The Fremont: An Enigmatic People and Their Rock Art
Judy Breen
ANT 517
12/12/2000
Archaeologists often rely on material traits to define culture groups. In the Southwest, one such group, the Fremont culture, has to a large degree defied classification. Inhabiting an expansive territory in the northern reaches of the Southwest, the Fremont sometimes look archaeologically very similar to their neighbors, the Anasazi, and to groups living on the Plains and in the Great Basin. The origin and eventual demise of the Fremont culture has been the subject of much debate, as has the question of whether the Fremont even constitute a “culture.” More than any other term “variable” seems to describe the Fremont best. Several traits appear more distinctly “Fremont” including a certain type of basketry, elaborate clay figurines, and a type of rock art, but many items and life ways of this diverse group are similar to those of neighboring regions. In the Fremont areas bordering those of the Anasazi, Fremont material culture both differs from and resembles that of its southern neighbors. Rock art in particular provides an interesting example of the diversity and cohesiveness within the Fremont culture and evidence of Fremont interaction with nearby peoples.
Noel Morss (1931), using survey work completed along the Fremont River in south central Utah, was first to designate the Fremont as a culture, one he saw as primitive and peripheral to the Anasazi. Since that time researchers have expanded the territory attributed to Fremont habitation to include most of Utah north of the Colorado River, parts of western Colorado and eastern Nevada, and a small section of southern Wyoming (Figure 1). This variable landscape includes alpine meadows, deep canyons, and spring-fed marshes, and spans both Basin and Range and the northern Colorado Plateau. This land, containing a number of rivers and abundant wild game and plants, had much to offer inhabitants. Researchers have provided a number of temporal ranges for Fremont habitation, with the most encompassing being 2000-500 B.P. (Madsen and Simms 1998).
The origin of the Fremont has been a disputed subject. Some researchers argue for an in situ development from the Desert Archaic culture (Aikens 1970; Marwitt 1970; Husted and Mallory 1967). Others have also suggested an in situ development but with a great deal of influence from the Anasazi to the south (Ambler 1966). Archaeologists have proposed a migration origin with an influx of people from the Virgin Anasazi region (Gunnerson 1969) or from the northwestern Plains (Aikens 1966). Researchers base these suppositions on Fremont material traits that are similar to those of people from outside of the Fremont region, such as tipi rings, shield pictographs, projectile point forms, moccasins, and pottery manufacturing techniques. None of these theories seems to adequately explain the variation that exists within the Fremont region (Madsen 1979).
The patterning of Fremont material traits has led archaeologists to outline a number of regional variants. The most commonly used model divides the Fremont area into five sub-regions (Marwitt 1970) (Figure 2) based on differences in architecture, ceramics, figurine and rock art styles, and means of subsistence. Traits do not stay contained within sub-regions; rather they merge and overlap in border areas. These Fremont variants are geographic, not temporal, units.
This lack of coherence led Madsen (1979) to question the value of discussing the Fremont as a singular entity. Instead he proposed the existence of two cultures based mainly on subsistence differences—a Sevier culture connected with the Great Basin and marshland gathering and a Fremont culture more closely associated with the Anasazi and more reliant on agriculture. This division would help explain the variation of material traits and potentially different origins. Recent research often focuses more on behavior and commonalities and less on regional variations, viewing the Fremont culture as a continuum with differences coming from local adaptations to the environment (Madsen 1989). Madsen and Simms (1998) note that while in place development is probably the most agreed upon proposal today, the Archaic acceptance of maize agriculture, the bow and arrow, and other traits associated with farming groups in the Southwest, probably happened in a piecemeal fashion involving a variety of groups over a thousand year period, making the transition from Archaic to Formative a much more multifaceted process than most archaeologists allow.
In a nutshell, many archaeologists consider the Fremont to have been highly diversified hunters and gatherers living in the eastern Great Basin and western Colorado Plateau who over the course of a thousand years slowly adopted and modified some Southwest farming techniques and technology and who, after another 500-600 years, either left the region or became incorporated into immigrant groups. Unfortunately this tells us very little about what makes the Fremont, “Fremont” (Madsen and Simms 1998).
As previously discussed, archaeologists have connected a variety of material traits to the Fremont culture, although these attributes do not come together as one component. The following is a description of a number of these traits, including some that are more distinctive to the Fremont and others that they share with their Anasazi neighbors. It is important to note that even those items more characteristic of the Fremont appear so variably within the region that they are not always useful in distinguishing Fremont sites, particularly since many items are perishable.
Basketry—Fremont basketry provides one of the clearest distinctions from the Anasazi in terms of material culture (Adovasio 1980). The basketry was generally quite well made and commonly had a close coiling with one-rod-and-bundle construction. The rods were usually either squawbush or willow and the bundle was normally yucca (Gunnerson 1969).
Ceramics—The Fremont created pottery using a coil and scrape method. The coils were rarely left unobliterated, as was common on Anasazi corrugated ceramics. Fremont pottery is thin-walled, gray, and tempered with crushed rock or sand. Decorative surface manipulation is one distinctive aspect of Fremont ceramics. This can involve incising, pinching, punching, or applying strips of clay to unfired pots. White slip, geometric designs in black paint, and fugitive red pigment sometimes appear on ollas, pitchers, bottles, and bowls. Reworked sherds occur fairly often. Trade items from Kayenta and Virgin Anasazi cultures do appear at Fremont sites but not in large quantities (Gunnerson 1969; Madsen 1977).
Projectile Points—No single point or group of points characterizes Fremont sites. Regional point diversity in the southern Fremont area began about A.D. 950 with the introduction of Parowan Basal-notch, Nawthis Side-notched, and Bull Creek points. These types are identical to those used in by the Anasazi in adjacent regions (Holmer and Weder 1980).
Architecture—There is a fair amount of architectural variation within the Fremont region. Pit houses ranging from almost round to nearly square are the most common structure, but jacal, coursed adobe, and masonry structures also exist. Anasazi and Fremont architecture share some commonalities (e.g. clay-rimmed firepits and slab use in wall construction) but many Anasazi traits such as room partitions, antechambers, benches, and sipapus are missing from Fremont sites (Lohse 1980). Masonry structures are generally constructed of undressed slabs dry-laid and chinked with adobe or wet-laid in adobe mortar. Small structures and cists in rock shelters occur frequently. Kivas do not appear at Fremont sites (Gunnerson 1969).
Subsistence—The Fremont subsistence strategy appears to have varied with local environmental conditions. On the Colorado Plateau, subsistence centered on agriculture supplemented by hunting and gathering, although the Fremont seemed to have relied to a greater degree on hunting than the Anasazi did (Madsen 1980). There is evidence for ditch irrigation several places in Utah (Gunnerson 1969), and researchers have traced a specific type of corn, Fremont Dent, to the Fremont area (Winter 1972). A complicated movement between foraging and agriculture, and between mobility and sedentism seems to have formed the basis for Fremont subsistence strategy (Madsen and Simms 1998).
While much about the Fremont culture is disparate, a rock art with both regionally consistent elements and intriguing sub-regional style differences is a cultural feature that extends throughout the area. The Fremont region, as well as surrounding locales, contains a wealth of spectacular petroglyphs and pictographs that reflect a variety of cultures and ideas. Rivers, including the Colorado, Gunnison, and Green, have long supplied a conduit bringing people into the region. Borders between culture regions were often quite fluid. Rock art in the region dates from the early Archaic to protohistoric and historic times. Stylistic and technical differences provide clues to the creators of the various works. Overlap of styles between different culture groups provides probable evidence for interaction between peoples, and overlap of art shows time depth and the movement of peoples through the region over the centuries.
Schaafsma (1971) divides the Fremont region into sub-groups based on differences in rock art styles (Figures 3 and 4). These styles are not definitive and should be considered convenient units of discussion. The Uinta region of northeastern Utah and northwestern Colorado contains many examples of the Classic Vernal Style. Further south are the Northern and Southern San Rafael Style groups in an area that borders the region inhabited by the Mesa Verde Anasazi. West of the Wasatch Mountains lies the Western Utah Painted Style in the Salt Lake area and the Sevier Style A that borders the Virgin and Kayenta Anasazi regions to the south.
Fremont rock art style groups share similarities in the types of elements used including large, supernatural looking anthropomorphs often with decorations and headdresses, a variety of zoomorphs, and many simple abstract forms (Cole 1994). The styles vary in the frequency that different elements appear and in modifications made to the elements. Figure 5 shows a breakdown of stylistic element frequencies between style groups. Below is a description of individual style group characteristics.
Classic Vernal Style—Many associate anthropomorphs with Fremont rock art, and these figures dominate Classic Vernal Style sites. Anthropomorphic figures in the Classic Vernal Style have trapezoidal bodies, and large round, rectangular, or bucket-shaped heads. Figures are precisely pecked in solid or outlined form, and are occasionally created with drill holes. Painted figures appear but are less common than pecked. Torsos are generally stylized, with single or double lines used to imply arms and legs. Hands are often missing, but feet and toes appear more regularly. The anthropomorphs frequently have elaborate decoration such as headgear or “helmets,” earbobs, necklaces, and facial markings such as the “weeping eye” (Figure 6). Figures sometimes appear to be carrying shields and heads or masks (Figure 7a and 7b) (Schaafsma 1971; Castleton 1984).
Other elements that appear less often include zoomorphs such as bears, birds, serpents, porcupines, deer, sheep, and bison. One-pole ladders, human hands, bear claws, and flute players appear in lower frequencies as well. Abstract symbols include mazes, spirals, concentric circles, dots, and asterisks. In general, Classic Vernal Style rock art is precise, well executed, and carefully arranged in pleasing visual patterns (Schaafsma 1971).
Northern San Rafael Style—Nine Mile Canyon in the northern part of the San Rafael region has over 100 recorded rock art panels. Art of the Northern San Rafael differs in several ways from the Classic Vernal. Anthropomorphs are less common and are not as large or as elaborately decorated as those farther north. The average panel contains far greater numbers of figures, and for the most part they are less carefully executed (Castleton 1984). Northern San Rafael anthropomorphs generally maintain the trapezoidal shaped torso, although a few are triangular or rectangular. Some appear to wear kilts and have rakelike horns on their heads, but facial feature or other elaboration is rare. Arms bent at the elbows and hands with outspread fingers are common. Most are solidly painted or pecked. In general, San Rafael figures appear more active and realistic than Classic Vernal Style (Cole 1994).
Animals occur quite frequently either singly or in groups. Mountain sheep are most common and sometimes appear with a hunter holding a bow-and-arrow (Figure 8). Deer and elk also show up, as well as an occasional bison. A few of the animal depictions are quite naturalistic. Snakes appear at several sites, and the few birds that occur seem to be waterfowl. Abstract forms appear alone or in conjunction with representative figures. The abstract figures include wavy lines, circles, and concentric circles. Spirals appear less frequently than in Classic Vernal, but dots and dot pattern occur more often in Northern San Rafael Style (Figure 9).
Southern San Rafael Style—The southern border of this region includes Fremont sites in areas predominantly occupied by Kayenta Anasazi. Terrain covered by the Southern San Rafael Style group is rugged and the sites are widely scattered. This may help account for the greater degree of style variation in this area than in the previously discussed regions, although some generalizations are still possible. The anthropomorphic figures in this area regain some of the elaborateness of those in the Classic Vernal Style including complicated headgear, hair or earbobs, necklaces, and facial decoration. Some, particularly in the Fremont River area, have hunched shoulders (Figure 10). Painted forms are more common in this region, and show some characteristics similar to those of the clay figurines including lack of appendages, paired figures, round or extended chin, common styles of hair, and “coffee bean” eye shapes. Shield figures also appear quite often. Abstract forms occur alone and with representative figures. Execution of the rock art in the southern San Rafael is more careful than that of the northern area.
One figure type distinctive of the San Rafael region is a small thin humpbacked form that is usually carrying a staff and sometimes appears in contexts away from other Fremont work. It may represent a particular aspect of Fremont mythology (Schaafsma 1971) (Figure 11).
Art near the borders of the southern San Rafael shows signs of mixture with the Anasazi. In the Moab and La Sal Mountain region, trapezoidal forms associated with the Fremont occur in conjunction with flute players, animal tracks, and hand-holding figures more typical of Anasazi rock art. Along the southern periphery, areas such as the Kaiparowitz Plateau show some interdigitation between Kayenta Anasazi and Fremont although not blending of the cultures (Schaafsma 1971).
Western Utah Painted Style—Schaafsma lists this style as a tentative category best represented in the Salt Lake region. Rock art in this style includes paintings of triangular and trapezoidal shaped anthropomorphs. Other painted geometric designs and handprints found in the region may possibly be included in this style.
Sevier Style A—This style contains some elements closely resembling those in the eastern part of the Fremont cultural region although the style is not as well documented as those in the east. Characteristic of many Sevier Style A sites are compact groups of neatly pecked images. Triangular or trapezoidal anthropomorphs appear but are not often the dominant element. Some of the figures have horns, and many have a small triangular, square, or boat-shaped element attached to the base of the form (Figure 12). Birds and quadrupeds, most often sheep, are fairly common. Abstract forms appear at Sevier A sites more often than in any other Fremont style group, particularly dots, dot groups, wavy lines, and spirals. Some images seem similar to pottery or textile designs. The Sevier Style A area borders on a region dominated by the Great Basin Curvilinear Style, which is characterized by circles, concentric circles, sun disks, curvilinear meanders, stars, and snakes. This may explain the greater propensity for abstract forms in Sevier Style A (Schaafsma 1971).
Within the southern San Rafael region exists a group of rock art sites containing large anthropomorphic figures but in a style that differs from the Fremont. These sites are concentrated near the confluence of the Green and Colorado Rivers between Barrier Canyon and North Wash and along the San Rafael Swell. Named the Barrier Canyon Style, this complex style of rock art has not been securely dated. Large ghostlike anthropomorphs dominate Barrier Canyon sites, many life-size or larger. These abstracted figures vary from sketchy to carefully painted and elaborately decorated forms. They appear long and tapered with sloping shoulders and a bottle shape, or at times with rounded and protruding shoulders. Arms and legs may or may not be present. Sometimes the figure is carrying something or participating in an activity.
Anthropomorph heads vary from nonexistent, to small and round on long necks, to large, round, and flat on top. Facial features sometimes include round staring eyes that can appear buglike. Various headgear types include short paired projections, curved horns or ears, long antennae, and crownlike features of white dots or lines. Torsos may have decorative dots or lines, and zigzag lines may appear near the figure. Wild plants and naturally depicted birds or animals often occur with the anthropomorphs but are a much smaller size (Figure 13) (Schaafsma 1971).
Dating the Barrier Canyon Style is difficult although some evidence does point to the style predating the Fremont. Very little archaeological evidence exists near the art to help procure reliable dates. Several Barrier Canyon figures appear to hold wild plants and possible threshing tools, but reliance on wild plant gathering remained part of the subsistence strategy from the Archaic through the Fremont occupation so that information provides little to help date the art. At some sites, the superposition of Fremont art over Barrier Canyon figures at least points to an earlier date for the Barrier Canyon work. A few sites show aspects of both styles (Cole 1994). The Barrier Canyon Style does not appear to be a variant of the Fremont Style. There are some general similarities between the Fremont and Barrier Canyon Styles including the dominant anthropomorph figure with tapered body and round, square or bucket-shaped head, but the emphasis and decorative details differ enough to imply that they are two distinct and discrete styles. However, it remains possible that Fremont art was to some degree influenced by the Barrier Canyon Style (Schaafsma 1971).
Fremont rock art shows evidence of contact with Anasazi groups. The Sevier Style A appears to have received influence from the Virgin and Kayenta Anasazi, particularly from a style called Cave Valley centered in southern Utah near Zion National Park. Cave Valley Style anthropomorphs have a horizontal element at the base of the torso from which legs drop down, similar to a basal feature in Sevier Style A anthropomorphs. Additionally, both anthropomorph styles exhibit a line extending across the head ending in downward projections (Figures 14 and 15). Both styles also share a decorative rectilinear scroll, rectilinear meander, and other abstract elements similar to those found on pottery and in textiles (Schaafsma 1971).
On the eastern side of Fremont territory, plumed serpents and flute players, although appearing only rarely, may show a connection between the eastern Fremont and the Mesa Verde Anasazi. Other shared elements such as one-pole ladders and shield figures, particularly in Tsegi Canyon, may point toward a Fremont to Pueblo movement of elements as Anasazi expanded into Fremont areas then retreated again in the late A.D. 1200s. Earlier influence of the San Juan Basketmakers on eastern Fremont is more apparent. The two anthropomorph styles share a trapezoidal or triangular shape and the common occurrence of thin arms and legs and splayed hands. Some Basketmaker anthropomorphs have “weeping eyes” like those on Fremont figures (Cole 1994). Basketmaker II figures often have necklaces and round or helmetlike heads similar to Fremont style forms (Figure 16). An apparent time gap of 250 to 300 years between the end of Basketmaker II and the earliest estimates of Fremont art complicates the picture somewhat, but the strong resemblance is clear (Schaafsma 1971).
Schaafsma (1971) proposes that the widespread domination of anthropomorphs and horned figures as well as the high degree of craftsmanship involved in Fremont rock art may indicate the art is an expression of a religious development that covered the Fremont region, although with some regional variations. The masklike features, headdresses, body decoration, kilts, and sashes all point to ritual functions (Cole 1994). The similarities between some rock art figures and clay figurines also appear to suggest a ceremonial purpose. Rock art in the Fremont region often occurs on high cliff faces and in inaccessible places. The high places emphasize the heroic nature of the figures, which, along with the careful craftsmanship of the artist, reinforces the ceremonial aspect of the sites (Cole 1994).
Scenes of hunting with deer, bison, and sheep occur fairly regularly. This is not surprising considering that hunting apparently played an important role in Fremont subsistence. Such panels may relate to shamanistic activities to bring hunting success. Warfare is one possible interpretation of the many shielded figures who at times seem to be holding heads or scalps in their hands, although such depictions may be symbolic of mythological warfare. Birdlike figures may also suggest mythology (Cole 1994).
Many of the Fremont rock art elements are abstract, and Cole (1994) observes that these types of elements are particularly difficult to interpret. Studies show that abstract elements can symbolize things from nature, indicate social groups, or serve as mnemonic devices. Identification of conventional symbols of society is naturally much easier in late prehistoric and historic settings when less time has passed. For the Fremont, this type of interpretation may be particularly difficult because it is unclear which modern people have descended from the Fremont.
Beginning around 900 years ago, the Fremont people began to disappear, although not from the entire region at once. During the next two to four hundred years, they stopped making their classic basketry, pottery, rock art, and figurines. By 600 B.P., horticulture ended in the central Fremont region, although it continued in northwestern Colorado for another century. Archaeologists disagree on what caused the demise of the Fremont but it was likely a number of interrelated factors. One potential factor was poor climatic conditions that made farming less tenable and forced people into a greater reliance on wild foods and increasing mobility (Madsen and Simms 1998).
Another possibility has to do with the fluidity of groups during this time period. The 12th and 13th centuries were a time demographic upheaval in western North America with increasing population and agricultural intensification in the Southwest and greater social complexity and warfare in California. It may have corresponded to the arrival of new cultural groups in the Fremont territory including Shoshone, Ute, and Paiute. This process is not well understood and needs further examination. Some explanations have the Fremont displaced or replaced by new forager groups. Others see the Fremont possibly integrating into historically known Numic-speaking groups. All that is known for sure is that at the time of Columbian contact, with the exception of some plain ceramics and side-notched points, the Fremont were no longer archaeologically recognizable (Madsen and Simms 1998).
Archaeologists rely on classification to facilitate comparisons between artifacts, sites, and groups of people. In making such simplifications there is always the danger of masking important areas of diversity. As Madsen and Simms (1998) note, “we use ‘Fremont’ as a generic name for an archaeological construct, which, we suspect, fails miserably in defining a people, who, like the landscapes of the Intermountain West, are not easily defined or classified.” The current movement away from this defining effort is likely to yield a more useful approach.
One common element shared among the “variable” Fremont appears to be an emphasis on the creation of rock art. As in the other cultural aspects of this disparate group of people, regional variation in rock art does exist. However, the commonalities that occur in rock art also appear to highlight a tie that binds people spread across a wide and diverse landscape, and to describe an interaction with neighboring peoples. While interpretation of rock art is difficult, continued study of this expressive form may provide archaeologists additional clues about the enigmatic Fremont culture.