Terror Bird

Hey folks,

I keep running into this large beaked bird which was clearly held in high regard by the artists. The fossil record seems to indicate that humans and terror birds never met, so I convinced myself they were a similar looking parrot or eagle that has yet to be discovered.

Then, I found this stone. That neck is way to big to be a flying bird. It's hard for me to believe that humans were in North America for any less than a million years looking at this bird, or else terror birds were around a lot longer that previously thought.

Very handsome fella. Doesn't look terrible at all. Interestingly, the tools I find associated with them are soft, seemingly meant for rubbing out a smooth substrate. I bet they were really fuzzy and warm...probably tasty too.

In case you are wondering, the bird with the large beak is facing left.

Love to hear your thoughts.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Here's a pic with measure for reference.[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Well this is the problem, without really good examples that are proof positive figure stones, and again without knowing exactly what any long extinct creature looked like exactly, we are taking shots in the dark. I do believe this to be a figure stone, finger tip bottom left, but on its own, without seeing those other possible depictions its difficult for me to say terror bird, and seeing as we only have a possible head profile here, I can just as easy say conger eel head....

Yes, I made a lot of quick conclusions.  I'm new to this format.

Most of the time I can find an alternate depiction of the main animation in these works in some other pose, as though the artist is reinforcing what has been put there so there is no mistaking their intention.  This one is kind of difficult because of the splotchy substrate.  I kind of see a standing bird on the opposite side, but it is very choppy.

I rely a lot on artist depictions of the known fossil record to understand my stones.  For reference, I'm using the position of the "eye", the size of the "beak" in relation to the "head" as well as an apparent line of separation between the two, the small "head feathers" the apparent girth of the "neck", as well as what appears to be a stubbly little "wing" on the right of the figure.  

And to be fair, I'm using a lot of information that I have gathered on my own from staring at the rocks for the last 3 months that other people don't have access to, and this obviously doesn't produce very good science.  

Here's the top down view.  I'm interested if you see any other figures.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Ignoring the blotchy material and possible exploitation of paredollia, I do see a classic figure here, the eoglyph long necked water bird. There is more I feel, but im uncertain as to what....

Here is a brief history.
Terror birds (330 lbs) existed in the Americas from 62 to 1.8 million years ago and possibly as recent as 18,000 years ago. In the folklore of the Yakima Indians, the pach-an-a-ho’ (Yakima: “crooked beak” or “rough-looking bird”) is a giant ground-dwelling brown bird which leaves three-toed tracks.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titanis
https://cryptidarchives.fandom.com/wiki/Pach-an-a-ho%27
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

The largest existing flightless bird that still exists in the Americas is the Greater Rhea (44–60 lb)
https://abcbirds.org/blog/largest-birds-of-the-americas
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_rhea
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Thanks Rocky Terror birds (330 lbs) existed in the Americas from 62 to 1.8 million years ago and possibly as recent as 18,000 years ago.
So no evidence of its evolution over that great time period then, as always evolutionary change is never preserved by the fossil record

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

I'm becoming less confident in this, my post, and would be happy for it to disappear.

I'm not sure when it is or isn't ok to refer to particular features of the subject. Most of my subjects have such a surprising level artistic accuracy that I try to figure out what exact species I am dealing with. Maybe I'll check out the rules!

Im not sure it even matters, its what the forum is about, if you tried another forum you would of been shot down in flames for even suggesting a rock could have any images in it....

That's for sure.

So after a bit of research, I think my specimen is not a "Terror Bird" effigy.  Whew.  Best to avoid directly contradicting the "known" fossil record if possible.

From my perspective, as a person sitting right in front of this stone, and having seen several different images of this likeness in my local rock art, I believe it is a depiction of a member of the family Teratornithidae.  Here is a wiki on this extinct bird family:  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teratornithidae

These birds are believed to be the inspiration behind the Thunderbird of Native American mythology.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

My guess is that prehistoric people would have had living likenesses of these birds to work from, while Native Americans would have been inspired by the stone images left by their ancient ancestors.

Trout wrote:
My guess is that prehistoric people would have had living likenesses of these birds to work from, while Native Americans would have been inspired by the stone images left by their ancient ancestors.

There are also vultures today of coarse, unequivocal to link figure stones to modern humans, the evidence is in flint tools from all ages, even those that are designated to be made by Neanderthals, of coarse in almost all cases that designation is not evidence based.

There is no reason that prehistoric people wouldn’t have had “cartoon” characters as we do. Any depictions could be of mythic creatures.

Is this evidence of giant crows or tiny people?   This is the popular Thunderbird image floating about today, but linking the Indian mythology to Teratornithidae seems logical....
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

From a paper about thunderbirds in american indian art:
Abstract

Thunderbird figures and images are found in American Indian art throughout Canada and the United States. In the legends of Algonkian and Iroquoian peoples of the Northeast region the thunderbird is a powerful and sacred spirit-being in the form of a giant eagle-like bird. It causes lightning, thunder, wind, devours serpents, and is seen as a guardian spirit of Indian people. In southeastern Canada and the northeastern United States, or the Northeast, the thunderbird image is found in various design forms and artistic mediums. It has been expressed on rock surfaces, in shell, clay, animal hide, metal, and as facial tattoos. Images occur on bedrock outcrops located along the banks of rivers and streams, the shores of lakes, and seaside bays. Thunderbird images have been engraved into artifacts including ornaments, small flat stones, a stone pipe, and pebbles. Thunderbirds appear in the archaeological record as copper cutouts, castings in pewter and lead, fashioned from shell and incised into clay. These various images are illustrated and described and an interpretation of their meaning and age is presented.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/23265141?seq=1

My own 'thunderbird'
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

"There is no reason that prehistoric people wouldn’t have had “cartoon” characters as we do. Any depictions could be of mythic creatures."

No reason to think that they could not represent the natural world in striking, lifelike dimensions either.  Perhaps the reason we can't identify Pleistocene human cultures is that we're looking for cartoons, when we should really be looking for "still life of the beaver".

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Teratornithidae was probably similar to a vulture or condor, I recon from recreated images.  It would have lived with humans.  They probably would have held it in high regard, cause it was really big.  What happened between then and now is up for discussion.

I like that napped 'thunderbird'.  Tell me more about it?

I like that napped 'thunderbird'. Tell me more about it?

Could be Cherokee I think Bryce sums it up nicely in another thread, there is also a post about it on my blog  https://eoliths.blogspot.com/