archetype Archetype in rock art art

Churn of re-creation also in African rock art

The iconic surreal churn of life and spirit, or interchange between matter and energy, is recognised in Indian art and myth as a milky ocean of soma related to a former spring equinox (Furter 2014). This motif also appears in some inspired rock art worldwide, as in this rock painting in Nanke shelter in Zimbabwe. The infinity wimple here expresses the same meaning, as a totality of responses to external pressures, named ‘panarchical discourse’ in history (Gunderson et al 2009), or ‘phase transit’ in chaos theory 3D graphs. Nanke was one of a set of traditional oracles, on par with Bronze Age and classical Greek, Egyptian and other sites. In addition to semi-conscious icons and visions, all complex rock art works also express archetypal structure (see the rock art analysis below).

Roman spiritual centres such as the oracle of the dead at Baia, in the volcanic Bay of Naples near Rome, also had paintings at their entrances; likewise destroyed (Paget 1967; Robert Temple 2003) to re-appropriate spiritual authority. This post demonstrates that one of the many unschooled surrealist rock paintings in the Matobo range, express the same archetypal features as all complex artworks in all cultures.

The dominant general theme in this Nanke shelter rock painting is type 15 Maker, typical of ropes (named ‘rope of the sky’ in San myth and in rock art), churn (here the central character), or re-creation (here nature, animals and people). Another general theme here is the adjacent type 15g, of limb-joints, here part of the ‘churn’ motif (see the introduction above). Another general theme in the work is type 10 Teacher, typical of raised arms, staff, hunt master, ecology, or school.

One of many example of archetypal structure in rock art (Zimbabwe, Matobo range, Nanke Cave. After Parry 2012. Type labels and axial grid after E Furter 2014, 2019).

Type label; Characters in the Nanke cave ‘churn’ painting (noting archetypal features):

1 Builder; Shoulder-head of rope-man churn (twisted), leaning on staffs (trance, of 8 opposite).

2 Builder; Rope-man churn (twisted) (NO EYE).

2c Basket; Shoulder-head rear, ropes (weave). C-types are usually off the grid.

3 Queen; Ostrich (long neck).

4 King; Antelope cow?, with young.

5a Priest; Antelope running (active).

5b Priest; Bowman spanning (active).

5b Priest B; Priest? (ritual?), axis on his chest (heart, of 13 opposite) and three with beams (horizontal).

6 Exile; Antelope (horned). And swimmer (ingress).

7 Child; Swimmer or walker.

7g Galactic Centre; Swimmer, arms up (limb-joints?), staff (of 10). Some apparently interrupted artworks indicate that visual expression spirals out as bags or limbs (named ‘formlings’ in archaeology) from this junction.

8 Healer; Swimmer in churn centre (strong?), at rope-man’s legs (pillars).

9 Healer; Swimmer? (NO EYE).

9c Basket-Lid; Fish pool churn wave (weave, lid).

10 Teacher; Swimmer (arms up?).

11 Womb; Pregnant womb (womb).

12 Heart; Runner?

13 Heart; Lion (felid), axis on chest (heart, confirmed by 15-14-13 flat outline).

14 Mixer; Dancer (dance), arms up, staff (of 10).

15 Maker; Antelope between two ropes (rope).

15g Galactic Gate; Antelope rump (limb joint).

Axial centre; Unmarked as usual.

4p Galactic S. Pole; Small bowman’s feet? (limb-joint?).

11p Galactic Pole; Bender’s shoulder (limb-joint).

Midsummer (cp); Churn’s front elbow (limb joint), on axis 14-15, implying spring and the cultural time-frame as Age Aries-Pisces, probably the perceived era of cultural formation. But midwinter (csp) could be on the churn’s hip (limb joint), on the axis 5, implying spring and the cultural time-frame as Age Taurus, typical of alchemical works in all cultures, and supported by the centrality and prominence of types 1 and 2. Structuralist time-frames are widely approximate, not exact in conscious terms.

Vishnu churn after the Mahabharata (tracing after De Santillana 1969. Type labels and axial grid after Furter 2014). Ropes, churn, canids and doubling express the general theme of types 15 and 15g, re-creation and incarnation.
  • See the stoneprint structuralist anthropology model, theoretical basis, data sources, examples in several media, conclusion, and references, in the paper Blueprint, in a post on


Archetypal structure in mushroom or psilocybin art and fairy art mindprint in modern art

Lindy Kehoe’s Serendipity Circus art of surreal meaning

Artist Lindy Kehoe’s child-styled artwork Serendipity Circus, pictures a semi-visionary dynamic, innocent and joyful moment of children and animals on rowdy, surreal parade in a garden. Her illustrative style is similar to Mark Chagall. She told Mindprint Art: “Chagall has represented a brother to me, in the dream-like trance state I experience when I paint, and when I saw his works first-hand. I have a deep fascination with tracing our hidden roots in etymology, and unveiling patterns and codes that flow from creation and creatives in the collective.” Some time ago she wrote of being ‘immersed in my own mythology… alive in a living story… attempting to weave the fabric of an old tapestry… wanting to be seen, heard, remembered; a story-keeper… to tell a Lemurian fairy-tale of heaven and earth… bringing alive the mythos of others through illustration… to conceive guardians we need, to protect our innocent courage… [in] the multi-dimensional holographic landscapes of dream-time.’

Lindy Kehoe; Serendipity Circus. The artwork subconsciously expresses a high level of integration among nine of the sixteen archetypal themes, typical of visionary or trance artists. her style is similar to Chagall, whom she visualises as a ‘brother’ (after and IG lindy_kehoe_art, with permission. Archetype labels and axial grid by E Furter).

Type Label; Character (archetypal features):

1 Builder; Peacock (bird) on one leg (twist). And cat E.

2c Basket; Vine (weave) with pods (containers, cluster). And cats A, C, and D. And peacock feathers. And trumpet (container). C-types are off the axial grid, but between specific axes.

3 Queen; Tree-cat B (queen?) tall (neck long).

4 King; Vine leaf–eye A, one of two (twins).

5a Priest; Leaf eye.

5b Priest; Rabbit, violet (colour, not counted here due to abundance) with cymbals (priest, hyperactive) leading parade (assembly).

5c Basket Tail; Rabbit’s cymbals (discs). And rabbit fluffy tail (tail).

6 Exile; Tortoise (reptile).

7 Child; Snake (‘rope’, unfold).

7g Gal.Centre; Dog’s forepaws (limb joints, path).

8 Healer; Dog (canid) jumping (bent forward).

9c Basket Lid; Red fly agaric mushrooms (disc, lid) of trance (trance, reveal). And mushrooms (disc). And sea star (lid).

10 Teacher; Seed pods? And dog-tail (canid) as a serpent (snake), waving a stick (staff) in parade (carousel).

11 Womb; Mother giraffe midriff (womb).

12 Heart; Drummer clown child marching.

13 Heart; Mother giraffe chest (heart).

13c Basket Head; Elf (oracle) child with cap (hat, lid) picking inverted vine (tree). And candy-striped mountain peak cap. And cats G and H.

14 Mixer; Trumpeter (time, see Midsummer marker below) marching (dance), with feathers (angel) and peacock (bird) and banner, near the centre (ingress), left eye. And cat F.

15 Maker; Trumpeter marching (rampant, order), large face (face), right eye, with feathers (winged), with banner (sceptre, order). And heart on banner staff (sceptre) with motto (order). And sun face (face).

Axial centre; Trumpeter’s elbow (limb-joint).

4p Gal.S.Pole; Standard staff base (juncture).

11p Gal.Pole; Drummer child’s jaw (limb-joint).

Midsummer; Trumpeter’s jaw (limb-joint).

Midwinter; Unmarked. The solstice axle is on the vertical plane. These markers place midsummer between 14-15, analogous to Cancer-Gemini, thus spring and the cultural time-frame in Age Aries-Pisces, typical of many works made in Age Pisces, particularly towards the end of Age Pisces (which ended in 2016).

Some themes interlock

Kehoe’s Serendipity Circus artwork has an unusually large number of general themes, indicated by extra features of nine types:

3 Queen, typical of long necks (here seven cats and a giraffe), spring (garden);

4 King, of sun, bird, field;

5 Priest, of colours, ritual (parade), hyperactive, assembly, reptile (tortoise, snake), winged (two birds, trumpeter’s feathers);

6 Exile, of horns (caps, and cats’ vine-horns), reptile (tortoise, snake), tree (garden);

7 Child, of bag (two flags), juvenile (two children, young animals);

8/9 Healer, of pillars (tree-cats), disc (turtle, sea-stars);

10 Teacher, of raised arms (of rabbit, two children, dove and elf child), staff (two flag-posts), hunt-master (noise flushing out animals), guard (parade), ecology (fauna and flora), carousel (parade circle);

14 Mixer, of time (serendipity in the title), transform (trumpeter as bird, animals as musicians), tree (garden), felid (many cats), reptile (turtle, snake), dance (parade);

15 Maker, of rampant posture (marching), or order (flags and parade).

Yet another general theme is the four transitional fields, off the axial grid but between specific axes:

2c Basket, of weave (here feathers and vines), instrument (trumpet, drum, cymbals, flags), hat (caps, bells); and its opposite 9c Basket Lid, of discs (cymbals, turtle, sea-stars);

5c Basket Tail, of trees or herbs (garden); and its opposite 13c Basket Head of oracles (sigil on the tortoise back).

Expressing a large number of general themes is typical of visionary, trance, mescaline, psilocybin, ayahuasca or DMT art, often at the cost of leaving some individual character features at minimalist levels. Thematic integration indicates artistic and probably individual maturity.

General themes reveal that nature and culture tend to re-use certain slightly ambiguous features (particularly reptile, bird, felid, horns) in expressions of overlapping themes; while other ambiguous themes, such as equid, are reserved for other works.

  • Structuralist features of expression are universal, and subconscious to artists, architects, builders, crafters and members of any culture.
  • See similar themes and styling in mushroom or psilocybin art in other posts on
  • See similar themes and styling by Chagall in forthcoming posts.
  • See archetypal structuralist analysises of artworks in styles associated with mushrooms, child cartoons, sugar or candy, fairies, mescaline, ayahuasca, and DMT, on and on
mindprint in modern art

Durer’s Melancholy expresses archetypal ambiguity

Albrecht Durer’s emblematic and allegorical engraving of Melancholia, has inspired many interpretations. Its minimalist design uses several objects, particularly scientific instruments, as ‘characters’. Esoteric multimedia artist William Blake had a print of this engraving all his life (Word and Silence 2019). Blake’s own artworks also tended to be emblematic and structuralistically minimalist (Furter 2014). Durer’s Melancholy contains only four living characters (woman, cherub, dog, bat); far fewer than eleven, and thus outside the scope of structuralist analysis (Furter 2014, 2016). But minimalist artworks such as seals, cylinder seals, stamps and jewels, express all five layers of natural and cultural structure by using some items and limb-joints, which usually express polar markers in more complex workss (Furter 2018; Stoneprint Journal 5; Culture code in seals and ring stamps).

Durer’s engraving of Melancholy expresses several general themes, as indicated by extra features of several types, attached to several types. These features also happen to be part of the optional features of several types, and thus archetypally ambiguous: rectangle of types 4 or 15g; furnace or smelt or metal of types 4, 9, 10; disc of types 9,10; building or pillar of types 1v8; school or teacher of types 3v10; laws and crafts of type 10, 11; reptile of types 3v10 or 14; canid of types 9, 10, 14 (see a similar subconscious play on ambiguity in subconscious features of Henry Holiday’s illustrations for Lewis Carroll’s Hunting of the snark, in a post on General themes in Durer’s melancholia include;

4 King; squat (here of both humans), rectangle (magic square), sun (in view), furnace (crucible).

9 Healer; pillar (here the cube, building, and city), smelt (crucible), trance (meditation).

10 Teacher; arms up (here wings), staff (here dividers), metal, disc (millstone), school (crafts).

11 Womb; womb (here the prominent woman, and the sphere), water (here a bay), law (sciences and crafts), library (crafts skills).

14 Mixer; time (here an hourglass, and Temperance), transform (alchemy), angel (two humans), reptile (bat), canid (dog).

Transitional types 2c 5c 9c and 13c Basket, is the strongest general theme here, typical of instruments (here a workshop), revelation (sciences and crafts), disc (millstone, and implied by dividers), planet (sun in view), and metal (crucible and tools).

Ambiguity is a general archetypal theme, typically expressed in emblematic artworks (as in Babylonian, Indus and Egyptian seals), and by esoteric minimalist artists. Recent revelations that Indus seals function as rebus logos for metallurgy suppliers and traders ( deserve more study to examine how some writing conventions came to be used with double meanings. Below is a structuralist anthropology analysis of Durer’s Melancholy, in the standard format (Furter 2016, 2019), noting its structuralist deficiencies, mainly for replacing eyes by other focal points.

Structuralist archetype model analysis of Durer’s Melancholy, in the standard format (Furter 2016, 2019). Minimalist artworks often use items as characters.


Type Label; Character (archetypal features):

2 Builder; Hourglass nail on the building (tower); time as accomplisher (build) and unraveller (ruin). NO EYE.

2c Basket; Scales pan B (instrument, container, arm-link or pivot-link).

3 Queen; Scales pivot (more typical of 10 opposite 3). NO EYE.

4 King; Sun (sun). And cherub sitting (squat). He also has polar functions (see 4p and Midwinter below).

5a Priest; Bat (reptile, winged, hyperactive) with banner (sash) and tail (tailcoat head), under rainbow (colours).

5c Basket Tail; Crucible (container). And cube with tetrahedron removed. Hammer. Dog tail (tail). And lamp?

6 Exile; Dog as lamb of God (sacrifice), curled ( U-shape). Canid is more typical of 14 opposite.

7 Child; Tongs rivet ‘eye’ (eyeless). The shape is more typical of 8.

7g Gal.Centre; Planer (juncture). And saw (juncture).Mallet or inkpad? (juncture). And foot (path).

9 Healer; Divider point A (bent ‘forward’, implied disc) of steel (metal). NO EYE.

9c Basket Lid; Purse (‘lid’, reveal).

10 Teacher; Divider point B (metal, ‘arms’, ‘staff’, implied ‘disc’).

11 Womb; Woman’s midriff (womb) or Science (gestation of knowledge).

12 Heart; Woman’s chest (heart).

13c Basket Head; Woman’s head (head) with wreath (weave, tree, hat), of Science (oracle).

14 Mixer; Woman as Temperance (time, angel) or Alchemy (transform) or the vice Melancholy (passing time); near the centre (ingress).

15 Maker; Bell attachment (churn?) with a rope (rope).

15g Gate: Magic square (grid) of 34. A grid is more usual between 15 and 1, here displaced to between 14 and 15.


22 Axial centre; Unmarked as usual.

4p Gal.S.Pole; Boy angel’s jaw (limb joint).

11p Gal.Pole; Woman’s hip (limb joint). More often inside the outline of types.

Midsummer (cp); Woman’s jaw (limb joint).

Midwinter (csp); Boy angel’s heel (limb joint).

The solstice axle is near the horizontal plane. These markers place midsummer in types analogous to Leo-Cancer, thus spring and the cultural time-frame in Age Taurus-Aries, confirmed by the two types at top centre, expressing the central themes of time and balance. The time-frame is before the work, as usual. A Taurid time-frame is typical of alchemical works.

The analysis score is 25/68 archetypal features; 6/16 axial eye points; 13/4 c-type sector features; 4/2 g-gate sector features; 3/5 polar markers; 1/2 planar or cardinal orientations; 1/1 correlation with the Age, or Age prior to the work; 6/2 general themes; thus 59/100, minus 0 extra characters off the axial grid; total 59%, close to the general average of 60%. Some excessive scores reveal that the current formula is adequate only if the indicated ‘maxima’ are ignored; and if excesses are considered as compensation for the impossibility of full scores in other structuralist layers. Thus the current analysis scoring formula requires further refinement.

Structuralist features of expression are universal, and subconscious to artists, architects, builders, crafters and members of any culture.

Mindprint in ayahuasca art

Eugenia Loli’s Nirvana art peeks into a tower of subconscious revelation

The dominant general theme in Eugenia Loli’s Nirvana artwork is revealed by extra features of type 1 /2 Builder. Its optional recurrent features include cluster (here people and planets), tower, building (here a vault or symbolic subconscious, as recognised by the Builders of the Adytum), hero (rope climber, astronaut, scientist, explorer), book (implied science and library), spring (shadows southward towards green fields), maze (staircases to space-time), and pit (vault). Compare this design with Tarot trump 16, Tower struck by lightning, often shown with scientists and measuring instruments blasted off by lightning of subconscious inspiration. A higher magnitude of 1 is 16 in base-8, an archetypal system often used in natural media (see Furter 2016; Stoneprint p74-81, including atomic numbers in the Periodic table in spiral format after Peyroux).

Type 1 /2 axial opposite is type 8/9 Healer, where optional recurrent features include strength (here the climber and astronaut), pillar (several), heal (implied by levels of consciousness, and maturing students), disc (protractor), smelt (atom), and trance (surrealist style). Between axes 2-9 and 3-10, lie the transitional fields of 2c Basket and 9c lid, whose optional features include weave (here a plant-nest, and atomic orbitals), instrument (telescopic viewers), container (cube), hat (climbing helmet, space helmet, spinning top ‘hat’, and exploration pith helmet), secret (space-time perspective), and planet (here five). Extra expressions of transitional types, and of types 5v12/13, is typical of art styled after ayahuasca, DMT and other hallucinogen visions.

In this work, all the other types, and the polar junctures in the centre, are also strongly expressed, without the direct knowledge of the artist of the five layers of archetypal structure, as usual. Below is the structuralist analysis, in the standard format, of how archetype finds its own expression in Loli’s Nirvana artwork. The ‘Three minutes’ in the title, is analogous to the three planes of space and time in cosmology; and the planes of consciousness of Ego-Shadow, Anima and Self.

The artist sees trials and technology as ‘evolution’

The artist wrote that her theme here is ‘the journey of humanity towards a higher state of being. The building and universe are all we could comprehend in human form… In the process, and part of progress, is war and misery. The cube is a teaser of the ultimate prize, placed by ascended people on the top level. The second level is about expanding our horizons towards enlightenment. The woman in black is ready to make the leap. The man on the staircase tries to call her back, but too late. Two people attempt to reach the third level, one climbing, one using trans-human space technology’.

Terence McKenna had a similar view of technology as part of human ‘skin’ (see posts on Ayahuasca oracle of the dead as counter-cult, on

Loli continues: ‘The climber and the astronaut would both evolve beyond human. The trophy in the cornice between painted angels, is just a trap, since climbers would have to leave behind vices, delusions, limitations and pride. Most never manage that. A skull is hidden in the flying spaghetti monster flower. At the very top, ascended people wait for newcomers to see the bigger picture beyond time and space.’

The presence in Loli’s work of all five levels of archetypal structure, as they are present in artworks and rock art works of the Ice Age, Younger Dryas, Bronze, Iron and modern eras, ironically contradicts the general assumption of ‘evolution’. But the need for individual maturity is part of the rationale of every human life, and perhaps of life itself. This artwork, and the archetypal ‘grammar’ within it, thus raises the unresolved issue of the extent of ‘evolution’.

Eugenia Loli; Three minutes to nirvana (after with permission. Archetype labels and axial grid by E Furter). The work subconsciously expresses about 83% of the currently known archetypal structuralist features; an unusually dense expression for art, but common in complex, psychedelic, New Age, ayahuasca or DMT art where theme, design and inspiration are highly integrated.

Below is the structuralist analysis, in the standard format, of how archetype finds its own expression in Loli’s Nirvana artwork.

Type Label; Character (archetypal features):

1 Builder; Ascended or ‘evolved’ group (cluster) seeing the vault (pit) of several levels (tower, built, maze).

2c Basket; Tropical plant (weave) hanging like a nest (container, throne), holding a skull (monster, as of decan star Algol).

3 Queen; Spinning top, UFO or hat (more typical of 10 opposite, or 9c).

4 King; Venus or planet, its axis to its centre (womb, more typical of 11 opposite).

5a Priest; Earth (colours, hyperactive, assembly, water, large).

5b Priest A; Explorer (hyperactive) calling back the woman from leaving.

5b Priest B; Explorer’s second axis (hyperactive) on chest (heart, of 13 opposite).

5c Basket Tail; Air exit (maze).

6 Exile; Child A (small) using viewer (double-head) in U-mount (U-shape).

7 Child; Child B (juvenile) viewing fire vortex (unfold).

7g Gal.Centre; Fire vortex (vortex, juncture).

8 Healer; Child C using geometry projection (‘strong’, ‘pillar’) at protractor (disc) to imagine (trance) an atomic (smelt) cube.

9c Basket Lid; Atom (disc, reveal) with orbitals (weave) in a cube (lid, instrument) levitated by child (armlink). And protractor (disc, lid, instrument).

10 Teacher; Child D operating viewer (arm up, school).

11 Womb; Woman scientist (law), axis to her midriff (womb) in monument (interior) with cosmic knowledge (library), leaving the vault.

12 Heart; Woman scientist leaving or rising.

13 Heart A; Respirator case (‘heart’) of astronaut (angel).

13 Heart B; Astronaut’s (angel) chest (heart) and tanks (rounded).

13c Basket Head; Astronaut’s head (head) and helmet (hat, lid).

14 Mixer; Rope (more typical of 15) climber between spaces and times (time, transform, angel).

15 Maker; Cornice angel or genie (re-creator) in a pair (doubled, churn, order) at a trophy cup (more typical of 14).

15g Gal.Gate; Sun over vault opening (juncture). And a skull (more typical of 15).


Axial centre; Unmarked, as usual.

4p Gal.S.Pole; Unmarked.

11p Gal.Pole; Woman or scientist’s shoulder (limb-joint).

Midsummer or celestial pole (cp); A pillar capital (juncture).

Midwinter or celestial south pole (csp); A pillar base (juncture).

The solstice markers are on a vertical plane. These polar triangles place midsummer between Gemini and Taurus, implying spring and the cultural time-frame in Age Pisces-Aquarius, confirmed by the presence of three types 5 (5a, 5bA, 5bB), which is analogous to Aquarius. Structuralist features of expression are universal, and subconscious to artists, architects, builders, crafters and members of any culture.

The tentative structuralist analysis score is 45/68 archetypal features; 16/16 axial points; 12/4 c-type sector features [excessive scores are counted, to compensate for other fields where full scores are impossible due to inherent optionality]; 3/2 g-gate sector features; 3/5 polar markers; 2/2 planar or cardinal orientations; 1/1 correlation with the Age, or Age prior to the work; 2/2 general themes; thus 84/100, minus 1 extra character off the axial grid; total 83%. This total is above the upper average margin of the sigma curve of about 35% to 75%. See another unusually detailed expression of known archetypal features, in structuralist analysis of archetype in Marc Alexander’s artwork Prophetic antics, in a post on

See other posts on how to identify archetypal features in any artwork or built site or other cultural media, on


archetypes in religious art art culture is subconscious mindprint in modern art

Rennes le Chateau’s Sermon on the Mount mural is archetypal therapy

The back wall of St Magdalene church in Rennes le Chateau is dominated by a relief group of Christ’s Sermon on the Mount, to newly chosen Apostles, and a crowd west of Galilee, perhaps at the Horns of Hattin, an east-west ridge near Capernaum. Abbe Berenger Sauniere chose this scene for the theme of spiritual healing and ascension.

The western direction, and flowers, indicate spring or autumn sunset, perhaps from Rennes hill, with Casteillas left, and Couiza right (see Rennes le Chateau map 6 and 11). Some authors see it as Bains (11) Mt Cardou; or the Rose Line meridian through Bains, just west of the Paris Meridian; or Violets Hill between the two Rennes (see Bains map 1); or Mt Bugarach; or Roziers Hill. The scene could also be Lavaldieu hill, on the south between the two Rennes, on axis 3 of both.

General subconscious themes in the mural include type 2c Basket, here expressed by Christ; and its opposite, type 9c Lid, here as the bread bag of St Germaine, a girl from a nearby village. She used miraculous flowers in midwinter to hide a bread she had stolen for a beggar, a miracle of physical and spiritual healing. Another general theme in the work is type 5 Priest, here expressed by boy A, perhaps a future priest, Sauniere himself, with the other boy as his brother Alfred, also a priest.

The inscription below reads, “Come to me all who suffer and are overwhelmed, I will comfort you,” from a sermon of Bernard of Clairveaux, after Mat11;28. The cure requires a small task; “Come to me all that labour and are heavy laden, I will give you rest. Take my yoke on you, learn of me, I am meek and lowly in heart, find rest for your souls. My yoke is easy, my burden is light.” If St Magdalene is the woman weeping over Christ’s feet, she is a model of cure and service, since Christ had cast seven devils from her (Luk7;37), enabling her to anoint with tears and ointment. She was present at his crucifixion, a global exorcism of sins. She anointed his body again at the tomb. She saw him risen on Easter Sunday. In local legend she continued the Judaic royal line in France. Magdalene and her ointment vase in art, often expresses type 1/ 2 Builder (see emblems, such as Tarot trump 2, Priestess, Wisdom under a veil between two pillars. See the Types, trumps and hour decans table, in another post). Here her head is under Christ’s cloak. The risen Christ’s hand is now her ‘vase’ (type 2c Basket, container). The sermon is on eight spiritual blessings.

Sauniere had contracted artists from Italy to paint the commercial casts of statues and Cross stations, dictating some background scenes and revisions (Smith 2018), apparently to transpose Biblical episodes into a localised landscape ‘sermon’.

Order the Rennes le Chateau archetypes guide on this link;

Rennes le Chateau church back wall relief group of Christ’s Sermon on the Mount (photo after Massagot. Type labels and axial grid by E Furter). Abbe Sauniere had ordered ‘about twelve figures’ from Giscard of Toulouse. Each character expresses some archetypal features, confirmed by the positions of their eyes on an axial grid, as in all complex artworks.



Type label; Character (noting archetypal features):

[]1 Builder; St Magdalene (priestess), on one knee (twisted), weeping (rain).

[]2c Basket; Christ’s cloak (cover).

[]3 Queen; Christ (sacrifice, spring), preaching (school) spiritual blessings.

[]4 King; Mary (queen), kneeling to touch Christ’s garment. NO EYE.

[]5a Priest; Boy A. Perhaps St Germain and St Sulpice churches as ‘sons’ of St Vincent de Paul; or Sauniere himself and his brother Alfred, also a priest; or Bains and Rennes villages.

[]5b Priest; Boy A’s chest (heart, of 13 opposite). Transfer from a sketch to deep relief sculpture, may have moved this axis from the eyes of boy B and the father, to boy A (more reliefs should be tested).

[]5c Basket Head; Father of two boys (St Vincent de Paul?), with a crutch (leg posture).

[]6 Exile; Mother of a girl and a baby.

[]7 Child; Baby (juvenile) in swathing (bag), eye off the grid (common at 7).

[]8 Healer; St Germaine (see Rennes church floor 6, in another post), kneeling (bent forward), her apron with bread (healer) or gold (metal).

[]9c Basket Lid; Apron bag (container).

[]10 Teacher; Bread bag or gold (metal), torn (9c revelation). Wheat is more typical of 11. NO EYE.

[]11 Womb; Reclining wife’s midriff (womb) under her hands, probably pregnant.

[]12 Heart; Wife’s chest (heart).

[]13 Heart; Wife. And husband’s chest (heart).

[]14 Mixer; Husband, far out (egress).

[]15 Maker; Young man with an arm wound (more often leg wound; see Rennes church floor 15 St Rock statue, in another post). 

[]Axial centre; Christ’s right foot (limb-joint).

[]4p Gal.S.Pole; Unmarked, or displaced to Mary’s elbow (limb-joint). MOVED?

[]11p Gal.Pole; Wife’s elbow (limb-joint).

[]Midsummer; Christ’s left foot (limb-joint), horizontal (orientation) from the axial centre, on axis 14-15. This marker implies that spring and the cultural time-frame is on axis 3-4, analogous to Age Aries-Pisces, the era at the start of Christianity. Artworks and building sites usually reflect the time-frame prior to the work. Structural layers of expression are subconscious to artists, architects, builders and members of any culture.

UPDATE: Structuralist art analyses of other Sermon on the Mount artworks, including Bloch and Dore

Sermon on the Mount print that may be the model for Giscard’s design (image after L’Independant. Axial grid and type labels by E Furter).

The mindprint in all artworks is structurally identical. The number of archetypal characters differ (usually twelve, fourteen, sixteen, eighteen or twenty); the characters differ (although some of their features usually (60% average) include one or two of the archetypal features specific to the type they express in the work; the direction of rotation may be in either direction; and the orientation of the subconscious structure differs (the top central type, or the position of the seasonal markers).

Sermon on the Mount by Bloch, 1877 (image after Wikipedia. Typology numbers with cosmology or seasonal labels, and axial grid by E Furter).

Sermon on the Mount by Gustav Dore (image after Creationism. Typology numbers with cosmology or seasonal labels, and axial grid by E Furter).


Part of the post above is an extract from STONEPRINT Journal Series. Supplement to Stoneprint, the human code in art, buildings and cities., $10. Consider ordering journal editions with the book Mindprint,

Contribute articles on edmondfurter at gmail dot com, or +27 (0)11 955 6732, Four Equators Media, Johannesburg. See also http://www.stoneprintjournal. blog

Use this link:

Back editions at $12;

1 Pictish beasts

2 Crop circles are natural artworks

3 The Stoneprint tour of Paris

4 The Stoneprint tour of London  (24pp, $18). Also from

5 Culture code in seals and ring stamps.

6 Stoneprint tour of Rennes le Chateau and Rennes les Bains.

culture is subconscious Indian Harappan art archetype Mohenjo Daro art

Indian Harappan seals express archetype in characters and script

Typology features of characters in the Indian Parhupati seal, as in all cultures, demonstrate that the five structural layers of expression are subconscious to artists, architects, builders and members of any culture. Early Indian seals compare well to Dilmun seals, partly due to stylistic exchange, but mainly due to universal archetype. General themes in the famous buffalo god Harappan seal include type 6 Exile or Capricornus; of ingress (here of the god), sacrifice, U-shaped (here of two letters, and of horns), volute (here of the podium bases), horned, and double-headed (here of two letters, and the main character).

India, Harappa, Parhupati seal (after Njasaryablog, bottom right character missing, assumed, and restored as antithetical. Typology and axial grid by ED Furter).

These characters express about 50% of the known recurrent features of the sixteen archetypes, in their sequence, and with their focal points on the axial grid, as usual (the average is 60%, but miniature artworks usually express fewer).

Type; Character (noting archetypal features):

2 Builder or Taurus; Fish (of 3? But see a type 2-4 swop in a Hellenic salt pan calendar, on ).

3 Queen or Aries; Two-headed dragon (long or bent neck, dragon, spring). Also typical of 6. Types 3 and 6 are inherently ambiguous in about 5% of their features.

4 King or Pisces; King? Sitting (squatting), with 4p (twins).

4p Gal.S.Pole; Shoulder (limb joint) of twin (of 4), squatting (of 4).

5a Priest or Aquarius; Man B’s midriff (should be chest, heart, opposite of 12, GRID ERROR, typical of miniature artworks) of officiant (priest, assembly).

5b Priest or Aquarius; Rhinoceros.

6 Exile or Capricornus; Buffalo (horned. Its double-headed feature is transferred to type 7).

7 Child or Sagittarius; Buffalo person (horned, of 6), three-faced (unfolding), near the axial centre (ingress, of 6).

7g Gal.Centre: Podium B (juncture).

9 Healer or Scorpius; Caprid (of 6), looking back (of 3 or 10) under podium (pillar).

9c Basket Lid; Podium.

10 Teacher or Libra; Caprid at podium (guard).

11 Womb or Virgo; Tiger’s midriff (womb).

11p Gal.Pole: Tiger’s jaw (limb).

12 Heart or Leo; Tiger (felid).

13 Heart or Leo; Man A’s chest (heart).

14 Mixer or Cancer; Elephant.

15 Maker or Gemini; V-shaped dragon A (doubled, churn).

15g Gal.Gate; V-shaped dragon B’s jaw (limb joint).

The axial centre or ‘ecliptic’ pole is unmarked, as usual. The celestial south pole is on horn B (usually a limb joint, which the horns here seem to express). The horizontal plane confirms ‘winter’ in Aquarius-Capricornus, thus ‘spring’ and the cultural time-frame in Age Taurus-Aries, confirmed by the two top central types.

The five structural layers of art and architecture, are subconscious. Some of the symbolic aspects of archetypal features are semi-conscious, thus semi-logical. The only design that hints at some conscious understanding of the axial grid by the artist, is the Cycladic salt pan bottom calendar, with radial divisions (see the link noted at type 2 above). However the calendar is understood as an abstract cycle, and most cultures and crafts do not inquire further into the underlying structure of time, space and character. Crafts such as astrology and alchemy use aspects of art, particularly emblems and icons, but tend to isolate their functions from common crafts such as art and myth.

Order the guide to archetypes in ancient seals here;

Indus seal, Mohenjo Daro. Pipal fig tree goddess and Seven Aswins or wives of sages (after Typology and axial grid by ED Furter).

Angel of time

General themes in this Indian seal of Mohenjo Daro, include type 13c Basket Head, typical of prediction or calendar feasts, here a head offering, a box, and two structurally ‘extra’ aswins, or wives of sages. The five structural layers of expression are subconscious to artists, architects, builders and members of any culture.

2 Builder or Taurus; Ram.

2c Basket; A letter (woven texture).

3 Queen or Aries; : (in the damaged edge).

4 King or Pisces; Fish (fish, rare).

5a Priest or Aquarius; Man, its head in the damaged edge. Priest? (priest).

5c BasketTail; Letter, U-shape (of 6).

6 Exile or Capricornus; Wife G with cap (horned), far from the centre (egress).

7 Child or Sagittarius; Wife G, opposite two types, a regular device in minimalist works. Hair tassle (rope, juvenile).

7g Gal.Centre; Wife F.

9 Healer or Scorpius; Wife E.

10 Teacher or Libra; Wife D.

11 Womb or Virgo; Wife C’s midriff (womb).

11p Gal.Pole: King’s foot (limb joint).

12 Heart or Leo; Wife C’s chest (heart, palace), under stool with head.

13c BasketHead; Wives B, A. And stool, box (container), head on stool (of 13, death).

14 Mixer or Cancer; Goddess in papal fig (tree) gate (U-shape of 6 opposite), calendric feast (time), far (egress).

15 Maker or Gemini; King (order) offering a head (face, doubled), creeping forward (rampant).

The axial centre is unmarked as usual. The celestial south pole is on the ram shoulder (limb joint), placing ‘winter’ in Aquarius-Capricornus, thus ‘spring’ and the cultural time-frame in Age Taurus-Aries, confirmed by the two top central types.

The culture code model

An abstract chart of the labels, sequence, ocular (eye to eye) axial grid, polar points of pairs of opposite, and Age calibrator of the subconscious structure of cultural expression.

Mindprint model of the archetypal structure, or ‘grammar’ of natural and cultural expression (after Furter 2014, 2016). The typological set of sixteen clusters of optional features, applies to all media, including cosmology, calendar, ritual and myth. The five levels of typology, sequence, polar points, axial grid of eyes, and spatial orientation of eyes or focal points, are directly testable in complex artworks (including seals and jewel stamps) and in building sites.

STONEPRINT Journal 5; The culture code in seals and rings

This post is an extract from a supplement to Stoneprint, the human code in art, buildings and cities, Order on this link;

Consider including the book Mindprint, including 200 examples of structuralist analyses of art and rock art works.

Or book slide show talks, or contribute articles, by email to edmondfurter at gmail dot com, or call +27 (0)11 955 6732.

Four Equators Media, Johannesburg. ISBN 978-0-620-69863-4

Back editions at $/E 12:

1 Pictish beasts ‘zodiac’

2 Crop circles are natural artworks

3 Stoneprint tour of Paris

4 Stoneprint tour of London ($/E 18. Also on

5 Culture code in seals and ring stamps. on

6 Rennes le Chateau stoneprint tour. $10.

culture is subconscious mindprint in modern art Stoneprint buildings and cities

Structuralist art analysis of Cibber’s battle plaques on Nelson’s Column

Four bronze plaques by Cibber, on the four sides of Nelson’s Column in Trafalgar Square, London, picture the four main battles of Admiral Horatio Nelson. Each plaque also expresses the standard, universal, subconscious structure of visual art, named mindprint (Furter 2014), as demonstrated below. The structure, still unknown to artists and art historians, includes the standard set of twelve to sixteen archetypal features; in the standard peripheral sequence; with their eyes or focal features on an axial grid; and with limb joints at certain polar points.
Comparison of structuralist analyses of the four sculpted and cast plaques, reveal the same minimalist level of design complexity, with one or two compromises towards the conscious programme in each panel.

Conscious and archetypal characterisation are also minimalist here, indicating that the four works are elements of one installation. Any structuralist assessment (or assessment of structuralist art analysis against what they revel of these plaques), should thus include all four.

The inherent time-frame of the four panels differ, indicating separate design phases. Apparent variety in design, even in works focussed on the same person, in four similar situations, demonstrate how conscious preoccupations camouflage the identical spatial structure and optional core content in artworks worldwide.
Cibber made a maximal expression of archetypal structure in his other major public commission in London, the Great Fire Monument west plaque, themed on rebuilding. Any structuralist assessment of Cibber (or assessment of structuralist art analyses against what they reveal of Cibber), should thus include the Fire plaque (see a separate post on that artwork).

This edition is available from (24 pages, $18), on this link: Students and lovers of art and rock art should order it with the book Mindprint (, 264 pages, 200 illustrations, about $29).

Battle of Trafalgar plaque

Battle of Trafalgar plaque on Nelson’s Column, Trafalgar Square, London (Cibber. Typology and axial grid by ED Furter). Here Nelson is type 6 Exile or Capricornus (sacrifice). His empty admiral’s cap is type 1 Builder or Taurus, a structurally weak point, but still making subconscious sense. The typology is listed adjacent.

Type label; Character (archetypal features):
1 Builder or Taurus; Capt Hardy’s grip on Nelson’s hat.
2c Basket; Nelson’s hat (container), emblem of a clover?
3 Queen or Aries; Capt Hardy looking back (bent neck).
4 King or Pisces; Sailor A.
4p Gal.S.Pole; Sailor A’s mouth (limb joint).
5a Priest or Aquarius; Sailor B in top hat (varicoloured) carrying Nelson.
5b Priest or Aquarius; Musketeer. Same axis as 5a.
5c BasketTail; Black (varicoloured, of 5) musket loader.
6 Exile or Capricornus; Nelson dying (sacrifice), near the centre (ingress), bullet in the spine, symbolised by the cannonball dent in the mast (tree) above him.
7 Child or Sagittarius; Sailor kneeling to carry Nelson.
8 Healer or Scorpius; Officer crouching (bent forward).
10 Teacher or Libra; Sailor dead (arm V-posture).
11 Womb or Virgo; Cannoneer ’s midriff (womb).
11p Galactic Pole: Captain’s hip (limb joint).
13 Heart or Leo; Cannoneer’s chest (heart, weapon).
13c Basket Head; Cannon.
14 Mixer or Cancer; Cannoneer, nearer the axial centre (ingress).
15 Maker or Gemini; Sailor raising a sail (bag) by rope (rope) with another (doubled).
15g Galactic Gate; Captain’s loudhailer.

The ecliptic pole is unmarked as usual. The celestial pole is on Capt Hardy’s shoulder (limb-joint). The celestial south pole is on a kneeling sailor’s mouth. These markers are off the horizontal plane, but place summer in Taurus, thus spring and the cultural time-frame in Age Aquarius, ahead of the era of the Age Pisces work, but consistent with London as a progressive city. Cibber’s other major public work is the Great Fire Monument plaque, expressing the usual conservative time-frame, but the conscious theme of rebirth and cosmic Ages. All five layers of structural expression are subconscious to artists, architects, builders and members of any culture.

Battle of St Vincent plaque

Battle of St Vincent plaque (Cibber. Typology and axial grid by ED Furter). No females are present, so the types 11 Womb or Virgo are on the ‘wombs’ of the men who also express type 13 Heart or Leo’s heart. The typology is listed adjacent.

Type label; Character (archetypal features):
2 Builder or Taurus; Admiral Nelson.
2c Basket; sail cover (container, weave).
3 Queen or Aries; Sailor A, looking up (long neck).
4 King Pisces; Soldier with two swords (twins), also expressing type 5a Priest or Aquarius (varicoloured, hyperactive).
4p Gal.S.Pole; Nelson’s elbow (limb joint).
5c Basket Tail; Rope coil.
6 Exile or Capricornus; Sailor B holding a spar (tree).
7 Child or Sagittarius; Sailor B’s hand on a sail (bag).
7g Galactic Centre: Bloodied sail on a spar (juncture).
9 Healer or Scorpius; Sailor wounded by a spar.
10 Teacher or Libra; Doctor (arm V-posture).
11 Womb or Virgo; Noble’s midriff (womb).
11p Galactic Pole: Noble’s shoulder (limb joint).
12 Heart or Leo; Noble’s chest (heart), presenting a sword (weapon).
13c Basket Head; Sailor with a hook?
14 Mixer or Cancer; Sailor top left, far from the centre (egress).
15 Maker or Gemini; Captain (order) conferring with an officer (doubled).

The ecliptic pole is on Nelson’s hip (limb joint). The celestial pole is on the noble’s jaw (limb joint 50%). The celestial south pole is on Nelson’s hand (limb joint). The horizontal plane confirms summer in Leo-Cancer, thus spring and the cultural time-frame in Age Taurus-Aries. All five layers of structural expression are subconscious to artists, architects, builders and members of any culture.

Battle of Copenhagen plaque

Battle of Copenhagen plaque (Cibber. Typology and axial grid by ED Furter). Here Nelson expresses only polar types; his arm stump and left elbow as 11p and 4p ‘galactic poles’, his heart and hip as ‘celestial poles’. Type 7 as a pulley lacks an eye, but still holds a rope. The typology is listed adjacent.

Type label; Character (archetypal features):
1,2 Builder or Taurus; Sailor A. And Sailor B behind.
3 Queen or Aries; Captain, reading map and holding a flag.
4 King or Pisces; Officer reading map (twins).
4p Gal.S.Pole; Nelson’s elbow (limb joint).
5a Priest or Aquarius; Sailor holding a wounded boy (inversion of 12).
5c Basket Tail; Map and hourglass.
6 Exile or Capricornus; Wounded boy (sacrifice, small).
7 Child or Sagittarius; Cannon’s pulley (unfolding, rope). NO EYE.
7g Galactic Centre: Five feet (path).
9 Healer or Scorpius; Wounded sailor.
10 Teacher or Libra; Doctor (arm V-posture).
11 Womb or Virgo; Officer’s belly (womb).
11p Galactic Pole: Nelson’s arm stump (limb joint).
12 Heart or Leo; Officer’s chest (heart).
13c Basket Head; Copenhagen buildings.
14 Mixer or Cancer; Nelson’s shoulder ? NO EYE.
15 Maker or Gemini; Sailor brother (doubled), his brother with a rope (rope).
15g Gate; Nelson, and a noble behind him (usually no character).

The ecliptic pole is on Nelson’s missing hand (limb joint). The celestial pole is on Nelson’s chest (more typical of 12/13 Heart or Leo, but his eye is not characterised). The celestial south pole is on Nelson’s hip (limb joint). The vertical plane confirms summer in Gemini-Taurus, thus spring and the cultural time-frame in Age Pisces-Aquarius, ahead of the work by about 200 years, but typical of London’s progressive spirit since the Great Fire of 1666. All five layers of structural expression are subconscious to artists, architects, builders and members of any culture.

Battle of the Nile plaque

Battle of the Nile plaque (Cibber. Typology and axial grid by ED Furter). Here Nelson’s eye is type 14 Mixer, and his heart is type 13 Heart. A youth is the ‘womb’ of the future. The typology is listed adjacent.

Type label; Character (archetypal features):
2 Builder or Taurus; Sailor A leaning over (twisted).
3 Queen or Aries; Captain, looking back (bent neck).
4 King or Pisces; Sailor D, carrying a casualty down stairs (squatting) with sailor C (twins).
4p Gal.S.Pole; Sailor C’s neck (limb joint, rarely a neck).
5b Priest or Aquarius; Casualty (horizontal).
6 Exile or Capricornus; Sailor C’s chest, EYE OFF GRID.
7 Child or Sagittarius; Sailor E.
7g Galactic Centre: (water 15%, gate, juncture).
9 Healer or Scorpius; Sailor F, wounded (bent forward), tended by a boy (typical of 7).
10 Teacher or Libra; Boy medic (arms up).
11 Womb or Virgo; Sailor G’s midriff (womb). And eye.
11p Galactic Pole: Nelson’s missing hand (limb joint 68%).
13 Heaert or Leo; Nelson’s chest (heart).
14 Mixer or Cancer; Nelson, near the axial centre (ingress).
15 Maker or Gemini; Sailor carrying Nelson.

The ecliptic pole is on the captain’s shoulder (limb joint). The celestial poles are uncertain, The horizontal plane indicates summer in Cancer, thus spring and the cultural time-frame in Age Aries /Pisces /Aquarius, confirmed by the top central position of type 3 Queen or Aries as the captain. All five layers of structural expression are subconscious to artists, architects, builders and members of any culture.

Order the London archetypal tour guide here:

Many pillars on London’s axis 9, 9B, 9c

Nelson’s Column in Trafalgar Square expresses one of the type 9 Healer (typical of pillars) sites in London (see the map and some extracts from Stonepint Journal 4, on and on

On a larger scale, the mindprint structure is expressed in London, as in all cities and building sites, where it is named stoneprint (Furter 2016). Nelson’s column is the main expression of type 9 Healer or Scorpius in London. The currently known features of type 9 Healer or Scorpius, some with known average percentages of recurrence in samples of about 50 or more artworks or building sites, are: pillar 50%, bent forward 30%, healer 11%, strength 9%, ritual, lamp.
Nelson’s column expresses two of these features (pillar, strength). The admiral and national hero had led his last naval battle off Cape Trafalgar in the English Channel in 1805 on 21 October, beating France and Spain combined under Napoleon. Here he was shot by a sniper on his ship Victory, in the spinal cord (bent forward). He had lost and arm and an eye in earlier battles. His statue of 17ft, on a pillar of 185ft, was erected in 1829. The pillar’s shadow geometry is based on the Great Pyramid (see also the Great Fire Monument, Stoneprint Journal 4, p24.). The pillar base has four reliefs of victories; Nile, Copenhagen, Cape St Vincent, Trafalgar. Four bronze lions (strength, see trump 8, virtue over monster jaws) were added on the corners in 1868.
Among the other features on London’s axis 9 Healer or Scorpius, are the Royal College of Physicians (healing); and the Queen Eleanor Cross site at Trafalgar Square south, of marble (pillar), a former survey zero point (incidentally on the same latitude as the London stoneprint axial centre across the river). One of twelve pillars on her body’s route from Lincoln, by Edward1. It was moved to Charing Cross, removed by the Republic, but replaced by a Charles1 statue. A replica stands at Charing Cross station.
Among the features on London’s adjacent axis 9 Healer ScorpiusB, are Trafalgar Square north-west corner, the empty plinth (pillar) for the Duke of York (William4), since 1999 bearing alternating statues. In 2018 it carried ‘Heroic Woman’, with short arms and legs, sitting flat (bent forward). In the north-east corner stands a George4 statue (intended for axis 12 Marble Arch in 1847). On this axis are also the National Gallery south side; Royal Institution former site; Museum of Mankind (strength feats); and Faraday Museum, Albermarle Str, to a pioneer of electricity (lamp), and a former Royal Society site. Ten elements were discovered here by electricity (strength).
Between axis 9 Healer or Scorpius and axis 10 Teacher or Libra, lies a wedge named 9c Basket Lid, known for recurrent themes of revelation 15%, law enforcement 9%, disc /wheel /crown, or snake. This wedge usually contains some additional expressions of type 9 or 10. Here lies Cleopatra’s Needle (type 9, pillar), linked in legend to a suicide by snakebite (snake), raised here in 1878 on Sep 13 over a time capsule (lid, revelation). Sphinxes (strength) were added later. The 9c Basket Lid wedge also contains the London Coliseum theatre (9 strength feats, pillars. See Rome 9 Coliseum, canvas texture, on the cover); London Palladium (pillar), named after a protective stone (healer); Royal Institute of British Architects (9 pillar), with interior columns of black marble (9 pillar); Hanover Square St George church Corinthian portico (9 pillar); St Martin in the Fields Corinthian portico (9 pillar); and Ripley’s Believe it or Not curiosities (revelation).

STONEPRINT Journal series

This post is an extract from a supplement to Stoneprint, the human code in art, buildings and cities.

Or order the book Stoneprint (2016), or Mindprint (2014); or slide show talks; or to contribute articles, email or call +27 (0)11 955 6732. Four Equators Media, Johannesburg. ISBN 978-0-620-69863-4

Back editions of 16pp, at $/E 12 plus postage each:
1 Pictish beasts ‘zodiac’
2 Crop circles are natural artworks
3 The stoneprint tour of Paris
4 The stoneprint tour of London. This edition is available from (24 pages, $18),

5 Culture code in seals and ring stamps

6 Rennes le Chateau stoneprint tour., $10.

Students of anthropology, art history, psychology; and lovers of art and rock art should consider ordering editions with the book Mindprint (about 264 pages, 200 illustrations, $29).

Archetypal structure in tryptamine or pineal art

Archetypal structure or mindprint in tryptamine art

This post demonstrates the five layers of standard subconscious archetypal structure in some artworks by Shawn Thornton, who paints in a style typical of tryptamine-induced visions. He suffered from pineal gland cancer at the base of the brain. Thornton uses few figurative characters, some semi-abstracts, and many abstract shapes, yet some features of the sixteen archetypes, in sequence, with their eyes on the axial grid, around the five polar junctures, and the cosmic time frame, appear in all his artworks, as they do in all complex artworks (containing eleven or more characters) worldwide.
There are no structuralist differences between art associated with coffee, sugar, alcohol, DMT, mescaline, psilocybin, tryptamine, or sober art (see other posts with these stylistic tags on my four sites:

The only differences are in styling and texture, which are inherently meaningless, and part of the optional repertoire for appropriating culture to a socio-economic polity or cult.
All complex abstract artworks, and rock art works (typically containing many abstract shapes among figurative shapes) also express mindprint (see Furter 2017, in the anthropology journal Expression 13: Abstract signs reveal archetypal structure in culture). Some recurrent ‘abstract’ shapes in art and rock art are figurative, but stylised, or poorly drawn. Part of their meanings lies in what they occasionally illustrate of other cultural media, such as myth, ritual, and conventions. But their core meaning is in their inherent differentiation, that we feel an innate and subconscious compulsion to express, and to associate with parts of other cultural sets.
Structuralist analysis of abstract forms in rock art, and art of pre-civilised, pre-literate, literate, and a-literate cultures, including Mayan or Mexican cultures, confirms that the core content of art is universal and subconscious, but within conscious reach due to the discovery of recurrent structured behaviour.
Artworks use figurative and abstract shapes interchangeably, along with many other variations allowed by the standard visual ‘grammar’ or ‘DNA’ of culture. Abstracts do not arise from conventional signs, myths, rituals, oto-visual (entoptic) experience, zodiacs, or alphabets. All cultural media equally contain abstracts.
Rock artists and schooled artists are ignorant of the details and layers of the structure they express. Even close study of cultural media by artists, does not affect the core content of art, nor the structural quality of expressions, which varies within narrow, predictable ranges.

An abstract chart of the labels, sequence, ocular (eye to eye) axial grid, polar points of pairs of opposite, and Age calibrator of the subconscious structure of cultural expression.

Universal elements of cultural expression (after Furter 2014: p50-51, p82-84). Each of the 12 main types, or expanded 16 types, appears in all groups of eleven or more figurative or abstract characters in art or building sites (Furter 2016; Stoneprint). Each type is identified by one or more of its optional featues, totalling about 60% of the currently known features. The four potentially doubled types (1 /2 v 8/9, and 5a/5b v 12/13) have nearly identical options, but they usually express different options when doubled. The eyes of typological characters are always spaced on an axial grid, with the constant exception of type/s 12/13 on a chest, and type 11 on a womb. Recurrent features include certain species, postures, items, and/or shapes.

Below is the standard list of archetype, in sequence, each with their known features (some of which have known average frequencies of occurrence), after Furter 2014; Mindprint (, and Ingram), and 2016; Stoneprint, and updated in editions of Stoneprint Journal ( Among the types are listed the four intervening half-types or Baskets (which appear in four sectors between certain axes); and the two galactic cross-points; and two of the polar points. The other three polar points are listed after the types:

Mindprint or stoneprint structuralist analysis format

Cut and paste these labels, to identify characters and structuralist points on a map or artwork. Pairs of opposites are given above/below one another. Some pairs may remain unused, often the Cistas, or 1v8, or 5a v12. Use ? ? for extra figures that do not have a limb joint at one of the five poles:

1Builder 2Builder 2cBasket 3Queen 4King 4p
8Healer 9Healer 9cLid 10Teacher 11Womb 11p


5aPriest 5bPriest 5cTail 6Exile 7Child 7g
12Heart 13Heart 13cHead 14Mixer 15Maker 15g


cp csp ? ?

Use this list to write a caption for the structuralist analysis of any complex artwork of building site:

1 and/or 2 Builder or Taurus; (twisted 48%, tower 22%, bovid 19%, cluster 14%, pit 13%, bird 10%, book 6%.
2c Basket; secret 17%, container 13%, woven texture 13%.
3 Queen or Aries; (long or bent neck 37%, dragon 14%, sacrifice 13%, school 11%, empress 9%, pool 9%, spring 6%, equid.
4 King or Pisces; (squat 25%, rectangle 20%, twins 11%, king 9%, bird 6%, field 6%, furnace.
4p Gal.S.Pole; (marked 65%, limb joint 50%, juncture, spout 13%.
5a/5b Priest or Aquarius; (assembly 30%, varicoloured 30%, hyperactive 30%, horizontal 30%, priest 15%, water 15%, tailcoat head, heart of 12, inverted of 12, equid.
5c Basket Tail; (weave, knot, riddle.
6 Exile or Capricornus; (egress/ingress 48%, sacrifice 13%, small 13%, U-shape 11%, tree, volute, reptile, amphibian, horned, double-headed.
7 Child or Sagittarius; (unfolding 17%, bag 13%, rope 12%, juvenile 10%, chariot 8%.
7g Galactic Centre: (water 15%, gate.
8/9 Healer or Scorpius; (pillar 50%, bent forward 30%, healer 11%, strength 9%, ritual.
9c Basket Lid; (revelation 15%, law enforcement 9%, disc, snake.
10 Teacher or Libra; (arms V/W-posture 50%, staff 17%, council 17%, guard 15%, market 8%, metallurgy 8%, crown /disc /wheel 10%, school 8%, canid, hunt master, ecology.
11 Womb or Virgo; (womb /interior 87%, mother 60%, tomb 13%, water 11%, library 11%, wheat 6%, law 6%.
11p Galactic Pole: (marked 81%, limb joint 68%, juncture.
12/13 Heart or Leo; (heart /chest /interior 85%, felid 20%, death 33%, water-work 30%, rounded 26%, bastion 22%, war 17%, weapon 13%, palace 11%, inverted).
13c Basket Head; (prediction 11%, texture 6%).
14 Mixer or Cancer; (ingress /egress 50%, bird 10%, tree 6%, canid.
15 Maker or Gemini; (rope 30%, order 25%, bag 10%, face 10%, doubled 10%, pool 8%, canid 8%, creation, churn, sceptre, mace, rampant.
15g Galactic Gate; (gate 20%, river 6%,

Axial centre; Usually unmarked (limb-joint 26%, juncture),
Midsummer or celestial pole; (limb joint or juncture 50%).
Midwinter or celestial south pole; (limb joint or juncture 37%).

The vertical or horizontal plane (or cardinal direction on a building site) confirm/s nidsummer in/between axes 12/13/14/15 or Leo12 /Cancer /Gemini, thus spring and the cultural time-frame in Age Taurus1 /Taurus2 /Aries /Pisces /Aquarius5a; often confirmed by emphasis on the character expressing the spring point.”

Two structuralist analyses of artworks by Shawn Thornton, using cosmology labels (generic labels used after 2018 appear above).

Uroburos and abstracts by Shawn Thornton (cosmologyt labels and axial grid by Edmond Furter).

This artwork may be part of a larger artwork, which probably has its own mindprint, including some of the major characters in this detail. ‘Nuclear’ imprints are typical of highly complex artworks and building sites (such as the Vatican City mindprint, while St Peter’s cathedral expresses the type 3 Queen or Aries of the larger Rome mindprint).

Large panel with virgin or woman by Shawn Thornton. Cosmology labels and axial grid by Edmond Furter.


PD Newman on the pineal gland as inner eye

Here are some extracts from a discussion of various psychoactive drugs, and their stylistic occurrence in cultural crafts such as alchemy, symbolism, art, ritual and religion, on,1130498,1131017#msg-1131017
posted in 2017 -2018, prompted by an article on acacia gum by PD Newman:
PD Newman; ‘In an attempt to discover the source and function of endogenous DMT production in humans organism, Dr Rick Strassman at the University of New Mexico conducted government sanctioned research with a scheduled psychedelic. DMT was largely unknown to the Western world, up to Strassman’s book; DMT: The Spirit Molecule. The research was funded by the Scottish Rite Schizophrenia Research Foundation, a subsidiary of the Northern Masonic Jurisdiction of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite [in the USA]… The most probable source of endogenous DMT production in humans is the pineal gland, which has “a lens, cornea, and retina. It is light-sensitive and helps regulate body temperature and skin coloration, related to environmental light,” or third eye. [However this conclusion is not universally accepted. See]

“In daylight, the pineal gland induces serotonin, which regulates appetite, mood, body movement, and other regulatory functions. A night, it produces melatonin, which regulates sleep patterns and body coloration.
The pineal may secrete DMT at psychedelic levels, at extraordinary experiences, enabling conscious experience of our life-force or soul. When our individual life force enters our foetal body, as we become humans, it passes through the pineal and triggers the first flood of DMT.
At birth the pineal also releases DMT. It may mediate experiences of deep meditation, psychosis, or near-death experience. At death, life-force leaves the body through the pineal gland, releasing DMT.”
Thus the pineal gland may be the seat of the soul, and DMT the catalyst. Some people use the compound as a sacrament.
In 2013, Cottonwood Research Foundation Inc announced that DMT is found in the pineal glands of rats.
René Descartes had proposed a similar function for the pineal gland. In Inter-Relation of Soul and Body, he wrote that the soul exercises its function particularly in the pineal. “suspended between passages containing animal spirits [reason, sensation and movement], that it can be moved by them…; and carries this motion to the soul… Conversely, the body is so constituted that when the gland is moved by the soul, or by another cause, it pushes the animal spirits to the pores of the brain.”
The pineal is the only single, not duplicated organ in the human brain. Thoughts and creativity may arise here. The acacia sprig in Freemasonry could refer to insight, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil. WL Wilmshurst wrote in 1922; Meaning of Masonry; “the entire nervous system contributes to charge certain ganglia, and light up certain brain centres, in a way of which the ordinary mind knows nothing… It is a mystery of spiritual consciousness, efflorescence of the mind in God, opening of human intelligence, in conscious association…”
McKenna noted that “a compound which each of us carries… in the ajna chakra; the philosopher’s stone… how can this be secret?” -PD Newman.

[Edmond Furter commented; The pineal gland is a temperature sensor in dynosaurs and their survivors, on top of the flat skull, for comparing internal and external temperature. Mammals have brains intervening, with a sturdy little bone cradle for the pineal at the base of the skull, near the spinal cord. Thus it reacts to indirect data, like most of our senses. There is some delay in the temperature equation, even for months, allowing us to delay homeostasis. Visions may perhaps be partly due to oto-temperature emissions, similar to oto-acoustic and oto-visual (entoptic) emissions.
In reflexology, the pineal node on the hand is on the index finger (which some gynosophic traditions press against the thumb in mediation) at type 4p, analogous to the Galactic South Pole). In the iris the pineal node is in the eleven /one o’clock positions, at type 15g (Galactic Gate). In our teeth the pineal node could be right top six, with the eyes node, at type 15g (Galactic Gate), but an alternative analysis of the fourfold set of reflects in teeth, charts this tooth as type 7g (Galactic Centre). In our inner ears, the brain stem is on the seven o clock position, at type 15 Maker or Gemini. Thus our pineal gland, between the spine and the brain, in cosmological terms, expresses the two galactic ‘gates’, where the ecliptic and galactic equators cross (one of which is adjacent to the galactic centre); and perhaps the two galactic poles. If the myth map in star lore could reveal anything about the role of the pineal in cultural terms, it may be sought in the archetypes attached to the gates, sometimes pictured as short or angled pillars with spiral churns; and to 11p Coma Berenices (Hair of Berenice), sometimes pictured as a baby in a lotus flower, on the same axle as Crater (Grail); and 4p Cetus spout, on the same axis as Pegaus neck. Esoteric literature in this context seems to favour the 7g pillar of Ophiuchus, as in the Apprentice Pillar of Hiram Abiff; and 11p as Aion, angel dangling head down from the ecliptic pole and Bootes’ hand; and Crater, Grail or head. These motifs all seem idiosyncratic, incidental, and legendised history, until they are studied in structuralist context. I demonstrated that we subconsciously express a very rigorous universal structure in artworks and building sites, with some evidence that the same applies to myth, ritual and calendars too. Now the question is no longer when and where archetypal motifs ‘come from’, but to what extent we subconsciously collude to engineer archetypal events, and selectively record and imagine events. And to what extent our endocrine system, glands, nerves and senses participate in the bigger picture of perception and re-expression.]

-Barbelo, alias PWH, commented on PD Newman; ‘I agree that the ancient myths, texts, star lore etc has more than one application. But the invisible precedes the visible, and it’s near impossible to convey the meaning of the invisible. Inner workings… were discussed in outward terms, analogy, story, star myth, totem, iconography… the journey up the Tree is a personal experience… [crafts] start aspirants on the path, and guide them as best as possible. The winged bird-man holds a pine cone pointed at the pineal gland. Who was first?’ -Barbelo /PWH.

[Edmond Furter commented; There are no ‘firsts’ in the expression of archetype. Every expression is equally ‘original’, and all expressions imitate similar types from various media to some extent. Correspondence theory assumes simplistic diffusion, and thus assumes starting points for everything. Nothing ever originated at a specific place or time, and nothing is ever lost. Even technologies are pre-existent and eternal, and are merely resumed when resources such as population enable them.]

PD Newman; ‘It is all about inner experience… In Jungian psychology, Tiphareth may be related to the transcendent function and to the archetype of the self, toward which the process of individuation strives. It is conjunction, union of opposites, merging of conscious and unconscious.
In his book ‘Strange Fruit,’ Heinrich relates the prevalence of mountaintop enlightenment scenarios to fly agaric mushrooms found there.
Traditions depict Moses with horns, perhaps the Hebrew word for ‘shining’, but Alexander was also depicted with horns in Islamic art.
Broker commented; “Horns convey eminence, loftiness, power, as of horned animals. See Apollo-Karneios, and Dionysos. Alexander adopted the emblem of Amon, ram, in the Egyptian Book of the Dead he is Lord of Two Horns. In Chinese myth, the terrible Ch’e Yu is horned. Huang Ti could only defeat is only by blowing on a horn. He used his rival’s standard, which bore his portrait and strength. In Gaul and elsewhere, warriors wore horned helmets. But it is not only about physical strength.
Horns of oxen signify fertility (Menghin, in Eliade; Patterns in Comparative Religion, p164).
In Jewish and Christian tradition, horns are equated with a ray of light or a lightning flash, as in Habakkuk3;4 ‘His brightness was as light, horns coming out of his hand.’ Moses descends from Mount Sinai (Exod34;29); ‘he wist not that his face shone’. Four horns of the altar of sacrifice exprfess four quarters of space, as cosmic extent of God’s power.
In Psalms, horns symbolize God’s strength, ‘The Lord is my rock… my buckler, the horn of my salvation’ (Ps18;2). It borders on aggression and pride; ‘Lift not up your horn on high, speak not with a stiff neck’ (Ps75;4). Horns are a boon; ‘I will make the horn of David to bud’ (Ps132;17).’
PD Newman replied; ‘Jung also commented at length on the symbolism of horns in “Aion” (CW 9:2), IIRC… Huxley discusses his experience with mescaline, the active compound of Lophophora williamsii, or peyote cactus. Regarding ergot [LSD], see Wasson, Hofmann, and Ruck; Road to Eleusis. -PD Newman.

Here are some images from my paper on abstract artworks (in the anthropology journal Expression 13), to compare to modern abstract artworks.

Hittite abstract characters, with the standard subconscious structuralist labels and axial grid by E Furter.

A ‘Hittite hieroglyphic text’ (after Gelb 1939. Cosmology labels and axial grid by E Furter). The figures and abstracts may be myths, hours, months, gods, stars, or syllables; derivative or original. Either way, they subconsciously express the standard archetypal structure:

2 Builder or Taurus; Bird (bird, see swift people, Furter 2014: 108-109), wing twisted (twisted).
3 Queen or Aries; Dolphin /crayfish (Triangulum and Cetus tail myths. See Tarot trump 18, moon over dragons and crayfish), with bent tailfins (more often bent neck).
4 King or Pisces; Hand, ‘Child’? (king?), with ribbon? (Horus Eye shape?), and another on the same axis (twinned).
4p G.S.Pole; Thumb (limb-joint).
5 Priest or Aquarius; Rectangles (Pegasus myth). See H/I-shapes at Gobekli Tepe (Expression 9: 22).
5c Basket Tail; Curve. C-types are off the axial grid, but in sectors between specific axes.
6 Exile or Capricornus; U-shaped camp (see Narmer palette).
7 Child or Sagittarius; Curve (rope? Or adjacent 7g Galaxy).
7g Galaxy; Radiant Cone (brightest area).
9 Healer or Scorpius; Scales, ‘High king’ (Ophiuchus myth), arms out, healer, pillar; and an ankh person (healer, and pillar).
9c Basket Lid; Crown? (cover. Corona myth).
10 Teacher or Libra; Womb (exchanged with 11), arms forward (arms V/W posture).
11 Womb or Virgo; Woman, large eye (her womb exchanged with 10, perhaps by subconscious confusion of opposite 3 Queen or Aries dolphin, as 4 King or Pisces fish. Cetus /Whale is a decan of both). The halved circle could mean ‘womb’, or adjacent 11p Galactic Pole. See the circle at the pregnant vulture at Gobekli Tepe (Expression 9: 22).
11p Galactic Pole; Heel (limb-joint).
13 Heart or Leo; Purse /weight, ‘Man’ (heart), horizontal (invert).
14 Cancer; Falcon (bird), under a crook (decan Ursa Minor).
15 Gemini; Face /speaker /creator /eel (rope)? And a doublie (doubled).
15g Gate; Curve (crossing or path?).

Briazil, Pedra Pintada engraving (after Homet. Cosmology labels and axial grid after E Furter, Expression 13, 2016).

Brazil, Pedra Pintada engraving of an oval shield or palette with abstract characters, and geometric signs in a border (after Homet 1962. Mindprint labels and axial grid by E Furter). The copyist may have imposed some styling, thus perhaps a variant structure. This is not an alphabet or text. The border characters are more abstract, like determinants, perhaps divinatory, but also decorative. The archetypal structure is:

1 Builder or Taurus; Twisted (twisted) dragon (more usual at 3).
2 Builder or Taurus; Bird (bird) with neck twisted (twist).
2c Basket; Dragon body (cistas are usually off the grid).
3 Queen or Aries; Dragon with a long neck (neck long/bent).
4 King or Pisces; Man’s head (more usual at 15).
4p G.S.Pole; Headband tassels (varicoloured of 5).
5b Priest or Aquarius; Cocoon or mummy tailcoat-head (of adjacent 6), reclining (30% horizontal).
5b Priest or Aquarius; Heart (often as its opposite, 13) of a bauble (varicoloured), reclining (horizontal).
5c Basket Tail; Snake tail (tail).
6 Exile or Capricornus; Horned snake? (horned; snake).
7 Child or Sagittarius; Rope animal (rope).
8 Healer or Scorpius; Cocoon or mummy (more usual at 7).
9 Healer or Scorpius; Placenta, or bauble baby (child is more usual at 7), bent sideways (bent forward), OFF THE GRID or opposite a character in the bird’s throat
9c Basket Lid; Woven (texture).
10 Teacher or Libra; Woman (usually a man), W-posture (arms up), with sceptre (staff).
11 Womb or Virgo; Womb (womb).
11p G.Pole; Hair? on bellows?
12 Heart or Leo; Puma (felid).
13 Heart or Leo; Heart (heart) of the puma (felid), under a sun? (former summer).
13c Basket Head; Mats or hoed fields (texture), and a weaver or ploughman.
14 Mixer or Cancer; Hoe? (decan Ursa Minor), over a star (celestial pole); far from the centre (egress).
15 Maker or Gemini; Rope and bag man (rope, bag).

Archetypal structure in a rock art cosmogram

In the Brazilian engraving copy, the celestial poles may be on the vertical plane, placing summer in Cancer, thus spring and the cultural time-frame in Age Aries. The general theme is type 3 Queen or Aries, of long and bent necks (three animal shapes, and a hat top, and two baubles), and palette or shield shapes (as in the border. See the Narmer palette, in Furter 2014: 118). Compare transitional ambiguity with polar decans.

The structuralist analysis score….. [see a scoring format update in later posts]… is about 62%, near the average. Abstract shapes are as capable of structural expression, as figurative art is.

Psychograms express structure, enabling meaning

Viewing recurrent rock art geometric shapes as pictographs or proto-syllables, is speculation, based on paradigmatic developmental assumptions about ancient art; not supported by studies of historic art (Gombrich 1979); nor linguistics (Chomsky 1991). We could interpret abstract ‘signs’ as psychograms (Anati 2010), in the sense of universal, compulsive, subconscious expressions, of elements of narrowly variant archetypal structure. Anthropology could study visual elements, as linguistics study grammar; as sociologists study inter-relationships; as physics study chemistry and mathematics. We learn more of culture, its crafts, perception, and ultimately of nature, from the structure of artefacts, than we learn from the conscious meanings that various re-creators imagine that they express, or convey, or explain. Art is as deceptive as grammar. Most people view it as logical and incidental accumulation of conventional rules, passed along by learning, and ‘developed’, while it is innate and eternal. Language seems to be wholly abstract, and arbitrary, but under the layer of conventional allocations of short strings of sounds to meanings, lies a hard-wired structure, that requires only a few social prompts to apply to various media (gestures, sounds, items, signs), and thus transform media into a ‘carrier wave’ of meanings. Mindprint reveals variant ‘meanings’ to be as rule-bound as the innate structure.
Art is too laborious to serve fickle ‘here and now’ communication, however it is more immediate, but more subconscious, in reading, than language. Art has a higher function, to express the core content of nature, perception, and culture, in an apparently endless variety of combinations and styles. Abstract signs seem to be abbreviated psychograms for more elaborate styling, perhaps a visual shorthand for culture. However their core functions could not be separated from picture characters, nor from the five layers of structure, which is the abstract matrix of all possible meaning. ‘Abstract’ also means recall, evocation, and conjuring of the absent. Pictures and signs both invite the assumption that art is primarily a record or events or imagination, with some decorative or poetic structure added for entertainment. However art evokes, distills, abbreviates, elaborates and distorts as well, or better than language.
Our ability to learn pictograms and hieroglyphs of foreign cultures, illustrate the universality of cultural structure. Gelb (1952) wrote that “Chinese writing appears in the Shang dynasty, as a fully developed phonetic system. Its outer from has change greatly in the course of its long history, but its inner characteristics of the oldest inscriptions hardly differ from recent times.” If Chinese and Egyptian hieroglyphic sets expresses, over millennia, the same five-layered structure that art is now found to express, then our definitions of art, pictogram, sign, ideogram, psychogram, hieroglyph, alphabet, communication, grammar, ritual, culture, and human, should involve the concepts of archetype. Anthropology may have to leave ‘evolution’ to biology; ‘diffusion’ to technology; and ‘crypto-astronomy’ to conspiracy theorists. Structural study of art, including abstract rock art, has significant implications for several human sciences.

Some sources and references
Allen, R.H. 1899 Star names and their meanings. USA: Stechert. Glastonbury: Lost Library (facsimile imprint)
Anati, E. 2010 World rock art: the primordial language. Oxford: Archaeopress
Butin, R.F. 1932 Protosinaitic Inscriptions. Harvard Theological Review, Vol 25 No.2
Chomsky, N, and M. Halle. 1968; 1991 Sound pattern of English. London: MIT Press
Furter, E. 2014 Mindprint, the subconscious art code. USA: Lulu
Furter, E. 2015a Gobekli Tepe, between rock art and art. Expression 9: 21-25
Furter, E. 2015b Art is structural magic, not illustration. Expression 10: 15-22
Furter, E. 2016 Abstract signs reveal archetypal structure in culture. In Expression 13, Sept
Furter, E. 2016 Stoneprint, the human code in art, buildings and cities. Four Equators Media, Johannesburg
Furter, E. 2017 Pictish Beasts. Stoneprint Journal 1, p1-16. Four Equators Media, Johannesburg, and
Gelb, I.J. 1939 Hittite hieroglyphic monuments. Chicago. Fig 38
Gelb, I.J. 1942 Hittite hieroglyphs, iii. Chicago. Frontispiece table
Gelb, I.J. 1952 A study of writing, Chicago: University of Chicago Press
Gombrich, E. 1979 Sense of Order. London: Phaidon
Homet, M. F. 1962 Sons of the sun. São Paulo: Ibrasa
Neugebauer, O., and R.A. Parker. 1969 Egyptian astronomical texts III; Decans. Rhode Island: Brown University Press
Newman, PD. 2017-2018. Comments and replies to comments on his own Author of the Month article on acacia drugs and the pineal gland,,1130498,1131017#msg-1131017
Roe, P.G. 2007 A further exploration of the Rowe Chavin seriation. Studies in pre-Columbian art and archaeology, Vol. 13
Sass, B. 1988. Genesis of the Alphabet and Its Development in the 2d Millennium BC. Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz
Schmandt-Besserat, D. 1981 From Tokens to Tablets: A Re-Evaluation of the So-called Numerical Tablets. Visible Language 15: 321-44
Steiner, G.F. 2016 Goddess and the copper snake: metallurgy, star-lore, and ritual in the rock art of Southern levant. Expression 12: 73-92
Steinhilber, B. (Gobekli Tepe pillar D43 photograph). Germany: DAI
Tresidder, J. 1997, 1999 Watkins dictionary of symbols. London: Watkins
Tsikritsis, M. 2015. Astronomical and mathematical knowledge and calendars during the early Helladic Era in aegean ‘frying pan’ vessels. Mediterranean Archaeology and Archaeometry 15(1):135-149, January
Vlassa, N. 1961 (Tartaria tablets); Prehistory.i/ftp/arta_populara
Von Petzinger, G. 2016 First signs. Canada: Simon & Schuster

culture is subconscious

Debate: Are cultural correspondences due to diffusion, or archetype?

Author Alistair Coombs posted a link to some Ice Age engravings in support of his correspondence theory of the diffusion of attributes of the Pleiades and Ursa asterisms (,1128408,1128408#msg-1128408). Mindprint author Edmond Furter demonstrates that correspondences run much deeper than a few hearsay tales. Here is an extract of part of the debate.
“Alistair, you affirm your view that “cultural diffusion routes… reflect DNA migration trails”, traceable in asterism personification variants.
But DNA is mixed, with few links to localised culture. The only inborn culture is universal.
You cite songlines “associated with astronomy at a national level” of scale in Australia.
But diffusion and standardisation of asterisms does not imply that incidental details of personification are developmental; nor that culture arises from diffusion.
You link my work to “David Lewis-Williams… mythic patterns neurologically generated rather than observed in culturally isolated traditions, which might account for similarities, like Jungian archetypes.”
But Lewis-Williams never uses any concepts or terms related to archetype or Jung. He summarised his recent position (2012) on ethnography as ‘individual idiosyncrasy, within a cultural framework’. He cites Megan Biesele on cultural motifs that may or may not ‘catch on’. This agrees with your paradigm of development and diffusion.
My research findings support and develop Plato, Jung and Levi-Strauss, not the cognitive trance dance rationalisation school.
You write that cognitive archaeology ignores astronomy.
But there is very little astronomy in cultural media. Babylonian, Sumerian, Indian, Chinese and Arabic decans and artworks, for example, are all mutating sets of calendric characters (Neugebauer and Parker 1996), useless for observational astronomy except as more or less arbitrary labels. Culture does not come from the sky, and is not sustained by the sky.
We agree that “zodiacal conceptions are not entirely neurologically generated,” but for different reasons. My research indicates that layers of archetypal meaning and structure are inherent in nature and in perception, with some inherent options allowing economic polities some differences, and a thick layer of stylisation (such as different sound strings in languages).
You doubt my finding of a “universal, subconscious, compulsive impulse” for “sounding elaborate”.
But the human sciences have fallen behind natural sciences partly due to populist simplification. I had found the ‘periodic table’ of culture, which simplifies the study of culture, by charting its quirks and structural complexities. Your diffusionist paradigm sounds like alchemical correspondence theory, before discovery and eventual acceptance of the periodic table. And it sounds generally true, meaning that it is not testable, in Popper’s definition of science.
You found that ‘the Pleiades came to be associated with flood… after being seven pursued maidens… more abstract parts of Taurus… both remain in cultural memory.’
But there is no secure way of dating the various attributes of this archetype. I listed about five or six attributes of type 2 Builder or Taurus, in my initial comment above. These attributes have always appeared at fixed average frequencies in artworks and building sites worldwide, anciently and in modern times, and will continue to do so. Archetypes are not man-made, and do not arise from major events. Events express archetype.
You found Taurus and Orion “less problematic than Ursa and the Pleiades, because Taurus [Hyades] reasonably resembles a bull or horned beast; and Orion resembles a man.”
But V-shaped buccrania are rare in art (see Gobekli Tepe images in the link I gave in my initial comment). Hyades and Orion-Auriga star lore is complex (Allen 1899).
You note that “Ursa and the Pleiades resemble each other in shape.”
But culture is more complex than visual gestalt (making wholes from suggestive parts based on relative proximity and magnitude). Egyptian myth links them since they are 90 degrees apart, former spring to former midsummer, equinox to celestial pole; and both have seven major stars. That common knowledge prompted conscious recognition of the archetypal motif of spring sacrifice, at the time of a bull foreleg, cast to the polar region as a severed foreleg-bull, and later a smaller one when the celestial pole and thus midsummer moved closer to Ursa Minor.
We agree that “Ursa does not suggest a bear, and Pleiades do not suggest a group of women.” But archetype prompts the rest of the picture, ritual, calendar, myth map, and compromises with peculiarities of diffused crafts, such as religion and legend.
You found that asterisms “came to represent different things to different cultures across time and space, which may not warrant input from an archetypal paradigm.”
But most star lore (Allen list all the known features from classical and modern sources) expresses almost all the elements of cultural structure, and few superfluous ones (which are often due to conscious correspondence theory ambiguation, or interference, and to a few inherent ambiguities, of which I have identified five, in Mindprint 2014). The archetypal paradigm confirms that asterisms and other cultural features do not “become”, and do not “represent things”. Star lore, myth, calendar, ritual and building sites did not start on blank canvases, and do not rest on idiosyncratic foundations (which do not eventually “become” cultural frameworks, as the current “scientific” paradigm assumes).
You note that ‘sevens might be archetypal, but also [arise from] language systems… meaningless [in the] Palaeolithic era.’
But language, which you probably equate with evolving cognition, does not dictate art, calendar, ritual or practical crafts. My research indicates that cultural media do not, and thus did not ‘evolve’. Paleolithic assemblages are complex and complete (textiles, needles, buttons, jewellery, cosmetics, fire, art, ritual, calendar, myth), lacking only metals, probably due to lack of population. Stone Age language was probably equal to any language, with stone, bone and mastic terminology instead of metallurgy.
You found that “The Pleaides came to represent a central role in the cosmologies of different cultures.”
But the function of every part of cosmology depends on the other parts. The Pleiades are meaningless without Sirius in Gemini, Hydra under Cancer, Regulus in Leo, Spica in Virgo, Antares in Scorpius, the three visible poles, three equators, and the rest of the ‘story’.
There is only one cosmology, with several different format options (ecliptic, celestial, galactic; months or hours; geometric or mythic; and so on).
Your partly agree with me, that “co-incidences of migration and trade routes with cultural elements, form a circular argument that reveals nothing about culture or humanity, unless it is studied in the archetypal paradigm,” but you remain in the conscious, developmental, diffusionist paradigm: “how ancient or extinct people storied their skies.” But our species is not extinct. Neanderthal, Denisovan, Flores and other mutational variants could re-appear.
You are working on “an early observational history… and genetic trail linking Siberia, North America, Melanesia and Australia… how such identities might remain in isolated groups for unexpectedly long periods… looking at the same constellations.”
But the same dots in the sky alone do not account for the correspondences, as you acknowledge. Nor does cultural contact. Archetypal expression of culture in various media is a simpler explanation.
We agree that the Seven Sisters and other characters “likely stem from very deep, archaic sources,” but you add the term “from observation”.
If our sky was as opaque as that of Venus, we would have used other canvases, such as long lines, geoglyphs, landmarks and building sites more extensively.
You do not see archetype at work in “what determines what we see in an asterism, other than resemblances.”
But Plato and many other philosophers found archetype to be inherent in nature. Your assumed detailed diffusion does not even explain all the visible correspondences between cultures separated in time and space. And you offer no explanation for the five layers and about 75 features of identical structural in 600 artworks and building sites, many of which I have posted a link to above.
For the Pleiades, you propose “a cosmic hunt theme, reformulated into a flood narrative, retaining earlier actors or depictions of space.”
But some Pleiades lore and images do not involve a hunt. And some flood stories do not single out the Pleiades.
On Ursa, you cite Asiatic-American parallels of Ursa as a bear “of immense antiquity”. Meaning Ice Age art.
But Ursa is not always a bear. And bear images do not all express Ursa. See the structuralist analysis of a doubled mindprint in the Trois Frere cave engraving, Mindprint p150-151, also via my link above, or in my GH AOM September 2015 article, where a bear frontal face, top left, subconsciously expresses type 15 Maker or Gemini.

Ice Age engraving in Trois Frere cave ‘sanctuary’ (After Donsmaps. Structuralist analysis by Edmond Furter).

Or see the structuralist analysis of the Trois Frere ‘Sanctuary’ engraving to which you posted a link, where a baby bear frontal face expresses an extra type 1 Builder or Taurus [here labelled 2Ta in error, it should be 1Ta, as the 1Ta elephant on the same axis], which the sky expresses as Auriga and Orion. Its outer eye expresses type 15g, which in the sky is the Galactic Gate and Polaris at the Ursa Minor (Small Bear) ‘hoof’. Art is not cosmology or astronomy of course, but all media express aspects of archetypal structure. The frontal face does not seem to be graffito, since this panel has some unusual false starts or later additions (mostly between types 8 and 9 Healer or Scorpius). [UPDATE; If it is graffiti, it does not disrupt any of the five layers of archetypal structure that artists and sometimes collaborators express.]
You warn researchers to ignore ethnographic sources of the last 100 years, to avoid contamination by “the information bubble”; and you cast suspicion that archetypal theories are contaminated by mass media, and thus diffusion mistaken as subconscious inspiration.
But standardisation had started in the Egyptian empire, and the Greek world, and the Chinese empires, and expanded in the Roman Empire; thus the last century is a random number. Notable recent ‘savage’ exceptions include the Picts in Scotland (see Stoneprint Journal 1; Pictish beasts, at, yet even there some Germanic, Scandinavian and Norse influences are visible.
The level of archetypal detail that I have isolated in cultural media, rises above diffusion and imitation. And in some examples, diffusion is entirely ruled out (as in the faint engraving in the recently opened Berriruata cave in Spain, sealed off for millennia, see my article in the anthropology journal Expression).
There is probably no diffusion between the Trois Frere examples and anybody anywhere, yet several artworks in that cave express mindprint in as much detail as any artwork anywhere, at any time. The list of archetypes that I give above, could be used to write a caption for the artwork (that you chose to support one of your points), by simply deleting the features that are not expressed; but are expressed in other Ice Age artworks. The same applies to Gobekli Tepe, Sumer, Babylonia, Egypt, Greece, Rome, the Picts, and about ten artists whom I know personally. They were all astonished when I demonstrated to them the extent of their subconscious repertoire. But they remain calm and keep on ‘designing’ artworks. As I expect that correspondence theorists will keep calm and keep on calculating diffusion routes, until a hundred of them have seen a hundred examples of mindprint in their data.
The explanation for this over-determined set of correspondences, and the study of culture, and the implications for who we are, has to involve archetype.
Alistair, I believe our irreconcilable differences are all paradigmatic. We look at the same data from different perspectives.

Stoneprint buildings and cities

Stoneprint, the human code in art, buildings and cities

Extract, summary and index to the book Stoneprint, the human code in art, buildings and cities (Edmond Furter, 2016). Stoneprint expands the demonstration of our subconscious behaviour, from visual art, to ancient and modern building sites.

See images and extracts from Stoneprint here;
or visit

Architecture reveals our subconscious building code
Our huts, houses, kivas, circles, pillars, fortune bowls, art, game boards, temples, pyramids, cities, constellations, geoglyphs and graves, say much more about us that we ever knew. Structural analysis reveals the universal repertoire in our subconscious behaviour. The structure also says more about culture and nature than we ever knew, but had glimpsed in nature. We imprint a natural, abstract structure of five layers, including sixteen characters in sequence, on an axial grid, in all our complex artefacts. The same structure appears in the periodic table, and in reflexology points in our hands, eyes, teeth and ears. A similar structure informs bio-chemistry and DNA. The archetypal expression in our works, thus the ‘cultural record’, is now readable, with significant implications for cultural crafts, and for the human sciences of art history, archaeology, anthropology, philosophy, psychology, sociology and communication science. The formerly ‘invisible’ layers of our perception and expression, or human code, now offer the opportunity to integrate the conscious and subconscious halves of crafts, sciences, and culture. Our works re-express nature, and our place in it. Culture does not ‘come from’ any of our media, but from archetype, the potential that enables nature to express self-replicating and mutating energy. Our re-expression of archetypal structure could be named stoneprint, the human code. The core content of any old or new culture is as predictable as chemistry, as readable as the periodic table, as translatable as language, as visible as art, as varied as mythology, and as recyclable as building material. This book demonstrates our subconscious expression of archetypal structure by a tour of celebrated building sites worldwide. There is indeed ‘something much more mysterious’ going on, but it is not fantastically ancient, nor distant, nor advanced, nor extinct. Many of us express it.
Gombrich posed this opening statement in The story of art; “There is no art, only artists.” In that view, Da Vincis and Picassos create the medium. Stoneprint demonstrates the opposite. Art and architecture have narrow repertoires, capable of description, thus there is art, and art enables artists. There are no Da Vincis or Picassos without the universal subconscious human code. Neither Da Vinci, nor any artist or mystery school, was aware of the visual grammar that they did not see, but could not contradict. Archetype, structure, and culture existed before we did, and before the universe, and will outlive the cycles of its expression intact. Whether we are few, as when we built the houses illustrated in the Ice Age chapter; or many, as when we built the pyramid fields and cities illustrated in the historic chapters; we express the core content of culture in all our media, with as much apparent variety as possible. Stylistic differences fade when the core content of culture is revealed. We all build, draw, talk, trade, count, strategise, pray and fight the same. Stoneprint reveals the size and shape of the blinkers in our conscious perception and assumptions. This book lifts the ‘beam’ of self-deception from our works, and from our supposedly scientific eyes.
We will continue designing art and buildings by intuition, but we will never see or study our works with half our brains again. The revelation starts with a testable definition of the subconscious structure in art and buildings. Then we query each esoteric craft, and each human science, on the abstract elements in culture and nature; and test the structure in 130 artworks, geoglyphs, buildings, temples, pyramid fields and cities.
Stoneprint reveals culture as directly rooted in nature; and as perpetual, universal, standard, and subconscious. This is much more mysterious than supposed ancient Atlanteans with magic building methods.
The core content of any old or young culture, is as predictable as chemistry, as readable as the periodic table, as translatable as language, as visible as art, as varied as mythology, and as recyclable as building material. Stoneprint demonstrates our subconscious expression of archetypal structure, by a tour of celebrated building sites worldwide…….

[order the book Stoneprint at $30 plus postage from Four Equators Media, via edmondfurter at gmail dot com ]……..

Stoneprint covers and pages samples display.
Stoneprint covers and pages samples display.

Structural analysis reveals ‘grammar’ in the cultural record
Stoneprint reveals the size and shape of the blinkers in our conscious perception and assumptions. This book lifts the ‘beam’ of self-deception from our works, and from our supposedly scientific eyes. We will never see or study our works with half our brains again.
The discovery of stoneprint in ancient and modern buildings, is the second call on the human sciences, and on popular culture, to replace the fundamental and supposedly ‘common sense’ paradigm of culture as ‘developed and evolved’, with the paradigm of subconscious structural expression. The first call was in the book Mindprint (2014), focusing on structural analysis of art and rock art. The first call on archaeologists was made in a paper presented at the ASAPA conference in Harare in 2015 (UZ, in press for 2019). The first call on anthropologists was in the international magazine Expression (2015 editions 9 and 10; 2016 edition 13).
We are unwitting instruments of structure. Yet we seem incapable of facing the evidence of our subconscious behaviour.
The challenge that the results of structural analysis poses to science, now includes hard evidence from chemistry, physics and architecture. The challenge to culture remains the same that our split-brained consciousness had always posed; to dramatise and integrate our subconscious perception, into our conscious minds. This is the challenge that healers, including Jung, pose to individual people and to our globalising society.
Chemistry and physics have their structural study in the periodic table. Language has its structure in grammar. Medicine has its structure in cells and DNA. The humanities and cultural crafts are lagging behind in our current cultural maturity cycle……

[order the book Stoneprint at $30 plus postage from Four Equators Media, via edmondfurter at gmail dot com ]……..

Motivation for the book
Edmond Furter wrote Stoneprint to redress the imbalance in the scientific paradigm, and in popular culture. Most human sciences, particularly Art and Architecture, are little more than craft training courses, designed to produce artists and architects, and to activate the inner artist; but not to train art researchers. Esoteric crafts training suffer from the same practical approach. Practitioners train practitioners, who seldom study the natural and psychological matrix that enables their crafts.
Furter commented on the book: “I was fortunate to find the five-layered structure in rock art; baffled to find it in ‘fine’ or ‘free’ art; doubly fortunate to find sufficient references to place it in context with crafts and sciences; and triply fortunate to demonstrate how we express it in mud and stone. I did not invent stoneprint, I found it, and invested six years in explaining it.”
“The quest in the book Stoneprint is: What is culture, and whom does it serve? It seems that our works serve more purposes than we consciously knew. We serve universal culture; which serves nature, which serves archetype, which is an end in itself.
“In Stoneprint, I examine the wonders of the human code in 130 works of nature and culture, in the context of crafts and social sciences, to raise subconscious behaviour within reach of our conscious minds.”

Stoneprint, the human code in art, buildings and cities, includes these themes and sites:

Cultural context
The Five levels of structure in cultural media
Alchemy: Crafts reveal chemistry
Chemistry reveals biology
Kabalah: Natural philosophy correspondences
Poetry: Blake’s London- Jerusalem- Golgonooza
Astrology: Calendars reveal divination
Cosmology: Direction is everywhere

Scientific context
Art History: Perception reveals gestalt
Archaeology: The World Archives challenge
Anthropology: Artefacts reveal structure
Popular Anthropology: Who did it?
Psychology: Behaviour reveals archetype
Philosophy: The universe reveals archetype
Communication Science: Structure is the message
Sociology: Behaviour reveals our self-image
Science and esoterica: our split consciousness

Natural elementary maps
The periodic table
Reflexology in our hands, eyes, minds, teeth, ears,
The Piacenza bronze liver double circle of gods
Piacenza city and its walls are cultural stoneprints

Culture maps
The Maikop silver bowl paradise
Mapungubwe’s gold foil oracle reconstructed
A Venda divination bowl
Pedra Pintada engraving oval, and pentagons
The Bulgarian Karanovo tablet answers questions

Ice Age sites
Turkey: Gobekli Tepe house C, D, B, A
Gobekli Tepe excavation and radar maps
Turkey: Gobekli Tepe pillar D43, a culture portrait
Spain: Malta’s Mnajdra double stoneprint
Spain: Malta’s Gigantija double stoneprint
Spain: Hal Saflieni’s underground stoneprint
Scotland: Skara Brae plans
Scotland: Jarlshof wheelhouses and site recycling

Early civil sites in Sumeria
Babylonia was a stoneprint in clay brick
Babylon city, a vortex of dispersion
King-priests Ur Nanshe, and Gudea built temples
Assyria: T-pillars and Y-tents in an army camp

Early civil sites in Egypt
Sakkara, first royal campus, and a stepped pyramid
Teti’s pyramids form a stoneprint in Sakkara
Giza pyramid field stoneprint
Kings Valley tombs are underground stoneprints
Queens Valley entrances lost and found
Edfu temple is a double churn
Senmut’s ceiling stoneprint is half zodiac, half duat

Civil outpost sites
Nubia: Meroe pyramids speak with their doors
Egypt: Nabta Playa slab field counts four Ages
Egypt: Hawara labyrinth in Kircher’s Gnostic vision
Nubia: The cornucopia of minister Huy
Palestine: Jerusalem temple mount hybrid
Palestine: Jerusalem, womb of three religions
Judea: Masada, a military stoneprint
Turkey: Nemrut hill, crossroad of Persians and Greeks
Australia: Elivna rock pavement engraving
Ethiopia: Axum is an ark of spiritual mysteries
Ethiopia: Lalibela temple field of bedrock ‘hearts’
Ethiopia: Lalibela’s Mary church; womb in a womb

Prehistoric European sites
Ireland: Drombeg house, a cosy double stoneprint
England: Avebury and Silbury landscape
England: Stonehenge counted three ages
England: Damerham circles in radar scan
England: Stonehenge landscape radar scan
England: Stanton Moor landscape; boulders and ‘ladies’
Greece: Phaistos palace, the other Greek labyrinth
Germany: Magdalenburg mound graves
Scotland: Stennes stone circle
Scotland: Cochno stone concentric engravings

African sites
Zimbabwe: Great Zimbabwe, landscape with a womb
Zimbabwe: Great Zimbabwe queen’s yard with a womb
Zimbabwe: Nhunguza and Penhalonga metallurgy floors
South Africa: San Bushman painted stoneprints on rock
Mali: Nature and culture on a Dogon mud wall
South Africa: Lydenburg concentric engravings boulder

Eastern sites
A Buddhist wheel of life landscape panorama
India: Sanchi temple gate pagoda engraving
Nepal: Kathmandu palace square temple complex
China: Beijing Temple of Heaven park, an Aquarian cosmos
China: Choukungmu pyramid fields need more research
Japan: Nara Basin Horyuji temple, galactic manifestation
Japan: Todai temple, a living site
Japan: Himeji, Shirasagi-jo temple, White Heron nests

Mexican sites
Izapa pyramid field and stelae, new world, same stoneprint
Izapa cacao tree ritual stele, a third layer of structure
La Venta pyramid field, spire eyes, platform womb
Monte Alban double stoneprint works with the landscape
Coba, a triple Stoneprint with interlocking ‘galaxy’
Uxmal was contested by a witch, a dwarf, and a king
Chichen Itza has temples to planets, and a stoneprint
Teotihuacan pyramid avenue, Leo sun, Virgo moon
El Tajin pyramid field, double thunder
Palenque lid cosmic tree and double stoneprint
Palenque pyramid field, chaos among order

North and South American sites
Peru: Machu Picchu, Mayan capital in the clouds
Bolivia: Tiahuanaco island’s Sun Gate is the sun type
Chile: Atacama geoglyphs with Aquarian tailcoats
Peru: Nazca plain geoglyphs express ecological structure
Peru: Cuzco’s Coricancha constellations reveal an update
USA: California’s Painted Rock, theatre of time
USA: Lower Colorado River geoglyphs has a calendar clock
USA: Hopi kiva 5mT2, and its village, hinge on a womb
USA: Colorado’s Mystery Hill metallurgy plant or tech school
USA: Crow Canyon kivas Block 100 has two missing features

Historic Western sites
Italy: Rome, eternal city with an Age update
Italy: Rome’s gates and bridges are eloquent
Italy: Rome’s Capitol Forum, contested but constant
Italy: Rome’s Quirinal forums for spiritual order
Italy: Rome’s Vatican City, a stoneprint inside type Aries
Italy: Brescia has Mark’s lion, Mary’s womb, John’s bull
Turkey: Ephesus, former city of Amazons and Artemis
Turkey: Serapis and Ophiotaurus, half-monsters
Spain: Santiago de Compostella, of a son of thunder
Canary Islands: Las Palmas governor’s house facade
Canada: Quebec, Victorian ideals in stone
South Africa: Cape Town’s Dutch forts claimed a footprint

See images and extracts from Stoneprint here;
or visit

[order the book Stoneprint at $30 plus postage from Four Equators Media, via edmondfurter at gmail dot com ]