In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

has detached and fallen, exposing the friable sandstone underneath. This bottom rock face (not labeled during the most recent recordation) once contained the largest engraved representation in the cave (Brown 1879:178). The bearlike motif, together with another bearlike motif recorded by Lewis (Lewis 1889), by McKern (McKern 1929), and by Stiles-Hanson (StilesHanson 1987), has been completely destroyed by exfoliation since 1986. Figure 13.9. Redrawn tracing of Area S, Samuel’s Cave. 232 Loubser and Boszhardt Area W is to the right of Area V (Figures 13.2 and 13.3). The rock crust is well developed but is threatened by the relatively recent exfoliation (i.e., post1986 ) to the left. Only two elongated elliptical grooves (Motif #88 and Motif #89), which were not traced, were recognized among all the incised graf¤ti. Incised graf¤ti include a circle and a square. On the ceiling above Area W are the remains of a broad-line engraved motif (Motif #90), which was not traced either. The upper part of Area V is in a far better state of preservation than the lower portion. The lower part is covered by black mineral encrustations and biological growth. The biological growth is the best developed in the entire cave, probably because Area W receives substantial light from the entrance. SIGNIFICANCE ASSESSMENT Samuel’s Cave is signi¤cant for various reasons. Because of its integrity during discovery, its role in early Wisconsin archaeology, its attraction of visitors, and its overall research potential, site 47LC5 was nominated to the National Register of Historic Places in 1986. The cave’s potential for archaeological and conservation research is still intact, even though severe damage has occurred. The most recent recordation shows that a consistent sequence of motif types exists in the cave. Grooves predate geometric motifs, and in some instances grooves are combined to create geometric motifs. Grooves and geometric motifs in turn predate ¤ne-line incised motifs. Pigmented motifs also predate¤ne-line incised motifs (Figure 13.10). Unfortunately, the chronological relationship between pigmented motifs and grooves/geometric motifs is not known. Although the overall time lapse between the different motif types is not known, the relative sequence can be compared with that of other petroglyphs and pictographs in the region (e.g., Loubser 1995). Samuel’s Cave also shows great promise to specialist research interests. For example, the black pigment could be analyzed for identi¤cation and for the possibility of dating. Physical analysis of the black encrustation on the rock surface could be useful in understanding rock weathering processes. Moreover, a geologist with rock-art interests and experience could assess the properties of the local sandstone, as it appears to lack the cementum or binder normally found in sandstone. Also, a conservator could be hired to measure temperature and humidity inside the cave. Additional and more rigorous research undoubtedly will be of use to the long-term conservation of Samuel’s Cave. Samuel’s Cave clearly has historic and research signi¤cance, but it lacks aesthetic value. The aesthetic appeal of the imagery has been irreversibly tarnished by extensive graf¤ti and spalling. Other than its curiosity value, the Samuel’s Cave, Wisconsin 233 “messy” appearance of the rock face within Samuel’s Cave hardly makes it a tourist attraction. The likely spiritual signi¤cance of the place among Native American Indian groups needs further background research. Bearing in mind the presence of Oneota pottery from Samuel’s Cave and other glyph sites in the area (Boszhardt 1995), the imagery most likely dates to late prehistoric times. It is accordingly possible to interpret the rock imagery by looking at the ethnographic record of the region. Also of interest is the deliberate placement of certain motifs so close to the ground surface, particularly Motifs #48, #68, and #70. Positioning of motifs on the rock surface is a matter of choice and may contain suggestive clues as to possible prehistoric signi¤cance of the imagery. CONDITION ASSESSMENT The sandstone appears highly siliceous and it also contains iron. Normally the silica inside the rock is dissolved and deposited on the surface to form a resistant, hardened crust (Davies 1981). However, once this crust is breached, chunks are loosened by the pressure of water and salt crystals, leaving the less-well-cemented interior rock open to further weathering. A good hardened surface, such as in Area O, could be deceptive, because the entire crust can break loose in one episode. Dean (1994:8) rightly suggests that annual...

Share