The sculpture represents a group of three individuals of the following character and arrangement:—
To the left is seen a tall human figure, with the head of a peculiar kind of bull, with long horns turned forward and broken at the point; instead of the right arm, he has a peculiar organ terminating like an oar, while in the left hand he carries an arrow and a bow—at least such is the appearance, though it might be mistaken for a shield; between his legs a long tail is seen hanging down from his slender body. The posture of this figure is bent forward, and all its movements are well represented. Opposite to this curious individual is another one of not less remarkable character, but of smaller proportions, entirely human as far up as the shoulders, while the head is that of an animal which reminds us of the Egyptian ibis, without being identical with it. The small pointed head is furnished with three ears, or with a pair of ears and some other excrescence, and beyond with a sort of hood (which, more than any other particular, recalls the idea of Egyptian art), but it is not furrowed; over the fore part of the head is a round line representing some ornament, or perhaps the basilisk. This figure likewise has a bow in its right hand, but, as it would seem, no arrow, while the left hand is turned away from the body.
Between these two half-human figures, which are in a hostile attitude, is a bullock, small in proportion to the adjacent lineaments of the human figure, but chiselled with the same care and the same skilful hand, with the only exception that the feet are omitted, the legs terminating in points, a defect which I shall have occasion to notice also in another sculpture. There is another peculiarity about this figure, the upper part of the bull, by some accident, having been hollowed out, while in general all the inner part between the deeply chiselled outlines of these sculptures is left in high relief. The animal is turned with its back towards the figure on the right, whose bow it seems about to break. The block on which it was sculptured was about four feet in breadth, and three in height. It was lying loose on the top of the cliff.
No barbarian could have graven the lines with such astonishing firmness, and given to all the figures the light, natural shape which they exhibit. The Romans, who had firmly established their dominion as far as Garama, or Jerma, might easily have sent emissaries to this point, and even further; but the sculptures have nothing in them of a Roman character. Some few particulars call to mind the Egyptian sculptures. But on the whole it seems to be a representation of a subject taken from the native mythology, executed by some one who had been in intimate relation with the more advanced people on the coast, perhaps with the Carthaginians. Be this as it may, it is scarcely doubtful that the subject represents two divinities disputing over a sacrifice, and that the figure at the left is intended for the victor.
On the cliff itself there is another sculpture on a large block which, now that the western end is broken off, is about twelve feet long and five feet high. The surface of the block is quite smooth, protected as it has been, in some degree, by the block above, which projects considerably; nevertheless the sculpture has suffered a good deal. It bears testimony to a state of life very different from that which we are accustomed to see now in these regions, and illustrates and confirms St. Augustine’s statement that the ancient kings of this country made use of bulls for their conveyance. It represents a dense group of oxen in a great variety of positions, but all moving towards the right, where probably, on the end of the stone which is now broken off, the pond or well was represented from which the beasts were to be watered. Some of these bulls are admirably executed, and with a fidelity which can scarcely be accounted for, unless we suppose that the artist had before his eyes the animals which he chiselled. My sketch gives only a faint idea of the design, which is really beautiful. The only defect, as I have already remarked above, is in the feet, which, from some reason or other, have been negligently treated.
If we consider that the sculpture described is close to a watering-place on the high road to Central Africa, we are reduced to the conjecture that at that time cattle were not only common in this region, but even that they were the common beasts of burden instead of the camel, which we here look for in vain. Not only has the camel no place among these sculptures, but even among the rude outlines which at a much later period have been made on the blocks around, representing buffaloes, ostriches, and another kind of birds, there are no camels; and it is a well-known fact that the camel was introduced into the western part of Northern Africa at a much later period.
