % #&30*1"%12 #&30*1"11

  2  " #&36*&%"1#&%% #&36*&%%122%

  #%  1 #&36*&%""&1#1& #&36*&%11#2""

  #1#  & #&30*1'#1"#1 #&30*1'&%1%

  '#  & #&30*1'112&' #&30*1#&112

  '#'  " #&30*12&'12' #&30*1212'1

  "'  " #&30*12''11%& #&30*121'1"&

  "%"  " #&30*11#11#'2# #&30*11&1#&2"

  "2&   #&30*1%#"1"&1 #&30*1&1'1"

  "2  " #&30*121## #&30*12211#%2

  1  " #&30*11&%&1'## #&30*11'11%"

  '  2 #&36*&&##1'2'1 #&30*11"&1''%2

  2%  # #&30*12
'&1 #&30*12&1#1'&%

  11 # #&30*1#1&11& #&30*1##1&1%

  #  % #&36,&%"%&&1" #&36,&%"&2&&"

  1  1 #&36*&"%&1%1 #&36*
%

  '  " #&30*12%"212" #&30*121"1#

  '%2   #&36*#"11%" #&36*##1%12"2

  '"'  #&36*&%%212" #&36*&%%11"#

  "  " #&30*11&1#22& #&30*121"'1#2

  "&  " #&30*11##"1%"2 #&30*11&2#1%#

  "%  " #&36*&&1"
 #&36*&&"'1''"

  "#  " #&36*&&11"'' #&36*&&"%1"&&
            
             









52MMALMOGAREN 48-49/2018
Table 2 USM rows south of Albacete (Spain)
/ 	! 9  -35: ;
  	$ 4	  
 -95 
	
 -95 
 *+, -	 & < ;
 	=
 < :>	
 
#
#2
#1
%&
%
%
%#
%%
%'
%"
%
%2
%1
'&
'
'
'#
'%
''
'"
'
'2
'1
"&
"
"
"#
"%
"'
""
"
"2
"1
&



  "#%  " #&36*&&%'1"%& #&36*&&"'1'12

  "%'  % #&30*1'2##2 #&30*1"'221

  &  % #&30*21221'"&# #&30*2"1%1##

  %%  " #&36*&%1"1'2 #&36*&&&1"21

  %  " #&30*1111"#2' #&36*&&#
'2#1

  2#  2 #&36*&%%1122' #&36*&'#'11#%"

  1  % #&36*&&%1' #&36*&21%"

  #"'  " #&30*1212"21"'1 #&30*112"21#1

  %%"  & #&30*1%#&121 #&30*1'&"1"'

  %1&  # #&36*&"'11'1 #&36*&1'1'

  '&  " #&30*11%21%'' #&30*11121%&2#

  '22  " #&30*12%1#&# #&30*1%1#1'1

  '1&  % #&30*2&"1''%& #&30*2&&1%1

  "'"  " #&30*111"#1"#" #&36*&&#""1'2"1

  "22  " #&30*11&"1'2& #&30*11%"11%"1

  1  " #&30*12"1#& #&30*11'""1'

 # #%   #&30*12'"1'"2' #&30*12%#11'''"

 % '%  % #&36*&%"'21%2' #&36*&%2221%#%

 % %#&   #&30*112""' #&30*121'2""

 % '%&  2 #&30*122#1&'& #&30*121211&&2

 %   # #&36*&%"121'#& #&36*&%"'%21'

 % #1  % #&30*1&"%2%2 #&30*211#2%%&

 % #2#  & #&36*&%11&##2 #&36*&'%'1&#%

 % %2'  2 #&30*1%"" #&30*211#2%%&
 
 % %  % #&36*&%&'21'2" #&36*"21%"#
 
 % %&%  & #&30*11"%2'& #&30*1#"22%
 
 % '  # #&30*1&222'" #&30*1#"'2'
H 
 ' %%  " #&36*&%%121"#% #&36*&%"#%21'&
H 
 ' "   #&36,&2"&&'#' #&36,&221"&&#%
H 
 ' #%#  2 #&36*%&'1&12 #&36*%"1&1&""
H 
 ' "&  & #&30*1&"2"&2# #&30*11""2'%#

 " #  % #&30,1'#"&&&12 #&30,1"&&&&

 " '%#  & #&30*1%#&11'" #&30*1''&11#2

 " '2  ' #&30,1"2'&#%"# #&30,121&#%

 " '11   #&30,111'&& #&30,11"1&""

 " &  " #&30*1"##1&# #&30*1"%21"#%

















ALMOGAREN 48-49/2018MM53
The phallus geoglyphs – unique in La Mancha. The 110 phalli of Albacete
are part of the above described stone-rows which surround the fields (Figs. 3/
4), in concreto, they emerge out of them (Fig.23) – preferably at peaky ends of
the fields –, thus building an architectonic and cultic unity. This means that
for the phalli the same loose-stone-technique was applied as for the stone line-ups,
what makes the phalli vulnerable for displacement or even destruction of
the geometric design. The state of preservation is generally bad and often
vegetation covers the geoglyph (Fig. 23) what complicates correct sketches.
We can observe that the phalli underwent the same graphical changes from
curved to angled like the USMs. And again this seems to indicate a temporal
process. The sketches are therefore divided into two groups: phalli with round
glans (48 / older / Figs. 30-77) and phalli with angled glans (24 + 38 / younger
/ Figs. 78-101, 102-139), the latter group containing also the pointy versions.
Nearly all examples look like having the Praeputium (foreskin) drawn back so
that the Frenulum praeputii and the Corona glandis become visible (Fig.140).
Table 3 USM rows south of Albacete (Spain)
/ 	! 9  -35: ;
  	$ 4	  
 -95 
	
 -95 
#
%
'
"

2
1
2&
2
2
2#
2%
2'
2"
2
22
21
1&
1
1

 "   " #&30,11%#1&%#1 #&30,1222


 " 1  " #&30*1%11"2 #&30*1'%"&11%22

 "   " #&30,12%"&&%""" #&30,12'"2&%&&

 " "'  " #&30,12&2'% #&30,1'2"&1

 " ""  ' #&30*12'112 #&30*1%"111&

 " 2#2  " #&30*1%&2&121' #&30*1%212&"

 " 1"  " #&30*1"'212"1 #&30*1#"12%

 " '#&   #&30,11'&# #&30,11""'&""&

 " '%  ' #&36,&'1&##1 #&36,&%2&2%1

 " '2"  # #&30*1%211"2' #&30*1'#2%11"&%
? 
 " '%  % #&30,12'2&&' #&30,12&1&&'"
? 
 " '#  % #&30*1'2"#11& #&30*1'"%12#"
? 
 " 2&  " #&30,1'1%2
" #&30,1"'%&1'%
? 
 " 2"%  " #&30,111&%&%#' #&36,&&&''

@ 
 " "1  ' #&36,%&y #&36,&%&1&#%&
@ 
 " 2&  " #&30,1'21&" #&30,1"'"%&21
@ 
 " 2"'  " #&30,111&%&%#% #&36,&&&''

I 
    # #&30*1#2&1&11" #&30*1#2&1&1'2
I 
  %"  " #&30*1"1"2# #&30*12%2"'
I 
  '1"   #&30*22#""1"11 #&30*221
"'%#
 *+, -	 & < ;
 	=
 < :>	
 
54MMALMOGAREN 48-49/2018
If the geoglyphs show an erect or non-erect phallus is not conclusive, but in the
sense of an apotropaic effect – which needs an ithyphallic state – I would assume
in most cases an erection, even if the shaft is bent. Analysing the forms it be-comes
clear that the constructions are not meant to be naturalistic but symbolic;
nevertheless the occurring layouts have an amazing range (Figs.30-139).
With only a few exceptions the phalli are decorated with empty or filled
triangles. That these represent the female pubics is beyond doubt; there are
countless plaques (Late Neolithic-Copper Age I) in the southwestern Iberian
Peninsula showing the owl-faced or eye goddess with triangles on her body
+ 1   &2  #$%&')&&&*)*
4  "  
     
"
/5 +#) !  4 
     0 !  6

 	

4
ALMOGAREN 48-49/2018MM55
Fig. 24 - This phallic basalt betyl from Rodicol (León, Spain) shows engravings
which can be interpreted as seed (corn) and as an agrarian field pattern; both
underlines the connex which a penis/phallus5 can have with the ploughing and
seeding of a field. [Sketch from Almagro Basch 1969: Lámina 2]
2& 
"% 
Fig. 25 - This amulet
from Brissos, Dolmen
6 (central Portugal)
shows the characteris-tic
triangles attributed
to the Magna Mater
Mediterranea [sketch
Almagro Gorbea 1973:
215].
Fig. 26 - An amulet
from Comenda da
Igreja (central Portu-gal)
showing the tri-angles
interestingly in
two groups and two
opposite rows, like
the Albacete phallus
geoglyphs and USM
rows [sketch Almagro
Gorbea 1973: 216].
$ 
/5 +*- !
$ 7
Fig. 27 - This phallic fetish from
the Serra da Moinha (Portugal)
shows on one side, near the lack-ing
scrotum, small engraved
rings (seed) and on the other side
stylized vulvae. [Sketch adopted
from Almagro Gorbea 1973: 91]
56MMALMOGAREN 48-49/2018
+)
Fig.29 - Roman bronze amulet
(sketch Famin 1863: Pl. XXIX).
This kind of phallus was worn
by men and women to keep off
the evil and to endow the latter
with fertility. The testicles and
the scrotum were emphasized.
Fig.28 - Phallic artefact from Cabezo da Arruda, Portu-gal
(sketch from Almagro Gorbea 1973: 77). The simi-larity
to the contours in Figs. 108/120/138 is striking.
(Figs. 25/26). That phallic idols can contain engraved female pubics shows
Fig. 27. Were the triangles a common ornament of the Albacete geoglyphs or
do they perhaps point to the custom of tattooing or painting as a kind of body
art? Both cases must be considered as ritual. If the pre- and proto-historic
population of La Mancha (or conquerors like Romans, Visigoths, Arabs)
practiced penis tattooing is not recorded. In the Arabic-Islamic world only
women apply pubic tattooing (Chebel 1997: 406-407; Herber 1922: 40-41).
Nevertheless the phallus cult was important and widespread on the pre-His-panic
Iberian Peninsula; this includes – for instance – the numerous phallic
menhirs of megalithic times (Ulbrich 2014, 2015). The form of the phallus in
Figs. 108, 120 & 138 has an amazing parallel in Fig. 28.
Some phallic geoglyphs (e.g. Figs. 30/31) are not connected to a field wall so
that we can assume that in the Albacete region existed for a limited time a
special phallus cult in which agriculture was a part. Local rock art reveals an
ithyphallic depiction already for the Spanish "Arte Levantino" (10.000-4.000
BC): e.g. the Abrigo Grande de Minateda, Hellín (Jordán Montés 2004: 95).
Extreme dimensions of the penis show also rock art panels of the Cueva de la
Vieja, Alpera (Cabré Aguiló 1915: fig. 96), belonging also to the east Iberian
Arte Levantino. For the time period ca. 4.-1. m. BC we find examples of the
Arte Esquemático, male anthropomorphs with exaggerated penis, in the Abrigo
de La Solana del Molinico, Socovos (Grupo de Acción Local de la Sierra del
ALMOGAREN 48-49/2018MM57
Segura 2015: 35-36). The inventory of the museum in Albacete comprises a
phallic amulet from Castillo, Lezuza, and a small phallic lamp from Los
Cabezos, Mahora; both are dated tentatively into the 1st or 2nd century AD
(Abascal & Sanz 1993: 26) and are therefore part of the Roman era. These ex-amples
from the Albacete province indicate that the physical penis in his ritual
meaning, the phallus5, played at all times an important role in this region.
Final reflections. The rich manifestation of phallic Roman artefacts on the
Iberian Peninsula (e.g. Zarzalejos Prieto et al.1988) reveals that not one of these
is decorated with triangles. Furthermore the typic Roman phallus amulet (Fig.
29) shows a scrotum which in the Albacete geoglyphs is lacking (Figs. 30-139).
This points to a time when the scrotum was unimportant in cultic contexts [in
the Greek/Roman world the first ideas on a relation between testicles and sperm
came up in the 1st c. AD]. When chronological questions arise, one can cau-tiously
answer with "early to middle Bronze Age of the Iberian Peninsula". The
physical state of the phallus geoglyphs seems to exclude an older age; although
the tradition of their design elements – especially the triangles – may reach
back to the Late Neolithic. Supported were the phalli by over 1000 female occu-pied
USMs; some of these can be found within phallus geoglyphs. The creators
seem to be a limited human group, possibly a tribe or a bigger clan engaged in
agriculture, perhaps organized as jefatura. This group appeared and vanished
with no further traces of phallus geoglyphs in Spain – at least regarding our
current knowledge. Were they local ethnics or were they Mediterranean ship-wrecked
travellers or even refugees? The latter could explain the smallness of
the group. If there are affinities to the Bronce Manchego or the Bronce del
Levante is not clear; aerial investigation alone cannot decide this, the rationale
is too thin. Intensive surface investigation is now required.
Literature (used & recommended):
Abascal Palazón, J.M.; Sanz Gamo, R. (1993): Bronces antiguos del Museo de
Albacete.- Serie 1 "Estudios" no. 67 (Instituto de Estudios Albacetenses),
Albacete, 212 p.
Almagro Basch, Martín (1969): El ídolo de Ciudad Rodrigo y el ídolo de
Rodicol.- Trabajos de Prehistoria XXVI, Madrid, 321-327
Almagro Gorbea, Maria José (1973): Los ídolos del Bronce I Hispano.- Bib-liotheca
Praehistorica Hispana XII (Univ. de Madrid / CSIC), Madrid, 354 p.
+ LVII p. of figures
5 Since antiquity Greek phallós and Lat. phallus means the erected Membrum virile. Fol-lowing
Artemidor the male erection was interpreted as potency, virility, soldiership and
political authority. In this paper "phallus/phalli" is used to describe non-physical, non-biological
aspects of the male sex organ, e.g. regarding symbolism and religious topics.
58MMALMOGAREN 48-49/2018
Arjona Castro, Antonio (1990): La sexualidad en la España musulmana.-
Universidad de Córdoba, Córdoba, 125 S.
Cabré Aguiló, Juan (1915): El Arte Rupestre en España (regiones septentrional y
oriental).- Comisión de Investigaciones Paleontológicas y Prehistóricas - Me-moria
No. 1 (Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales), Madrid, XXXII + 229 p.
Camphausen, Rufus (1999): Yoni: die Vulva – weibliche Sinnlichkeit, Kraft
der Schöpfung.- Gelbe Reihe Magnum 9 (Diederichs), München, 151 p.
(American original 1996)
Chebel, Malek (1995): Dictionnaire des symboles musulmans. Rites, mystique et
civilisation.- Spiritualités Vivantes 179 (Éditions Albin Michel), Paris, 501 p.
Chebel, Malek (1997): Die Welt der Liebe im Islam. Eine Enzyklopädie. Ero-tik,
Schönheit und Sexualität in der arabischen Welt, in Persien und der
Türkei.- Verlag Antje Kunstmann, München, 496 p. (French original 1995)
Chevallier, Raymond (1986): Les graffiti dans le monde romain.- I Segni della
Terra 4 (Antropologia Alpina), Torino, 67-81
Costas Goberna, F.J.; Hidalgo Cuñarro, J.M. (Eds. 1995): La figura humana en
los grabados rupestres prehistóricos del continente europeo.- Arqueología
Divulgativa 1 (Asociación Arqueológica Viguesa), Vigo, 73 p.
Cuenca Sanabría, J.; Rivero López, G. (1994): La Cueva de los Candiles y el
santuario del Risco Chapín.- El Museo Canario XLIX / 1992-94, Las Palmas
de G.C., 59-99 [on engraved female pubics in a Canarian cave]
Danielou, Alain (1998): Der Phallus. Metapher des Lebens, Quelle des Glücks.
Symbole und Riten in Geschichte und Kunst.- Gelbe Reihe Magnum 7
(Diederichs), München, 130 p. (French original 1993)
Dieterich, Albrecht (1913): Mutter Erde. Ein Versuch über Volksreligion.- G.
Teubner, Leipzig-Berlin, 138 p.
Famin, César (1836): Musée Royal de Naples, peintures, bronzes et statues
érotiques du cabinet secret.- Ledoux, Paris, XXX + 159 p.
García Rivero, Daniel (2017): The evolution of anthropomorphism in the neo-lithic
engraved plaques of Southwestern Iberian Peninsula: a systematic
approach from phylogenetics.- Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences
vol. 9/8 (Springer), 1689-1714
Gassner, Jutta (1993): Phallos. Fruchtbarkeitssymbol oder Abwehrzauber?-
Böhlau Verlag, Wien-Köln-Weimar, 274 p.
Gauthier, Yves & Christine (1999): Un nouveau type de monuments en pierres
sèches à la limite Nord de l'Edeyen de Murzuq (Fezzân, Libye)?- Almogaren
XXX (Institutum Canarium), Vöcklabruck (Austria), 131-143
Gauthier, Yves & Christine (2004): Réflexions autour des monuments en "U"
du Sud-Ouest du Fezzân (Libye).- Sahara 15, Segrate (Milano), 137-150
Gimbutas, Marija (1996³): Die Sprache der Göttin. Das verschüttete Symbol-system
der westlichen Zivilisation.- 2001-Verlag, Frankfurt/M., 416 p.
(American first edition 1989)
Grupo de Acción Local de la Sierra del Segura (2015): Arte rupestre en la Sier-
ALMOGAREN 48-49/2018MM59
ra del Segura, Albacete.- Monográficos de la Sierra del Segura 1, Elche de la
Sierra (D.L. Albacete), 50 p.
Herber, Jean (1922): Tatouage du pubis.- Revue d'ethnographie et des traditions
populaires 9 (Societé française d'ethnographie), Paris, 37-47
Jordán Montés, Juan Francisco (2004): El arte rupestre en la provincia de Albacete.
Desde los descubrimientos hasta las interpretaciones. Bibliografía e historia
de la investigación.- Cuadernos de Arte Rupestre no. 1, Murcia, 83-128
Le Quellec, Jean-Loïc (1993): Symbolisme et art rupestre au Sahara.- L'Har-mattan,
Paris, 638 S.
Neumann, Erich (1997): Die Große Mutter. Eine Phänomenologie der weibli-chen
Gestaltung des Unbewußten.- Walter Verlag, Zürich-Düsseldorf, 350 p.
text + 185 p. figs. + XV p. index
Pérez Ballester, J. (1992): El abrigo de Reiná (Alcalá del Júcar). Ensayo sobre
un nuevo modelo de lugar de culto en época ibérica.- Serie de Trabajos Varios
del SIP no. 89, Valencia, 289-300
Soleilhavoup, François (2013): Érotisme et sexualité dans l'art rupestre du Sah-ara
préhistorique.- L'Harmattan, Paris, 243 p.
Ulbrich, Hans-Joachim (1997): Sexualität und Scham bei den Altkanariern.-
Almogaren XXVIII (Institutum Canarium), Vöcklabruck, 7-88 [also as PDF
with addendum 2015 on p. 88a-88c] *
Ulbrich, Hans-Joachim (2014): Zu Besuch bei megalithischen Stätten (1) – die
"Rota Megalítica" von Évora (Portugal).- IC-Nachrichten 96 (Institutum
Canarium), Wien, 35-58 *
Ulbrich, Hans-Joachim (2015): Zu Besuch bei megalithischen Stätten (2) – die
Monumente im Hinterland der Costa Brava (Katalonien).- IC-Nachrichten
97 (Institutum Canarium), Wien, 69-98 *
Ulbrich, Hans-Joachim (2016): U-shaped monuments in the badlands of
northern Jordan.- IC-Nachrichten 98 (Institutum Canarium), Wien, 39-54,
map on p. 38 *
Zarzalejos Prieto, M.; Aurrecoechea Fernández, J.; Fernández Ochoa, C. (1988):
Amuletos falicos romanos inéditos de las provincias de Madrid y Toledo.-
Cuadernos de Prehistoria y Arqueología 15 (Univ. Autónoma de Madrid),
Madrid, 301-318
* Online at http://www.institutum-canarium.org/news_e.html
7! #&+%& ➝
An important hint:
Google Earth photos can have in certain regions an age of 20 or even more
years – despite a younger "Imagery Date". The consequence may be that one
or another monument described here on the basis of satellite photography can
no longer be found in situ. Sketches by the author of Albacete monuments
base on the Google Earth satellite images from 2013; these show the structures
mostly better and more original than the actual ones of 2017.
60MMALMOGAREN 48-49/2018
#
 '
,
-
+
#&30*1#221%12% #&30*12%&1&& #&30*111&1#&&&
#&30*1#"%1'#"% #&30*1#"122" #&30*1#12#1""2"
/ (+ ! / ), !
/ & ! / '(- !
/ ' !
/   !
Geoglyphic phalli south of Albacete (Spain) 3
  *+, -	 &2
4
4
4 
 
  ! A 

! 4 
 
  ! A 

!
4
4
4
4
ALMOGAREN 48-49/2018MM61
(
& '#
*
',
)
#&30*1#12"121 #&30*1%2%1"&& #&30*1%"'1%1
#&30*1%2#1112 #&30*1%1%&1''2' #&30*1'&'11
/ ,)- ! / ++ !
/ +#) ! / +-* !
/ -'- !
/ ,)) !
Geoglyphic phalli south of Albacete (Spain) 3
  *+, -	 &2
4
4
4
4
4
4 8
62MMALMOGAREN 48-49/2018
'+
'- '(
'
'*
''
#&30*1'21121'" #&30*1'2&1" #&30*1'211%21
#&30*1'11# #&30*12&1111%& #&30,1#"&&&#"
/ (* ! / +) !
/ +, ! / *- !
/ ,* !
/ ',* !
Geoglyphic phalli south of Albacete (Spain) 3
  *+, -	 &2
4
4
4
4
4
4
ALMOGAREN 48-49/2018MM63
')
-, -+
'&
-
-#
#&30,1%&"%# #&30,1%2'& #&30,1%#22&&"'
#&30,1%%&&#"' #&30,1%11&1& #&30,1'&"&#
/ ,') !
1'++ !2
/ ')' !
/ +'- ! / +&) !
/ ' !
/'(( !
Geoglyphic phalli south of Albacete (Spain) 3
  *+, -	 &2
4
4
4
4
4
4
64MMALMOGAREN 48-49/2018
-'
-*
--
-&
-(
#&30,1'%&#'#2 #&30,1'2&2"% #&30,1"&#&2
#&30,1"'2&#'# #&30,11##&%%&
/ + ! / -(' !
/ '- !
/ ,&- !
/ +# !
Geoglyphic phalli south of Albacete (Spain) 3
  *+, -	 &2
4
4
4
4
4
-)
#&30*1%211"
/ '( !
4
ALMOGAREN 48-49/2018MM65
(#
( ('
(,
(-
(+
#&30,11'%&&'% #&30,121&%#2" #&30,12"&&%"
#&30,12#% #&36*#2211"1" #&36,&%%&'"2
/ () ! / ) !
/ ,+) ! / - !
/ + !
/ ',* !
Geoglyphic phalli south of Albacete (Spain) 3
  *+, -	 &2
4
4
4
A	 !
4
4
A	 !
4
66MMALMOGAREN 48-49/2018
((
(& *#
(*
*,
()
#&36,&'%&#&2 #&36,&'&1&2 #&36,&1%2&'%'
#&36,&#&'&"## #&36,&#'"&' #&36,&#'22&%"
/ )) ! / *&+ !
/ -+ ! / -& !
/ '#( !
/ '+ !
Geoglyphic phalli south of Albacete (Spain) 3
  *+, -	 &2
4
4
4
4
4
4
ALMOGAREN 48-49/2018MM67
*+
*- *(
*
**
*'
#&36,&#"%& #&36,#&#%2' #&36,&%"''&'%#%
#&36,&1#2%&''' #&36,&1%1&1 #&36,##&#&1
/ #+ ! / +- !
/ '- ! / -(- !
/ ++ !
/ +* !
Geoglyphic phalli south of Albacete (Spain) 3
  *+, -	 &2
4
4
4
4
4
9  	 ! A	 !
4
68MMALMOGAREN 48-49/2018
*)
), )+
*&
)
)#
#&30*1#111&1 #&30*1#%#21"# #&30*1#"221%1#'
#&30*1%#'1'%2& #&30*1%#'1"&& #&30*1""#12"1
/ +() ! / () !
/ ( ! / +'- !
/ ++( !
/ +(' !
Geoglyphic phalli south of Albacete (Spain) 3
  *+, -	 &2
4
4
9  	 !
4
4
4
4
ALMOGAREN 48-49/2018MM69
)'
)* ))
)-
)&
)(
#&30*12"1"1%# #&30,1%'"%&' #&30,1%2'&&22&
#&30,1'%%&&2 #&30,1'2#&&&%# #&30,1'12#&'''
/ (+ ! / ,#-' !
/ -* ! / , !
/ ,'+ !
/ -# !
Geoglyphic phalli south of Albacete (Spain) 3
  *+, -	 &2
4
4
4
4
4
4
70MMALMOGAREN 48-49/2018
&#
& &'
&,
&-
&+
#&30,1'11&&&1# #&30,1#%&&'#" #&30,1%2%&1"
#&30,12##1& #&30,12%12&# #&30,12"22&%#
/ -+ ! / -# !
/ '' ! / ' !
/ +- !
/ +' !
Geoglyphic phalli south of Albacete (Spain) 3
  *+, -	 &2
4
4
4
4
4
4
ALMOGAREN 48-49/2018MM71
&(
&& ,##
&*
,#,
&)
#&30,1211&%"11 #&30,112
'' #&30,111#&%%1#
#&30,11"%2&##1 #&36,&%&%" #&30*1#'%"112&&
/ -& ! / #' !
/ )- ! / ,& !
/ +& !
/ * !
Geoglyphic phalli south of Albacete (Spain) 3
  *+, -	 &2
4
4
4
4
4
4
72MMALMOGAREN 48-49/2018
,#+
,#- ,#(
,#
,#*
,#'
#&30*1###112 #&30*1#11221 #&30*1#"'1"&%&
#&30*1#2#1"' #&30*1%#%11'1 #&30*1%#1&1"%
/ +* ! / +,* !
/ ,-+ ! / +,+ !
/ '& !
/ & !
Geoglyphic phalli south of Albacete (Spain) 3
  *+, -	 &2
4
4
4
4
4
4
ALMOGAREN 48-49/2018MM73
,#)
,,,
,#& ,,#
#&30*1%'"1"2'" #&30*1%2212&# #&30*1'"#12
#&30*1'"'12&22
/ +' ! / - !
/ +* !
/ ( !
Geoglyphic phalli south of Albacete (Spain) 3
  *+, -	 &2
,,+ ,,
#&30*1"'12'' #&30*1"#&11"%
/  ! / '' !
4
4
4
4
4
4
74MMALMOGAREN 48-49/2018
,,'
,,*
,,-
#&30*1'"1#' #&30*1#%112
#&30*1'11&'&
/ +-& !
/ +# !
/ '#& !
Geoglyphic phalli south of Albacete (Spain) 3
  *+, -	 &2
,,) ,,&
#&30*1''1122% #&30*1#1""'2
/ -'+ ! / ,*& !
4
4
,,(
#&30,1"2'
/ +(' !
4
4
4
4
ALMOGAREN 48-49/2018MM75
,+#
,+
,+, ,++
#&30*12"&11&# #&30*12#211## #&30,1##%1&&
#&30,1##&&%
/ () ! / +-( !
/ + !
/ +- !
Geoglyphic phalli south of Albacete (Spain) 3
  *+, -	 &2
,+' ,+-
#&30,1#12#&&" #&30,1'2"'&#
/ ,+ ! /  !
4
4
4
4
4
4
76MMALMOGAREN 48-49/2018
,+(
,+&
,+* ,+)
#&30,1%#&%# #&30,1'11&&&1% #&30,1"'&%##
#&30,1%&22'
/ +'- ! / ,& !
/ +)* !
/ , !
Geoglyphic phalli south of Albacete (Spain) 3
  *+, -	 &2
,# ,,
#&30,111&#&" #&30,12%&'%2
/ -+ ! / -) !
4
4
4
4
4
4
ALMOGAREN 48-49/2018MM77

	
 

	
 

		
 

	
 	   
 
  
  
Geoglyphic phalli south of Albacete (Spain)    ! 
 
	
 
    
 
"
" "
"
"
"
78MMALMOGAREN 48-49/2018
,)
,&
,'#
#&36,
&"'&' 7

 	 	 =
	 	
#&36,&%"'1&'%#%
/ ,) !
/ ,)( !
Geoglyphic phalli south of Albacete (Spain) 3
  *+, -	 &2
The sketches have not the same scale. All maxi-mal
extensions (ME) and all sketches in Figs. 30-
139 are more or less approximately. In most cases
it is not clear how long the shaft of the phallus
was originally meant to be. Sudden changes in
the direction of lines may not be the intention of
the original constructor, but rather the result of
dislocation of the stones by meteorological proc-esses
(erosion, storms etc). The above mentioned
"darker material" in some of the triangles could
in fact be a different kind of soil or a layer of
fine-grain debris, but possible is also a low veg-etation
blanket which had a slightly better pro-tection
between the low walls of a triangle than
in the open savannah – the satellite images de-liver
not enough resolution to evaluate this ex-actly.
Fig. 140 shows an idealizing sketch of the
"average" Albacete phallus geoglyph.
4
4
-	 B $	 

		 $ 
 
  !  9 	
  
 $ $



		
  =
 	 
!
C
    
3		

	 $
 
D	 
7	 	

 

D	  


C	 
 	 
 
  	
 E