Part 10
Equally instructive is the application of small nodes and fillets to pottery which has been explained by Dr. G. G. MacCurdy as resulting from degeneration of armadillo figures.[78] The essential characteristic of all this ware is the use of small nodes and fillets applied to the surface of the vessel or to some of its parts, like feet, neck, shoulder or handle. These attachments are decorated by a series of short parallel impressions. An oval node with single medial line or lines is often used to indicate an eye; a similar nodule with several parallel lines indicates the foot; a series of parallel, short fillets with short parallel crosslines, are applied to forms that represent animals, but they are also found on the bodies of vases. Dr. C. V. Hartman[79] and S. K. Lothrop[80] describe the same technical motives from other parts of Costa Rica. In technical character these are so much like the Chiriqui specimens that we can hardly doubt that they are derived from the same device. This method of decoration is widely spread. Its use extends over Central America and the West Indies. It is most characteristic of archaic ware, particularly figurines of this early period are always modelled by means of attaching nodules and fillets. During this period the eye is regularly represented by a nodule with one or several incisions. This technique is also found in Ecuador[81] up to more recent times. In the Toltec period the adornment of vessels by attached nodule decoration reached its highest development. In North America it is not common. Incised fillets occur in remains from the middle Mississippi region but even here they are not one of the pronounced features. In contrast with its frequency in the highly developed pottery of early Central America its rarity may be noted in Africa, where highly developed forms are by no means absent, and where lids with animal figures might seem to suggest readily the application of the device.[82] This is true also of the prehistoric pottery of Europe. The nodule appears in the pottery of Michelsberg, in Jaispitz (Moravia) and in a few other late localities. Only in the slip (barbotine) decorations of the terra sigillata do we find anything resembling the American appliqué ornamentation, but since the material is applied in a semifluid state, it does not attain the same freedom of treatment. Nodes that do occur in European prehistoric pottery were apparently made rather in imitation of punched bronze decorations and belong to a late period. Attached animal figures, made in clay, like those found at Gemeinlebarn, also seem to be imitations of metal work and have never reached that development which is so characteristic of Central American ceramic art.
[78] George Grant MacCurdy, A Study of Chiriquian Antiquities, Memoirs Connecticut Academy of Arts and Sciences, Vol. 3 (1911), pp. 48 et seq.
[79] C. V. Hartman, Archaeological Researchers in Costa Rica, Stockholm, 1901.
[80] Samuel Kirkland Lothrop. Pottery of Costa Rica and Nicaragua, New York, Museum of the American Indian, Heye Foundation, 1926.
[81] Marshall H. Saville, The Antiquities of Manabi, Ecuador, New York, 1910.
[82] See a relief ornament on a red ware vessel from Banana, Belgian Congo, Annales du Musée du Congo; Notes analytiques sur les collections ethnographiques, Vol. 2, Brussels, 1907, Les industries indigènes, Pl. III, fig. 34.
The characteristic slit rattle feet of Chiriqui pottery prove even more conclusively than the application of fillets and nodes, that the art forms of this province must be considered as a special development of forms characteristic of a much wider area. This type of foot is widely spread beyond the territory in which the fish forms prevailed.[83]
[83] See Franz Boas y Manuel Gamio, Album de colecciones arqueológicas, México, 1912, Plates 36, 42, 51.
We are thus led to the conclusion that the use of the nodes and fillets for building up armadillo motives, are historically related to the method of decorating vessels by means of the attachment of separate pieces. The armadillo motive can then be only a specialized application of building up animal motives from the elements in question. The elements themselves must not be considered primarily as symbols of the armadillo, nor can all the animals built up of these elements be interpreted as armadillos.
The essential point of this consideration lies in the wide distribution of technical and formal motives over large areas, although differing in details in various localities. These technical and formal motives are the materials with which the artist operates and they determine the particular form which a geometrical motive or a life motive takes. If the notched fillet and node are the material with which the hand and the mind of the artist operate, they will occur in all his representations.
The investigators who have tried to prove that conventionalized forms originate through a process of degeneration from representations, have generally overlooked the strong influence of motor habits and of formal arrangements upon the resultant style. In those cases in which there is a tendency to organize decorative motives in rectangular panels, in circular areas, or in fields defined in other ways, the result must be quite different from others in which the artist habitually arranges his material in large fields or in continuous bands. The habit of decorating pottery by moulding and by adding on relief forms, must lead to results different from those which are obtained by painting or engraving. The use of lines and the habit of using dots or circles will also effect the resultant style. I think there can be very little doubt that if an artist is in the habit of using dot designs combined with lines and if, later on, he tries to represent an animal, this particular method will be applied in the representation. The origin of the motor habits must probably be looked for in technical processes, that of arrangement in the same processes and in the forms of familiar utensils.
Our examination of the factory-made material shows that the process of slurring, or slovenly execution leads first of all to the development of individual characteristics that can best be compared with handwriting. Pronounced mannerisms permit us to recognize the hand of the artisan. It is only when an unusually careful and ingenious person operates with this traditional material that new forms develop, analogous to those described by Balfour. It will readily be seen that these conditions are not often realized in primitive society.
I believe another cause is more potent in bringing about a modification of design. Ornamental patterns must be adjusted to the decorative field to which they are applied. It is not often that the artist is satisfied with representing part of his subject and cutting it off where the decorative field ends. He will much rather distort and adjust the parts in such a way that they all fit in the field that he has at his disposal. When a bird is represented with outspread wings, which would occupy approximately a square field, and the space to be decorated is long and narrow, the artist may twist body and tail about, and draw out the wings and thus squeeze the design into the available space. Henry Balfour[84] gives as an instance the adjustment of Chinese figures of bats to an ornamental band (fig. 130).
[84] The Evolution of Art, 1893, p. 50.
The northwest coast Indians, who always take the greatest liberties with the outer forms of animals, do not hesitate to distort them in a way that allows the artist to adjust the animal to the decorative field. Their method will be discussed in greater detail at another place (see pp. 183 et seq.).
On shell discs from the mounds of Tennessee the rattlesnake is so represented (fig. 131). The head of the rattlesnake with upturned upper jaw is readily recognized in fig. 131 _a_. Behind the mouth, the eye represented by a number of circles, will be seen. The body continues along the lower rim towards the right and terminates on the left, in a rattle. The analogy between fig. _b_ and _a_ is easily recognized; the essential difference consists in the fact that the body in _b_ is undecorated; the rattle lies just over and behind the eye. Figure _c_ still preserves the same form, but added to the decorations found in the preceding specimens, is the long loop with small circles surrounding the eye. The position in _d_ is slightly changed; the eye will be easily recognized and just to the right of it, more upright than in the preceding specimens, is the mouth with a fang. The body is in the same position as before, following the rim of the disk and ending in a rattle. In _e_ the mouth is very much shortened and the eye is reduced to a single small circle, while the body and tail retain their characteristic features.
The formal elements which were discussed in the beginning of this book exert a far-reaching influence upon decorative forms. The exigencies of symmetry within a decorative field require adjustments which may modify the representative form considerably. A peculiar effect of inverted symmetry may be seen in those Borneo shields in which the whole shield represents the face of a demon; one half to the left of the vertical middle line right side up, the other half upside down.[85]
[85] A. R. Hein, Die bildende Künste bei den Dayaks of Borneo, figs. 48, 49, 51.
Much more potent than the necessities of formal adjustment is the symbolic tendency which is liable to lead to abbreviations in which the representation is reduced to the slightest indications. In our former discussions we have seen that symbolic representations are very common and that it happens in many cases that the symbol itself is represented in a more or less perspective way. Wherever the art of the people wavers between the symbolic and representative modes of delineation, opportunity arises for the occurrence of realistic and abbreviated forms, side by side. To this class belong the face urns, the prehistoric representations of human figures in stone, and even our busts and portraits may be considered as continuing this practice, for they are fragmentary in so far as they show only that part of the body in which we find the character of the individual most clearly expressed; in part, because the rest of the body is always covered by inexpressive clothing which hides whatever individuality may exist. The principal character of forms of this type will be the tendency to suggest an object by the indication of a few of the most characteristic traits. It would probably be erroneous to speak in these cases of a gradual breaking up of the realistic form and the development from it of a conventional form, for this is not what actually happens. The two types occur side by side.
STYLE
We have to take up now the problem of individual art styles. The general formal elements of which we spoke before, namely symmetry, rhythm, and emphasis or delimitation of form, do not describe adequately a specific style, for they underlie all forms of ornamental art. Representative art is more apt to develop differential features, for in each area symbolic, perspective and wavering representations have peculiar, pronounced characteristics. The principles of symbolic selection and the method of composition help to individualize representative art forms; but, besides these, many formal elements are integral parts of every art style and these give it its most specific character. The New Zealander, the Melanesian, the African, the Northwest American, the Eskimo,—all are in the habit of carving human figures in the round. They are all representative, and still the provenience of each is easily determined on account of very definite formal characteristics.
We shall direct our attention to an elucidation of the principles by which art styles may be described. We shall also ask ourselves, in how far the historical and psychological conditions under which art styles grow up and flourish may be understood.
It will be well to begin with a simple problem. We have seen that we may consider as works of art undecorated implements made by a perfectly controlled technique,—in other words made by a virtuoso. Such are polished stone axes, chipped arrow or lance heads, iron spear heads, spoons, boxes; in short, any object of daily use, provided only the form which we may recognize as conceived in crude specimens, is worked out in a perfect technique. Objects of this kind, used for the same purposes, have not by any means the same form everywhere. The specimens accumulated in ethnological museums prove that, until very recent times, before contamination by European wares, each locality, and also each cultural period had developed fixed types that were rigidly adhered to.
This observation is illustrated by the utensils of prehistoric times as well as by those collected among the primitive tribes of our times. The throwing sticks of the Eskimo may serve as an example. They are used to give greater impetus to the hand-thrown weapon. The principle of their use is the same among all the Eskimo tribes, but they present highly specialized local forms, so distinct in appearance that each type may with certainty be assigned to the region from which it comes (fig. 132).
For the purpose of our inquiry it is important to understand the reasons that bring about this fixity of type. In a tool like the throwing stick it is obviously related to the manner of its use. The clumsy board of Baffinland must feel unwieldy to the hand of a native who has learned to handle the narrow, pegged stick from Bering Sea. The adaptation of the hand to the handle does not permit the use of forms that require unusual muscular movements which would lessen the accuracy and ease of use. Therefore the variations of form are confined within the limits established by the fixed motor habits of the people. Even if a variation of form should appeal to the eye, it will not be adopted if it should require a new adjustment of the hands. The more fundamental the motor habits that determine the form of the implement, the less likely will be a deviation from the customary type.
The motor habits which find expression in the forms of utensils are in part highly specialized,—like those required for the effective use of the throwing sticks just referred to,—but others are much more general in character, and it would seem as though large divisions of mankind were characterised by habits of this kind which influence the forms of their implements and household goods. The restriction to the islands of the Pacific Ocean of the process of producing fire by ploughing; the areas of different types of arrow release described by Edward S. Morse; the extended use of throwing clubs in Africa and their relative insignificance in many parts of America are other examples of this kind.
A curious instance of the stability of motor habits is found among the Eskimo; notwithstanding their great inventiveness the ancient Eskimo does not seem to have used the saw for cutting large bones. The cutting was always done by drilling holes close together along the line on which the bone was to be divided. When enough holes had been drilled the parts were separated by a blow of a hammer or by means of a wedge; it seems that saws of flaked stone were entirely unknown to these people.
Another instance may be cited; the Indians of the North Pacific Coast, from southern Alaska to central Vancouver Island, do not practice the art of stone chipping and flaking. All their stone work was made either in tough stones that are handled by sawing, battering, pecking and polishing, or in soft stones that can be cut with a knife and rubbed down with polishing materials. The beautiful chipped blades, characteristic of their Eskimo neighbors in the north and their Indian neighbors on the interior plateaus and of the southern coast tribes, are missing here entirely.
Similar observations may be made in regard to the handling of the knife. The North American woodcarver of modern times uses principally the crooked knife, the blade of which forms part of a spiral surface. Archaeological specimens of this type are rare[86] so that it is not certain whether this method of cutting was extensively used in olden times. At present it is undoubtedly distributed over the whole continent.[87] The knife is used like a spoke-shave, being drawn towards the body. In Africa, on the other hand, carving is done with a rasp and a straight[88] double-bladed knife. I find the use of a crooked, sickle shaped knife mentioned only once, as being applied to the shaving down of an arrow shaft and, presumably, to similar purposes. Schweinfurth[89] mentions that the Mangbattu are the only people in the regions he visited,—including even Egyptians—, who are familiar with the use of the single-edged carving knife, while all the others use the double-edged knife. Of the Ila speaking people it is also said that they use a spear blade for carving[90].
[86] Harlan I. Smith, Archaeology of the Thompson River Region, Publ. Jesup North Pacific Expedition, Vol. I, fig. 352 _d_, p. 418; James Teit, The Thompson Indians, _ibid._ figs. 125, 126. p. 184; perhaps also the beaver tooth knife, _ibid._ fig. 49, p. 144.
[87] Otis T. Mason, Report U. S. National Museum, 1897, pt. 1, pp. 725 et seq.
[88] M. Weiss, Die Völkerstämme im Norden Deutsch-Ostafrikas, p. 421 et seq.; also G. Tessmann, Die Pangwe, p. 222; Jan Czekanowski (Ruanda) l. c. (see p. 111) p. 155.
[89] G. Schweinfurth, Im Herzen von Afrika, 3d ed. p. 349.
[90] E. W. Smith and A. M. Dale, The Ila-speaking Peoples of Northern Rhodesia, Vol. I, p. 199.
Another example illustrating our point is presented by the hammers used by the Indians of the northwest coast of North America. The coast tribes of Washington use a hand hammer made of a single bowlder with a lateral striking head, the tribes of Vancouver Island, a hand hammer also made of a single bowlder, with a cylindrical shaft and a flat striking head at the lower end[91]; those of northern British Columbia a heavy hammerstone lashed to a large wooden handle.
[91] Franz Boas, The Kwakiutl of Vancouver Island, Publications of the Jesup North Pacific Expedition, Vol. 5, pp. 314 et seq.
In another way habits of movement or position find expression in household furniture and dress. Tribes among which squatting on the ground is habitual do not use stools or chairs. Those in the habit of lying on their sides do not use neck rests which are found among people with elaborate hair dress that lie on their backs.
The clothing of women is adapted to the manner in which they carry their children. The hood of the Eskimo woman of Baffinland accommodates the child that is carried on the back. The wide boot of the women of Southampton Island and of the ancient styles of Hudson Strait served to protect the child that was carried on the hip.
It is hardly likely that the habits of the people originated from forms of the household goods they used. It is much more probable that the inventions were determined by older habits. In later times the relation may have been reversed, in so far as each generation stabilizes its habits in accordance with the objects to which it is accustomed.
A similar permanence of form of utensils which are adjusted to definite motor habits exists in modern times, as is illustrated by the rigidity of form of many tradesmen’s tools or the permanence of the keyboard of the piano.
The same conservatism, although based on the training of another sense organ, is found in the stability of the forms of the letters of our alphabet. In writing, both the firmly established motor habits and the fixity of the associations between visual image and form, help to stabilize old forms and to make difficult innovations.
The stability of language is another phenomenon of the same kind. The fundamental phonetic characteristics of a language are based on motor habits; the use of vocabulary and of grammatical forms partly on auditory associations. In all these cases; in the use of tools, forms and language the mind becomes so thoroughly adjusted to the use of definite motor habits, and to certain types of association between sense impressions and definite activities, that a resistance to change appears as the most natural mental attitude; if for no other reason, because it requires the effort of unlearning and relearning. It must be understood that this does not imply an absolute stability, which does not exist, but merely the individual resistance to sudden changes.
In another way this resistance is expressed through an emotional attachment to customary forms. In the domain of tools it is perhaps not so much the pleasure of play that induces man to bestow much labor upon the manufacture of his utensils, as rather the love of the special tool that he is using, a love that implies pleasure in the customary movements as well as in the form of the implement. This mental attitude is one of the most important sources of the conservatism in the form of objects of use, and of the tendency to give to them the greatest possible technical excellence. The intensity of the emotional relation between a person and his tool is naturally greatest when maker and user are the same person; it must decay with the ease with which substitutes are obtained. Here is one of the causes of the rapid decay in the beauty of form of native utensils as soon as European tools and manufactures are introduced.
While the lack of variation in the forms of utensils, and their regional characterisation are often expressions of definite motor habits, or of other sensory reactions that are firmly associated with useful activities which have become culturally fixed, there are other cases in which conservative retention of form may not be thus explained. This is true particularly when the use of an object does not depend to any considerable extent upon its form. Whether a basket is round or oblong, angular or without corners does not influence the mode of its use, unless it serves as a carrying basket. Still, in many cases the familiarity established through long use of the objects may readily lead to an emotional attachment that finds expression in permanence of form, and in the refusal to accept new, unfamiliar shapes for every day use, an emotional resistance to change that may be variously expressed,—as a feeling of impropriety of certain forms; of a particular social or religious value, or of superstitious fear of change. Permanence of form is also favored by the participation of many individuals in the manufacture of objects. In most cases every person supplies his own needs. The number of original minds is certainly no larger in primitive society than in our own, although I do not believe that it is any smaller. The bulk of the makers of objects of every day use are, therefore, imitators, not originators, and the mass of uniform material that is in use and constantly seen will restrict the free play of imagination of the original minds. The desire for deliberate attempts to create something novel, that characterises the industries of our times, is not present, just as little as it is present among our peasants, so far as they are uncontaminated by city influences. I do not mean to imply that primitive forms are absolutely stable. Nothing could be farther from the truth; but the conscious striving for change that characterizes our fashions, is rare. We are also conservative in forms, a modification of which would require fundamental changes of habits.