Insect life

HU1I1lpbacked FlutePlayer and OtherEn to:m.o:m.orphsfroJln the AJlner:ll.canSouthwestBy JOHN L. CAlPXNERA

insectsare frequent elements of art andreligion in American southwestern cuItures (Capinera 1993) and have been

used for food and medicine. However, thecultural significance of insects among indige-nous peoples is poorly known and seldomappreciated by entomologists and anthropol-ogists.

Anthropomorphic art often is linked toreligion, and it is not surprising that variousanimals are identifiable in the context of reli-gious ceremony. Indigenous Americans hold abalanced nature in reverence; thus, all ele-ments of their environment are held in highregard. Also, the interconversion of humansand animals is a common tenet of southwest-ern American religions, and animal anteced-ents are frequent in their creation mythology.(The most comprehensive treatment of south-western cultural entomology is a treatise ofNavajo ethnoentomology by Wyman andBailey [1964], but useful discussions are alsoprovided by Fewkes [1910], Hitchcock[1962], Wright [1977], Kevan [1979, 1980],Hogue [1987], and Cherry [1993]).

AMERICAN ENTOMOLOGIST • Slimmer 1995

The iconography of indigenous Americansouthwestern cultures contains a fascinatingarray of anthropomorphic and entomomor-phic figures. Much of what has been writtenabout these figures is solely descriptive, andthe serious attempts that have been made toanalyze the symbolism have rarely taken anentomological perspective. Two common en-tomomorphic figures, the humpbacked fluteplayer and Kokopelli, have attracted particu-lar attention due to their appearance in sever-al cultures over a long expanse of time. Inrecent years, archeological and anthropologi-cal publications generally have distinguishedbetween these two related figures, but olderpublications and current popular publica-tions often use these names interchangeably.

Humpbacked Flute Player

The humpbacked flute player is the hu-man form of the cicada (Carr 1979), an im-portant insect in American southwesternmythology. Why should the cicada be partic-ularl y significant among the many insects and

Nymphal exuvium and teneraladult cicada. Cicada serves asthe insect model for thehumpbacked flute player ofsouthwestern mythology, and hasa central role in the Navajocreation myth.

83

Humpbacked flute playerpetroglyphs from northern NewMexico (after Renaud 1948).This fertility symbol is one of themost popular subjects for artisticexpression among severalsouthwestern cultures.

84

other animals inhabiting the southwesternenvironments? Perhaps:the attributes of cica-das are the key to their significance.

Cicadas spend most of their lives asnymphs in the soil, feeding on the roots oftrees and shrubs. Nymphs are well-equippedwith fossorial prothoracic legs for digging intheir subterranean habitat. As they approachmaturity, they emerge from the soil, climbvegetation and other vertical surfaces, andanchor themselves to a substrate (usually thebark of trees) with their tarsal claws. Afterswallowing air and pumping blood to the tho-racic region of the body, the nymphal integu-ment splits along the back, and the adultcrawls out from the old cuticle. Initially, theadult is pale or white, but gradually turnsbrown. Cicadas often emerge synchronouslyfrom the soil, becoming abundant for briefperiods of time. The adults are strong fliers.The general humpbacked appearance causedby the enlarged prothorax, so evident in thenymph, is only slightly diminished in theadult. The fossorial prothoracic legs are re-placed by slender legs in the adult, but thelong tubular mouthparts suitable for piercingvascular tissue of plants and extracting plantsap remain evident. In the adult stage, malecicadas produce a loud buzzing sound. Thefrequency of sound production is directly re-lated to temperature. Adults are especiallyvocal on hot days.

The inhabitants of the American south-west were clearly aware of cicada morpholo-gy and life history. There is a fairly precisecorrespondence between their mythology andcicada natural history. Although mythologyvaries slightly from tribe to tribe, and evenamong storytellers within tribes, certain com-mon patterns are evident, and cicadas rou-tinely have significant roles.

In the Navajo creation (emergence) myth(Locke 1976; see Capinera 1993 for a summa-ry), the cicada had a central role in attainmentby Navajos of the presently inhabited world.This story probably is an account of the ex-ploration and invasion of the Southwest byancestors of the present-day tribes, possiblyeven tracing their dispersal from Asia. In ap-propriate recognition of the strong flying abil-ity of cicadas, the ancestors of the modern-day Navajo reportedly sent cicadas out toexplore their new environment as they movedfrom world to world seeking a permanenthome. Both regular and white (teneral?)forms of cicadas routinely performed thefunction of scout in the Navajo journey fromworld to world. The cicada also was the ani-

mal that successfully burrowed through soilto help the Navajo attain the current world.In the creation myth, the ancient peoples weretrapped in another world and even formida-ble animals such as the badger were unable todig into the new world. As already noted, ci-cada nymphs are well equipped for diggingand were able to prove their worth by leadingthe way to a new land. Finally, but equally im-portant, the current world once belonged togrebes, and the cicada had to prove itself as aprecondition of winning the world for theNavajos by withstanding a challenge of beingimpaled with arrows. Insects, including cica-das, are surprisingly difficult to kill by impal-ing. Many an insect collector who has pinneda "dead" insect has returned days later to findthe insect rejuvenated. It is noteworthy, per-haps, that cicadas have pronounced lateralspiracles, which resemble puncture wounds.

In virtually all anthropological accounts,cicada is called locust. However, locust is anold-world term applied to grasshoppers thattend to aggregate into swarms and migrate,forming damaging plagues. Confusion of theterms has long been a problem (Kevan 1980).Nevertheless, Navajos easily distinguishedbetween grasshoppers and locusts (1tahacagi )and cicadas (wonistsidi ) (Wyman & Bailey1964, Kevan 1979); cicadas, not locusts orgrasshoppers, played the essential role in thecreation myth.

The humpbacked flute player is repre-sented in many forms, but usually is seen as ananthropomorph with two arms, two legs, twoantennae, a humped back, and an end-blownflute. Common variants include presence of apenis, substitution of a prayer or plantingstick for the flute, or variation in antennalnumber. Good examples of humpbackedflute player representations can be found inGrant (1978), Schaafsma (1980), Cole(1990), and Young (1985, 1990). However,the most complete collection of images isfound in Renaud (1948). Humpbacked fluteplayer motifs are found on Hohokam andMimbres pottery (Grant 1978) and petro-glyphs and murals from numerous cultures(Renaud 1948, Young 1985). Occasionally,they comprise the subject of pottery and stonefigurines (Lambert 1957, 1967).

The humpbacked flute player is reputedto be a fertility symbol, which may accountfor its popularity. Many depictions are decid-edly phallic, but also important is the presenceof seed, harbinger of new plant life, in hishump. The flute player creates warmth, sonecessary in the temperate climate populated

AMERICAN ENTOMOLOGIST • Summer 1995

by the Pueblo peoples of the Southwest, byplaying his flute. The Anasazi petroglyphs il-lustrated by Grant (1978) show this beautiful-ly: illustrated are planting sticks, sproutingseed, and anthropomorphic (entomomor-phic) figures with flute and planting stick ..

Cicadas serve as good models for the at-tributes of the humpbacked flute player. Cica-das, like most insects, are highly fecund,sometimes attaining alarmingly high anddamaging numbers. Cicadas are decidedlyhumpbacked in form, appear in the warmmonths, and produce loud, acoustic displays.The amount of vocalization is positively cor-related with temperature. When examinedfrom below, the long tubular mouthparts ofthe cicada extend from the base of the headdown between the legs. A dead cicada ornymphal exuvium truly appears to be playingan end-blown flute when examined in thismanner. The Anasazi flute player effigy pitch-er illustrated by Lambert (1967) resemblesnothing so much as a cicada exuvium.

The lack of exact correspondence be-tween insect morphology or insect life historyattributes, and the mythology or physicalmanifestations of mythical characters shouldnot serve as a basis for entomologists or an-thropologists to dismiss the possible impor-tance of entomofauna in native Americanculture. Rather, the mythology is vital testi-mony to the high degree of familiarity thatearly peoples had with their environment, in-cluding seemingly trivial elements. It cannotbe overemphasized that the mythologicalcharacters in these stories were not insects aswe know them today; they were large insectpeople, possessing characteristics of both hu-mans and insects. For example, the Zuni re-port that "all the animals and bugs used tospeak way back then" (Young 1985). Obvi-ously, it is foolish to attempt to interpret my-thology too literally, and entomologists andanthropologists should keep in mind thatpetroglyphs and other ancient artistry will notbe scientifically correct illustrations of insects.At best, we should expect to see an artist'sinterpretation of insect and human hybrids.

KokopelliAmong the Hopi and related Pueblo

tribes, kachina characters figure prominantlyin religious ceremonies. There are hundredsof different kachinas; one that is important inHopi ceremonials and should be of particularinterest to entomologists is Kokopelli. Thekachina Kokopelli is the Hopi interpretation

AMERICAN ENTOMOLOGIST • Slimmer 1995

of the humpbacked flute player. Despite par-allels in symbolism, Kokopelli and the hump-backed flute player are not completelyequivalent (Parsons 1938, Cole 1990).Whereas the humpbacked flute player isequated with the cicada, Kokopelli is derivedfrom a robber fly model (Fewkes 1903).

In many ways, cicadas and robber fliesare very different insects. Robber flies (alsocalled assassin flies or bee catchers) are pred-ators, not plant feeders. Their immature(maggot) stages are not modified for diggingand are rarely observed except by specialists.Most significantly, adults do not sing. Evi-dence that the Hopi distinguish between theinsects is apparent from the fact that a cicada

(top) Petroglyph from ChacoCanyon, New Mexico showingflute players, planting sticks, andsprouting seed (after Graht1978).

(bottom) Flute player effigypitcher from the Anasazi cultureresembles the exuvlum of acicada nymph (after Lambert1967).

85

•..I

II

Adult robber fly, insect model forthe Hopi kachina Kokopelli.

The Hopi kachinaKokopelli showsmany of the physicalattributes of robberflies, but there is alsoa strong historicallink to humpbackedflute player (afterFewkes 1903 andWright 1973).

86

kachina, caUed Mahu, appears in dances oc-curring early in the year or in spring (Wright1973).

In Hopi mythology, kachinas were benev-olent, anthropomorphic spirits who accom-panied the ancient Hopi from the under-world. They no longer exist, having beenkilled by the Hopi's enemies. However, theHopi believe that many of the benefits former-ly provided by the kachina spirits can be ac-quired by donning the appropriate kachinacostumes and performing certain ceremonies.For sedentary agrarians, such as the Hopi, thegood weather and abundant rainfall formerlyguaranteed by the kachina spirits are of para-mount importance. The kachina cult is bestdeveloped among the western Pueblos (in-cluding the Hopi), but occurs to some degreeamong all Pueblos.

The Hopi appear to have carefully mod-eled Kokopelli after robber flies. The mask,including the alternating white and dark pat-tern and gray or black background, accurate-ly portrays the general appearance of robberflies. Unlike the humpbacked flute player, andmost other insect kachinas (e.g., bee, wasp,

cricket, and cicada), Kokopelli figures lacklarge, paired antennae; antennae in robberflies and many other flies are greatly reducedin size. Most importantly, however, is thepresence of a pronounced beak or snout.Hawley (1937) suggested that this might sig-nify a small end-blown flute or nose-whistlestick. It is not necessary to explain the beak inthis manner; the aggressive robber flies arewell endowed with enlarged and protrudingmouthparts in the form of a beak with whichthey rapidly subdue their prey. The beak,therefore, may be a touch of realism, helpingto identify Kokopelli as a robber fly mimic.Robber flies have a very pronounced hump,much like cicadas, and this is a diagnostic fea-ture of Kokopelli.

The absence of a flute in Kokopelli figureshas been noted repeatedly (Fewkes 1903,Hawley 1937, Parsons 1938, Wright 1973).Although not all humpbacked flute player fig-ures possess a flute (any more than they havehumped backs, antennae, or other "character-istic" features), I interpret the routine absenceof a flute from Kokopelli figures as furtherevidence of a distinction between the hump-backed flute player and Kokopelli. It could beargued that the heat-producing function asso-ciated with the flute is less important to theHopi than to some other cultures. Certainlymoisture is a more important factor than heatin limiting crop production for contemporaryHopi. Nevertheless, from an entomologicalperspective, the presence and absence of aflute corresponds (both morphologically andacoustically) appropriately with cicada androbber fly models for humpbacked flute play-er and Kokopelli, respectively. Anderson(1955) noted a strong conservatism of generalpattern in expressions of the kachina cultamong southwestern cultures, but a ready ac-ceptance of small innovations. Certainly, thesubstitution of robber fly for cicada modelsconforms to this pattern.

Kokopelli is known to the Hopi princi-pally as a seducer of women, although a cor-responding female character, the seductressKokopelli Mana, also occurs. Titiev (1939)provided an erotic mythical account of Koko-pelli's sexual prowess and modern accounts ofseduction behavior by both male and femalekachinas. Kokopelli and Kokopelli Mana aresources of great amusement to the Hopi andformerly were more common participants inceremonials. Prudish white observers foundthe antics lewd and obscene, and governmentofficials suppressed this bawdy tradition(Titiev 1939). This cultural distortioncontin-

AMERICAN ENTOMOLOGIST • Slimmer 1995

ues; traditional depictions of Kokopelli in-clude a large penis (symbolized by a gourd)strapped to the clothing (Fewkes 1903, Titiev1939), whereas modern versions lack this fea-ture (Wright 1973). Kokopelli reportedly car-ried in his hump not only seeds (a carry-overfrom flute player?), but blankets, belts, andother presents that were presented to eachwoman successfully seduced (Parsons 1938).In kachina ceremonials, victims of mock se-duction are presented with packets of somivi-ki (cornmeal cakes) (Titiev 1939). Analogousbehavior perhaps can be seen in robber flies,that, when not engaged in copulation, oftenare observed clutching food (their insectprey). Kokopelli reportedly has functions be-yond representing human fertility. Titiev(1939) indicated that Kokopelli was a bringerof rain, and Renaud (1948) suggested an asso-ciation with successful hunting and multipli-cation of game animals.

Other Entomomorphs

Technically accurate depictions of insectsare unusual in the art of southwestern peo-ples, who favor highly stylized renderings.Probably the most accurate occur on Mim-bres pottery, where many depictions can berecognized to family level. The number andtype of legs, wings, and other morphologicalcharacters often were drawn precisely by theMimbrenos (Cosgrove & Cosgrove 1932).However, a characteristic feature of nearly allMimbres insect figures is large, paired anten-nae, even if, as in the case of caterpillars andflies, the antennae are reduced in size and notreadily discernible. This is not surprising, be-cause antennae are fairly unique to insectsand are used almost universally to designatesimple drawings as insects.

Sometimes, the Mimbrenos produceddrawings of curious mythical creatures. Hy-brids of insects and fish (figure 4 in Rodeck1932), insects and tadpoles (figure 169 inBro-dy 1977), and insects and humans (plate 7 inCarr 1979) are examples of this unusual art-istry. Insect hybrids were provided with prom-inent antennae, as were humpbacked fluteplayer images from this period. The signifi-cance of these insectlike creatures is not defi-nitely known, but Carr's (1979) thesis thatmyths are basically the same among the vari-ous ancient and extant southwestern culturesis tenable, and, therefore, insight into thesedrawings can be gained from examination ofZuni, Tewa, Hopi, Navajo, and related peo-ples. Support for this is provided by Schaafs-

AMI!RICAN ENTOMOLOGIST • Slimmer 1995

rna and Schaafsma (1974), who documentedthe spread of the kachina cult from the Jorna-da region of the Mogollon to the Anasazi andthe Pueblo Southwest.

The important role of insects in south-western mythology and in the creation myth(the Navajo account of Locke [1976] is per-haps the most entomocentric), suggest a reli-gious and historical significance to insects andinsect people. What better subject for illustra-tion of such religious items as altars, funerarypottery, and rock outcroppings at sacred sitesthan the entomomorphs associated with thecreation myth? I suggest that portrayal of en-tomomorphs, and insect people in particular,is a common but overlooked theme, not onlyin Mimbres artwork, but in the many petro-glyphs that span several centuries of humanhabitation in the Southwest.

Numerous examples of entomomorphsare engraved or painted on rocks in the South-west. Some are interspersed with humpback-ed flute players, but lack the most char-acteristic features of this popular figure, thehumped back or flute (e.g., plate 3 in Renaud1948; figure 71 in Cole 1990). More com-mon, however, are entomomorphic figureswith prominent antennae (e.g., figures 51, 66,76, 105, and 124 in Schaafsma 1971; figures4.53,4.55, and 4.57 in Grant 1978), but bear-ing no resemblance to, or association with,flute players. These figures are sometimes re-ferred to as horned, or are considered to beshamans. The long, thin antennae, or elbowedantennae (e.g., figures 51, 66, and 105 inSchaafsma 1971) suggest insect people, how-ever. Cole (1990) and others have argued thatknowledge of symbolism is essential in inter-pretation of rock art. A reexamination ofpetroglyphs with adequate consideration giv-en to the importance of insects and insect peo-ple in southwestern mythology, and in thecreation myth in particular, may allow an-thropologists new insight into the beliefs andpractices of indigenous southwestern peoples.Even our existing limited knowledge providesentomologists with interesting perspective oninsects in native American culture.

Acknowledgments

Robert Lavigne(Universityof Wyoming)kind-lyprovidedthe photograph of the robber fly. JaneMedley,Pat Hope, and BradCoriell(UniversityofFlorida) prepared the illustrations. This is pub-lishedas Florida AgriculturalExperimentStationjournal ~eriesR-04030.

Example of mythical insectperson produced by Mimbrescivilization (after Carr 1979).

Representative unnamedentomomorphic petroglyphs fromUtah (after Schaafsma 1971).These often are referred to ashorned figures or shamans, butare likely insect people.

87

To Order:

•

INSECTS 1995CALENDAR

'MD residents, add 5% sales tax.'Foreign orders, add $3/calendar shipping

Price reduced to just$5* each with this coupon.While supplies last!

• Send payment1.) check2.) Visa (include expo #)3.) Mastercard (include expo #)

• Send shipping address• Send daytime phone number• Send this coupon

IIIIII ESA SalesI 9301 Annapolis RoadI Lanham, MD 20706

I Phone (301) 731-4535Fax (301) 731-4538L .-J

,--------------,CLEARANCE! I

IIIII

John Capinera is professor and chairman ofthe Entomology and Nematology Department atUniversity of Florida, Gainesville. His profession-al interests include vegetable insect pest man-agement, and the ecology and management ofgrasshoppers. Currently, graduate students inhis laboratory are conducting research on biolog-ical control of cucurbit insects and Schistocercaamericana.

1980. Indian rock art of the Southwest. Univer-sity of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Schaafsma, P.& C. F. Schaafsma. 1974. Evidencefor the origins of the Pueblo katchina cult assuggested by southwestern rock art. Am. An-tiquity 39: 535-545.

Titiev, M. 1939. The story of Kokopele. Am. An-thropol. 41: 91-98.

Wright, B. 1973. Kachinas: a Hopi artist's docu-mentary. Northland, Flagstaff, AZ.

1977. Hopi kachinas. Northland, Flagstaff, AZ.Wyman, L. C. & F. L. Bailey. 1964. Navajo Indi-

an ethnoentomology.University of New Mexi-co Publications in Anthropology, no. 12.University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Young, M.j. 1985. Images of power and the pow-er of images: the significance of rock art forcontemporary Zunis. J. Am. Folklore 98: 3-48.

Young, j.V. 1990. Kokopelli. FilteJ; Palmer Lake,CO.

Anderson, F. G. 1955. The Pueblo kachina cult: ahistorical reconstruction. Southwest. J. An-thropol. 11: 404-419.

Brody, J. J. 1977. Mimbres painted pottery. Uni-versity of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.

Capinera, J. L. 1993. Insects in art and religion:the american Southwest. Am. Entomol. 39:221-229.

Carr, P. 1979. Mimbres mythology. Texas West-ern, El Paso, TX.

Cherry, R. H. 1993. Insects in the mythology ofnative americans. Am. Entomol. 39: 16-21.

Cole, S. J. 1990. Legacy on st'Jne: rock art of theColorado Plateau and Four Corners Region.Johnson, Boulder, CO.

Cosgrove, H. S. & C. B. Cosgrove. 1932. TheSwarts Ruin: a typica I Mimbres site in south-western New Mexico. Papers of the PeabodyMuseum of American Archaeology and Eth-nology, vol. 15, no. 1. Peabody Museum,Cambridge, MA.

Fewkes,j. W. 1903. Hopi katchinas. Twenty-firstAnnual Report, Bureau of American Ethnolo-gy, Washington.

1910. The butterfly in Hopi myth and ritual.Am. Anthropol. 12: 576-594.

Grant, C. 1978. Canyon de Chelly: its people androck art. University of Arizona Press, Tuc-son.

Hawley, F. 1937. KQkopelli, of the prehistoricsouthwestern Pueblo pantheon. Am. Anthro-pol. 39: 644-646.

Hitchcock, S. W. 1962. [nsects and indians of theAmericas. Bull. Entomol. Soc. Am. 8: 181-187.

Hogue, C. L. 1987. Cultural entomology. Annu.Rev. Entomol. 32: i81-199.

Kevan, D. K. McE. 1979. Tho.:place of grasshop-pers and crickets in Amer indian cui t u res.Proc. trienn. Meeting Pan. Am. Entomol. Soc.2: 8-74.

1980. Grigs, graces, graphics and graffiti: an essayon elements of ethnoentomology. Metaleptea 2:54-72.

Lambert, M. F. 1957. A rare humpbacked figurinefrom Pecos Pueblo, New Mexico. EIPalacio 64:95-108.

1967. A Kokopelli effigy pitcher from northwest-ern New Mexico. AIl'.. Antiquity 32: 398-401.

Locke, R. F. 1976. The book ohhe Navajo. Man-kind, Los Angeles.

Parsons, E. 1938. The humpbacked flute player ofthe Southwest. Am.Anthropol. 40: 337-338.

Renaud, E. B. 1948. Kokopelli: a study in Pueblomythology. Southwe~t. Lore 14: 25-40.

Rodeck, H. G. 1932. Arthropod designs of prehis-toric Mimbres pottery. Ann. Entomol. Soc.Am. 25: 688-693.

Schaafsma, P. 1971. The rock art of Utah. Pea-body Museum of Archeology and Ethnology,Cambridge, MA.

Suggested Readings:

88 AMERICAN ENTOMOLOGIST • Slimmer 1995