Perhaps no manufacture is of such importance to anthropologists
as pottery. In Europe pottery first appeared in what is termed by
archæologists the Neolithic Age, or that period of human history when
man had learnt to neatly chip and to polish his stone implements, but
had not as yet discovered metal. Amongst living people the Australians
and the Polynesians are the only great groups among whom pottery is
unknown.[31] There can be little doubt that the ceramic art has been
independently discovered in various parts of the world, and Mr. Cushing
believes that this has been the case even in America.
[31] In Oceania pottery is unknown save in the West, and there
only sporadically. It is absent in Polynesia except in the
Tonga Islands, where it is doubtless due to Fiji influence.
Its distribution in Melanesia is erratic; for example, it
occurs in the Fiji Islands, New Caledonia, and the Loyalty
Islands. Rude, unglazed dishes are made in Espiritu Santo
(R. H. Codrington, _The Melanesians_, 1891, p. 315), but not
Aurora, in Pentecost and Lepers’ Island in the New Hebrides,
nor in Banks’ Islands, Torres Islands, Santa Cruz Group, and
most of the Solomon Islands. While wanting in the Bismarck
Archipelago, it occurs in New Guinea. But even where pottery
is made it is very local and confined to certain tribes. For
example, in British New Guinea (A. C. Haddon, _The Decorative
Art of British New Guinea_, 1894, pp. 149, 222-224) it is made
only in the south-east peninsula and in some of the adjacent
islands. In scattered villages, or even in parts of villages,
from Yule Island to Maopa in Aroma, pottery is made from clay
in the lump; but in the Engineer Group, and especially in
Wari (or Teste Island), the clay is laid down in a spiral,
and no stone and beater are used, but it is smoothed by a
Tellina shell. This method is described and figured by Dr.
Finsch (O. Finsch, _Samoafahrten_, 1888, p. 280; _Ethnological
Atlas_, 1888, Plate IV.). The upper border of these pots,
he says, “exhibits various simple band patterns, which are
scratched with fork-like bamboo instruments, and which serve
not as ornamentation but as trade-marks. Thus here also (as at
Bilibili) each woman has her own mark, with which she signs her
fabrication.” I have elsewhere (cf. _Decorative Art of British
New Guinea_, p. 223) printed an extract from the unpublished
journal of Dr. H. O. Forbes, in which he gives an account of
the method of making pottery at Wari. Fig. 23 is a copy of
Dr. Forbes’ sketches of these slightly decorated vessels. In
German New Guinea (Kaiser Wilhelm’s Land) pottery is made
from the lump, as among the Motu of British New Guinea, at
Sechstroh River (Humboldt Bay), Goose Bay (Dallmann Harbour),
the island of Bilia (Eickstedt Island in Prince Henry Harbour),
and more especially at the island of Bilibili in Astrolabe
Bay. Dr. Finsch claims that this pottery is of better quality
and better decorated than that of the south-east coast. Some
of the vessels are ornamented with small bosses. But the
insignificant patterns, frequently made with the finger-nail,
are probably intended, as in Port Moresby, for trade-marks,
and not merely for ornament. From their extremely local and
scattered distribution it is evident that the pottery makers
of New Guinea are not autocthones, but belong to the waves
of Melanesian immigration that have washed the coast and
neighbouring islands.
In speaking of New Caledonia Baron L. de Vaux (L. de Vaux, “Les
Canaques de la Nouvelle-Calédonie,” _Rev. d’Ethnog._, ii.,
1883, p. 340) says, “formerly the women of Pouébo, Oubatche,
and Pam had the monopoly; now the art tends more and more to
disappear as the natives find it more practical to buy trade
vessels. They succeeded in making pots to the height of two
feet, and very often decorated externally with lizards and
frogs in relief. The base being ready, they superimpose rings
of well-prepared clay the one above the other, holding them and
joining them from the interior with the left hand, whilst they
smooth their work externally by means of the right hand and of
a little beater of smooth, hard wood.”
Mr. Atkinson (J. J. Atkinson, “Notes on Pointed Forms of
Pottery among Primitive Peoples,” _Journ. Anth. Inst._, xxiii.,
1893, p. 90) also describes the New Caledonian method of making
pottery, and draws attention to the fact that the occasional
traces of faint horizontal marks occasioned by the technique
“imitate the marks left by pottery made on the system of
plastering wickerwork employed by some people,” and therefrom
he suggests a necessary warning not to take the latter method
as having been of universal occurrence.
Earthen vessels are comparatively easy to make, and though they
are brittle, their fragments, when properly baked, are almost
indestructible. The history of man is unconsciously written largely
on shards, and the elucidation of these unwritten records is as
interesting and important as the deciphering of the cuneiform
inscriptions on the clay tablets of Assyria. The Book of Pots has
yet to be written, but materials for its compilation lie scattered
throughout the great literature of archæology, anthropology, and
ceramics, and in the specimens in a multitude of museums and
collections. The scientific treatment of the subject has been
sketched out mainly by W. H. Holmes and F. H. Cushing, and I have not
hesitated to borrow largely from the publications of these American
anthropologists.
There are three principal methods of making clay vessels—1, by coiling;
2, by modelling; or 3, by casting.
In the first method longer or shorter rope-like pieces of clay are
formed. These are laid down in a spiral, and the vessel is built up by
a continuation of the same process.
In modelling, or moulding, a lump of clay is taken, and this is first
worked with the hands, and then the clay is gradually beaten into the
desired shape and thickness by means of a wooden mallet, which hits
against a stone or other object that is held inside the incipient
vessel.
The third method, by casting, is very rarely employed except by quite
civilised peoples. It was a comparatively late discovery that clay
vessels could be cast within hollow moulds if the paste was made thin
enough.
The coiling and moulding processes are in some places employed side by
side, and a vessel may be commenced in the latter method and finished
by coiling. (Fig. 55.) This is done by the Nicobarese,[32] Pueblo
Indians, and other peoples.
[32] E. H. Man, “Nicobar Pottery,” _Journ. Anth. Inst._,
xxiii., 1893, p. 21.
The subject of the forms and decoration of pottery is so important for
our study that it will be advisable to quote at considerable length
some of the American investigations which bear upon it. Nowhere than
in that continent are conditions more favourable to a scientific study
of the evolution of ceramics, and our American colleagues happily are
fully alive to this fact. Their researches afford valuable sidelights
upon the probable history of European prehistoric ceramics.
Mr. J. D. Hunter,[33] writing of the Mississippi tribes in 1823, says
that they spread the clay “over blocks of wood, which have been formed
into shapes to suit their convenience or fancy. When sufficiently dried
they are removed from the moulds, placed in proper situations, and
burned to a hardness suitable to their intended uses. Another method
practised by them is to coat the inner surface of baskets, made of
rushes or willows, with clay, to any required thickness, and when dry,
to burn them as above described.”
[33] J. D. Hunter, _Manners and Customs of several Indian
Tribes located west of the Mississippi_. Philadelphia, 1823,
p. 296.
Messrs. Squier and Davis,[34] referring to the vessels of the Gulf
Indians, say:—“In the construction of those of large size, it was
customary to model them in baskets of willow or splints, which at the
proper period were burned off, leaving the vessel perfect in form, and
retaining the somewhat ornamental markings of their moulds. Some of
those found on the Ohio seem to have been modelled in bags or nettings
of coarse thread or twisted bark. These practices are still retained by
some of the remote western tribes.”
[34] Squier and Davis, _Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi
Valley_, 1848, p. 187.
Mr. W. H. Holmes[35] points out that “clay has no inherent qualities of
a nature to impose a given form or class of forms upon its products,
as have wood, bark, bone, or stone. It is so mobile as to be quite
free to take form from surroundings.... In early stages of culture the
processes of art are closely akin to those of nature, the human agent
hardly ranking as more than a part of the environment. The primitive
artist does not proceed by methods identical with our own. He does not
deliberately and freely examine all departments of nature or art, and
select for models those things most convenient or most agreeable to
fancy; neither does he experiment with the view of inventing new forms.
What he attempts depends almost absolutely upon what happens to be
suggested by preceding forms.
[35] W. H. Holmes, “Origin and Development of Form and Ornament
in Ceramic Art,” _Fourth Annual Report of the Bureau of
Ethnology_, 1882-83. Washington, 1886.
“The range of models in the ceramic art is at first very limited, and
includes only those utensils devoted to the particular use to which the
clay vessels are to be applied; later, closely associated objects and
utensils are copied. In the first stages of art, when a savage makes
a weapon, he modifies or copies a weapon; when he makes a vessel he
modifies or copies a vessel” (pp. 445, 446).
The discovery of the art of making pottery was probably in all cases
adventitious, the clay being first used for some other purpose.
“The use of clay as a cement in repairing utensils, in protecting
combustible vessels from injury by fire, or in building up the walls
of shallow vessels, may also have led to the formation of discs or
cups, afterwards independently constructed. In any case the objects or
utensils with which the clay was associated in its earliest use would
impress their forms upon it. Thus, if clay were used in deepening
or mending vessels of stone by a given people, it would, when used
independently by that people, tend to assume shapes suggested by stone
vessels. The same may be said of its use in connection with wood and
wicker, or with vessels of other materials. Forms of vessels so derived
may be said to have an adventitious origin, yet they are essentially
copies, although not so by design” (p. 445). In other words, such
pottery is primitively skeuomorphic. Ceramic biomorphs will be dealt
with in a later chapter.
Mr. Holmes further points out that the shapes first assumed by vessels
in clay depend upon the shape of the vessels employed at the time of
the introduction of the art, and these depend, to a great extent, upon
the kind and grade of culture of the people acquiring the art, and upon
the resources of the country in which they live.
A few examples will suffice. Mr. Holmes (_loc. cit._, pp. 383, 448)
figures an oblong wooden vessel with a projecting rim, which is narrow
at the sides but broad at the ends; it is in fact a sort of winged
trough; this is sometimes copied in clay. It is evident that the
elongated terminal shelf-like projections are more suited to a wooden
than to an earthen vessel.
In Fig. 53 we have an Iroquois bark-vessel. Mr. Cushing[36] informs us
that in order to produce this form of utensil from a single piece of
bark, it is necessary to cut pieces out of the margin and fold it.
Each fold, when stitched together in the shaping of the vessel, forms
a corner at the rim. These corners, and the borders which they form,
are decorated with short lines and combinations of lines, composed of
coarse embroideries with dyed porcupine quills. Clay vessels (Fig. 54),
which strikingly resemble the shape and decoration of these birch or
linden bark vessels, are of common occurrence in the lake regions of
the United States. There can be but little doubt that the clay vessels
are directly derived from the bark vessels.
[36] F. H. Cushing, “A Study of Pueblo Pottery as illustrative
of Zuñi Culture Growth,” _Fourth Annual Report of the Bureau of
Ethnology_, 1882-83. Washington, 1886.
[Illustration: FIG. 53.—Iroquois bark vessel; after Cushing.]
[Illustration: FIG. 54.—Rectangular, or Iroquois, type of earthen
vessel; after Cushing.]
Mr. Cushing’s long and intimate knowledge of the Zuñi Indians has
enabled him to speak with authority on matters which might be merely
happy suggestions by other anthropologists. Any one can guess at
origins and meanings, but there are few who know at first-hand, and who
therefore can act as interpreters to the student at home. The following
account of Zuñi pottery is taken from Mr. Cushing’s paper, entitled “A
Study of Pueblo Pottery as illustrative of Zuñi Culture Growth.”
So far as language indicates, the earliest Zuñi water vessels were
tubes of wood or sections of cane. The latter must speedily have given
way to the use of gourds. While the gourd was large and convenient in
form, it was difficult of transportation, owing to its fragility. To
overcome this it was encased in a coarse sort of wicker-work. Of this
there is evidence among the Zuñis, in the shape of a series of rudely
encased gourd vessels into which the sacred water is said to have been
transferred from the tubes.
This crude beginning of the wicker-art in connection with water vessels
points towards the development of the wonderful water-tight baskets of
the south-west, explaining, too, the resemblance of many of its typical
forms to the shapes of gourd vessels. The name for these vessels also
supports this view.
Mr. Cushing suggests that water-tight osiery, once known, however
difficult of manufacture, would displace the general use of gourd
vessels. While the growth of the gourd was restricted to limited areas,
the materials for basketry were anywhere at hand. Basket vessels were
far stronger and more durable than gourds.
“We may conclude, then,” continues Mr. Cushing, “that so long as
the Pueblo ancestry were semi-nomadic, basketry supplied the place
of pottery, as it still does for the less advanced tribes of the
south-west, except in cookery.” Thus the _Ha va su paí_, or Coçoninos
of Cataract Cañon, Arizona, in 1881, “had not yet forgotten how to boil
food in water-tight basketry, by means of hot stones, and continued
to roast seeds, crickets, and bits of meat in wicker-trays, coated
inside with gritty clay. A round basket-tray, either loosely or closely
woven, is evenly coated inside with clay, into which has been kneaded
a very large proportion of sand, to prevent contraction and consequent
cracking from drying. This lining of clay is pressed, while still
soft, into the basket as closely as possible with the hands, and then
allowed to dry. The tray thus made is ready for use. The seeds or
other substances to be parched are placed inside of it, together with
a quantity of glowing wood coals;” these are made to rapidly revolve.
“That this clay lining should grow hard from continual heating, and in
some instances separate from its matrix of osiers, is apparent. The
clay form thus detached would itself be a perfect roasting vessel” (pp.
484, 485). The modern Zuñi name for a parching pan indicates that the
shallow vessel of twigs coated with clay for roasting had given birth
to the parching pan of earthenware.
In the ancient Zuñi country are found vessels of the same form as the
basket-pot or boiling basket, still surviving among the Havasupaí.
These baskets are good examples of the spirally-coiled type of basket.
“Seizing the suggestion afforded by the rude tray-moulded
parching-bowls, particularly after it was discovered that if well
burned they resisted the effects of water as well as of heat, the
ancient potter would naturally attempt in time to reproduce the
boiling-basket in clay. She would find that to accomplish this she
could not use as a mould the inside of the boiling-basket, as she had
the inside of the tray, because its neck was smaller than its body. Nor
could she form the vase by plastering the clay outside of the vessel,
not only for the same reason, but also because the clay in drying
would contract so much that it would crack or scale off. Naturally,
then, she pursued the process she was accustomed to in the manufacture
of the basket-bottle. That is, she formed a thin rope of soft clay,
which, like the wisp of the basket, she coiled around and around a
centre to form the bottom, then spirally upon itself, now widening the
diameter of each coil more and more, then contracting as she progressed
upward until the desired height and form were attained. As the clay
was adhesive, each coil was attached to the one already formed by
pinching or pressing together the connecting edges at short intervals
as the widening went on. This produced corrugations or indentations
marvellously resembling the stitches of basket-work. Hence accidentally
the vessels thus built up appeared so similar to the basket which had
served for its model that evidently it did not seem complete until
this feature had been heightened by art. At any rate, the majority
of specimens belonging to this type of pottery, especially those of
the older periods during which it was predominant, are distinguished
by an indented or incised decoration exactly reproducing the zigzags,
serrations, chevrons, terraces, and other characteristic devices of
water-tight basketry. Evidently, with a like intention, two little
cone-like projections were attached to the neck near the rim of the
vessel, which may hence be regarded as survivals of the loops whereby
the ends of the strap-handle were attached to the boiling-basket.
Although varied in later times to form scrolls, rosettes, and other
ornate figures, they continued ever after quite faithful features of
the spiral type of pot, and may even sometimes be seen on the cooking
vessels of modern Zuñi.” Corroborative evidence of the connection
between the two kinds of receptacles is found in their names, the
translation being “coiled cooking-basket” and “coiled earthenware
cooking-basket” (pp. 489-491).
Other earthenware vessels had a somewhat different evolutionary
history, but they had for their starting-point the food-trencher of
coiled wicker-work. When by a perfectly natural sequence of events
ornamentation by painting came to be applied to the surface of the
bowls a smooth surface was found preferable to a corrugated one, not
only because it took paint more readily, but because it formed a far
handsomer utensil for household use than if simply decorated by the
older methods.
Later the building up of large vessels was no longer accomplished by
the spiral method exclusively. “A lump of clay, hollowed out, was
shaped how rudely so ever on the bottom of the basket or in the hand,
then placed inside of a hemispherical basket-bowl, and stroked until
pressed outward to conform with the shape, and to project a little
above the edges of its temporary mould, whence it was built up spirally
(Fig. 55) until the desired form had been attained, after which it was
smoothed by scraping.”
[Illustration: FIG. 55.—Clay nucleus in base mould, with beginning
of spiral building; a stage in the formation of a Zuñi vessel; after
Cushing.]
With regard to the employment of textile supports by the ancient
peoples of North America for the clay vessels during the process of
manufacture, Mr. Holmes[37] writes:—“Nets or sacks of pliable materials
have been almost exclusively employed. These have been applied to the
surface of the vessel, sometimes covering the exterior entirely, and at
others only the body or a part of the body. The nets or other fabrics
used have generally been removed before the vessel was burned or even
dried.... I have observed in many cases that handles and ornaments
have been added, and that impressed and incised designs have been made
in the soft clay after the removal of the woven fabric. There would
be no need of the support of a net after the vessel had been fully
finished and slightly hardened. Furthermore, I have no doubt that
these _textilia_ were employed as much for the purpose of enhancing
the appearance of the vessel as for supporting it during the process
of construction. In support of the idea that ornament was a leading
consideration in the employment of these coarse fabrics, we have the
well-known fact that simple cord-markings, arranged to form patterns,
have been employed by many peoples for embellishment alone. This was a
common practice of the ancient inhabitants of Great Britain”[38] (p.
398).
[37] W. H. Holmes, “Prehistoric Textile Fabrics of the United
States derived from Impressions on Pottery,” _Third Ann. Rep.
Bureau Ethnol_. Washington, 1884.
[38] A very interesting collateral line of study has sprung
from Mr. Holmes’ investigations of the impressions on pottery.
By the simple expedient of taking impressions in clay from
ancient pottery, and so throwing into high relief the rather
obscure intaglio impressions in the originals, he has been
able to restore a considerable number of diverse fabrics which
were used for the purposes just stated. “The perfect manner in
which the fabric in all its details of plaiting and weaving can
be brought out is a matter of astonishment; the cloth itself
could hardly make all the particulars of its construction
more manifest.” The perishable material so impressed the clay
that when it had long since crumbled into dust the latter was
enabled to transmit the details of the structure of a fabric
the very existence of which would otherwise never have been
known.
The value of the bearing of such observations as the foregoing on the
study of the prehistoric pottery of Europe is obvious. In America
the record is unbroken; with us, like the great majority of our
archæological finds, we are dealing with fragments, and it is only by
careful piecing together that a symmetrical whole can be restored.
Dr. Klemm,[39] some half-century ago, wrote:—“The imitation (of natural
vessels) in clay presupposes numerous trials. In the Friendly Islands
[Tonga[40]] we find vessels which are still in an early stage; they are
made of clay, slightly burnt, and enclosed in plaited work; so also the
oldest German vessels seem to have been, for we observe on those which
remain an ornamentation in which plaiting is imitated by incised lines.
What was no longer wanted as a necessity was kept up as an ornament.”
[39] G. Klemm, _Allgemeine Cultur-Geschichte der Menschheit_,
vol. i. p. 188.
[40] Pottery is made in Fiji, but not in Tonga.
Dr. Daniel Wilson[41] says that the early British urns may have been
“strengthened at first by being surrounded with a plaiting of cords
or rushes.... It is certain that very many of the indented patterns
on British pottery have been produced by the impress of twisted cords
on the wet clay—the intentional imitation it may be of undesigned
indentations originally made up by the plaited network on ruder
sun-dried urns.”
[41] D. Wilson, _Prehistoric Annals of Scotland_ (2nd ed.),
1863, i. p. 430.
Professor Tylor[42] refers to Mr. G. J. French’s experiments.[43] “He
coated baskets with clay, and found the wicker patterns came out on all
the earthen vessels thus made; and he seems to think that some ancient
urns still preserved were actually moulded in this way, judging from
the lip being marked as if the wicker-work had been turned in over the
clay coating inside.”
[42] E. B. Tylor, _Researches into the Early History of
Mankind_ (3rd edit.), 1878, p. 273.
[43] G. J. French, _An Attempt_, etc., 1858.
“On the surface of a few ancient vases or urns found in Germany,” Mr.
Charles Rau[44] says, “I noticed those markings which present the
appearance of basket-work; I was, however, in doubt whether they were
impressions produced by the inside of baskets, or simply ornamental
lines traced on the wet clay. Yet, even in the latter case, it would
seem that this kind of ornamentation was suggested by the former
practice of modelling vessels in baskets.”
[44] Charles Rau, “Indian Pottery,” _Smithsonian Report_, 1866,
p. 346, and 1882, p. 49.
It may be taken as proved that in a number of cases the forms of pots
are taken from natural objects, or from receptacles made of different
materials. We cannot demonstrate this in all cases, nor should we
expect to, for even assuming this to have been the universal origin, we
cannot hope to have the earlier stages preserved to us. The record is
imperfect, the evidence of origin is clear in some cases, and probable
in others; in some the evidence is lacking.
What applies to the form of pottery applies equally to its decoration;
often it is impossible to disassociate them. The actual or primitive
technique of manufacture, too, may exhibit itself in and as an
ornament, as, for example, the spiral markings in pottery made in
the coil method. We have seen that in some places plaited or woven
fabrics have been used to support the soft clay, and these have
left their impress. If not previously destroyed, these marks become
indelible after the burning of the pottery. These markings being due
to the process of manufacture, are repeated in the manufacture of
every vessel, and if not purposely smoothed out, expectancy comes into
operation, and they may be imitated in a slightly conventional manner
even when they may no longer occur in construction, as, for example,
when the supports are no longer employed, or in pottery turned on a
wheel.
Various methods of plaiting, intertwining, netting, and so forth may
thus be transferred as skeuomorphic decoration to pottery. These are
at first produced by means of incisions, puckerings of the clay by the
fingers, application of accessory coils or pieces of clay, etc. Even
the accidental imprints of nails or finger-tips, or of implements, may
have suggested certain decoration.
Later on, when pottery was decorated by painting, the same kind of
ornamentation was reproduced in the new medium, and as the changed
conditions evoked freer treatment, the designs underwent various
transformations.
Mr. Holmes[45] discusses the modification of ornament (1) through
material, (2) through form, (3) through methods of realisation (p. 458).
[45] W. H. Holmes, “Origin and Development of Form and Ornament
in Ceramic Art,” _Fourth Ann. Rep. Bureau Ethnol_. Washington,
1886.
(1.) The material of which an object is made must have a very definite
effect upon its decoration, and the material is to a very large extent
dependent upon the locality. Metal, stone, clay, wood, bone, skins, and
textiles are so varied in their structure that they require different
artistic treatment, and it has usually taken a considerable time for a
people to discover what is the most suitable form of decoration for an
object made of a particular substance.
(2.) The forms of decorated objects exercise a strong influence upon
the decorative designs employed. An ornament, as Mr. Holmes remarks,
applied originally to a vessel of a given form, accommodates itself to
that form pretty much as a costume becomes adjusted to the individual.
When it came to be required for another form of vessel, very decided
changes might be necessary.
[Illustration: FIGS. 56 and 57.—Variations in a motive through the
influence of form. Pueblo pottery; after Holmes].
The ancient Pueblo peoples were very fond of rectilinear forms of
meander patterns, and many earthen vessels are found girdled with a
beautiful angular pattern. (Fig. 56.) When, however, the artist has to
decorate a vessel which has rounded prominences in its central zone,
he finds it very difficult to apply his favourite device, and he is
practically compelled to convert his angled into a spiral meander.
(Fig. 57.)
(3.) Ornament is modified by the method of its execution, whether by
incising, modelling, painting, or stamping; closely associated with
these are the peculiarities of construction.
Nearly all woven fabrics encourage, even to compulsion, the use of
straight lines in their decoration. Curved lines are rendered as
stepped or broken lines. Fig. 58 illustrates, in a diagrammatic
manner, two forms of the same motive as expressed in different arts.
The curvilinear freehand scroll, which is readily painted, incised,
or moulded in relief, is forced by the constructional character of
textiles into square forms, and a rectangular meander or fret will
result. Brickwork, mosaics, or whole-coloured tiles also lead to
similar results. In the small panel to the left of Fig. 59 it will be
observed that careless or hurried work has resulted in the rounding of
an angular hook, which has been transmitted to pottery from a textile
source. I have noticed the angularisation of spirals occurring in New
Guinea; this was due, not to change in the material employed, but to
the preference which the natives of the Papuan Gulf have to straight
and angled lines. (Cf. Figs. 11, 12.) Primitive spirals have been
copied by these people, and have gradually become angularised into a
rectilinear meander.
[Illustration: FIG. 58.—A, Freehand form; B, Form imposed by fabric.
Forms of the same motive expressed in different arts; after Holmes.]
[Illustration: FIG. 59.—Design of Fig. 60; after Holmes.]
[Illustration: FIG. 60.—Ancient Pueblo vase, province of Tusayan. The
height and width of the vase are 14 inches; after Holmes.]
Fig. 60 is a drawing of the painted design of a large earthen vessel
from the province of Tusayan, in the district of the Colorado Chiquito.
From the occurrence of an isolated stepped line in the decoration, Mr.
Holmes suggests that the ornamentation had a textile ancestry. The
design is made by leaving the white colour of the pot and painting
a black background. The “unit of the design,” as interpreted by Mr.
Holmes, is given in black in Fig. 61. Judging from Fig. 60, which is a
representation of the vessel itself, Fig. 59 is a fairly faithful copy
of the design; but there is no warrant on this vase for his joining
the scroll pattern at each end with its enclosing line, as in Fig. 61.
It is obvious that if this design were logically worked out, it would
appear as in the last figure; it may be so on other vases, but Mr.
Holmes apparently is concerned with this one. Professor Grünwedel[46]
has drawn attention to the mistake of rectifying aboriginal drawings,
as we are thereby preventing ourselves from studying the psychology of
the natives. According to the method we are employing, we are concerned
with what actually occurs, and not with what might be.
[46] Cf. p. 334, which is an abstract of what that author says.
[Illustration: FIG. 61.—“Unit of the design” of Fig. 60; after Holmes.]