Part 18
The fundamental feature of the second type of blankets is a central face placed a little higher than in the preceding type, so that it forms exactly the center of the whole field. In place of the large eyes on top, we find two large inverted eyes, often without the adjoining jaw design. In many cases two small circular patterns, or small eye designs, occupy the center of the lower border. These may often be identified with the nostril of the head to which the two large lower eyes belong. This pattern is much more symmetrical than the former type, but its symbolism is much more obscure. I presume that the inverted position of the eye in the upper border is essentially due to the attempt to obtain greater symmetry. For an explanation it is necessary that the upper eyes must be viewed as some part of the body that is turned upside down. Characteristic examples of this type are shown in figs. 103 and 271. In these, the fields to the right and left of the central face are treated, in the former, as a profile face; in the second they are decorated with a feather design filler. A somewhat different treatment is given in fig. 272 which may be compared with fig. 270. In both a large face occupies the center of the whole design, surrounded by the four large eyes and the lateral spaces filled with feather designs.
In fig. 273 the upper eyes have been moved towards the center and the eye design has been expanded into a profile which occupies the whole upper margin of the central field. In fig. 273 _b_ the lateral fields next to the central face are occupied by the two sides of the dorsal fin so that here the form of a whale is brought out fairly clearly.
The general scheme of the narrow lateral panels is also quite definite. We find on practically all the blankets an eye design,—part of the profile of an animal’s head,—in the upper, outer corner, another eye design near the lower border, generally approximately in the middle of the lateral field. The position of the lower eye design is much more irregular than that of the upper one. In general we are given the impression of an animal, the body of which extends along the extreme outer border of the blanket, the head occupying the centre of the panel, while the feet or tail are shown along the lower border. In this way a space is left in the middle, next to the central panel, which does not belong essentially to the form of the animal.
In both fundamental types the intervening spaces which are not filled by the large eye designs, the body, tail, and extremities, are filled with a variety of patterns which depend only in part upon the selection of the animal to be represented, but are very largely determined by esthetic considerations.
The broad sides of rectangular boxes bear the same fundamental design as the first type of blankets; an animal with an enormous head on the upper border, the body occupying the centre below. A fairly consistent difference between the blanket and box types is that the lower border of the large face is curved on the boxes; straight on the blankets. I believe this difference is due to the desire to avoid excessive parallelism. In the blanket the straight lower line of the head is set off against the curves of the upper part of the head and against the angle in the lower border of the blanket, while in the boxes a straight middle line would appear set off against the parallel upper and lower edges of the box. The lateral panels of the blanket correspond, in a way, to the narrow lateral strips in the front of the long boxes (fig. 274 _a_) which are characterized by a fairly large eye design in each corner. These are connected by a variety of decorative elements. At the lower border of the box front there originate, in this manner, five fields. The middle one being occupied by the body of the central animal; the corners being occupied by the eye designs which form the basis of the lateral strips. Between these there remain spaces which are often filled with designs representing the fore or hind feet of the central animal. On account of the shifting of the eyes the five field division does not appear as clearly in fig. 275. The reverse side of fig. 276 is treated differently; in the lower field the body is omitted, the two eyes placed in the middle so that a fourfold division of the whole area under the mouth originates. A similar treatment is given to a front (fig. 277 below), in which the eyes are placed in the corners while the middle is occupied by the two sides of a tail, which, however, is treated like a hawk’s face. The arbitrary character of the details appears very clearly in this arrangement.
The narrow sides of the boxes are generally painted with a design analogous to the central design of the front with this difference, however, that the lateral panels are missing and that the head is more compressed. In a number of cases the short sides are treated differently, as shown in fig. 276. Very rarely the short sides contain a profile figure that does not occupy the whole width of this side (fig. 277).
There are also a number of low boxes which are treated somewhat differently. On account of the lowness of the sides the lower rim of the head is drawn straight so that a narrow rectangular panel originates along the lower border (fig. 278). In this specimen the eyes are retained; the central face in the lower field presumably represents the body, to which are attached the arms and hands. In most specimens of this type, however, the lower section is almost entirely suppressed; the large upper face is retained but under it we find only a few ornaments that may be interpreted only as fillers (fig. 279 above).
There are also a number of low boxes in which the body is entirely suppressed. They contain, essentially, the large head design with a few decorative features along the sides, and the eyes in the upper corners. (Fig. 279 below).
The arrangement of the long boxes is such that the center of the mouth, or a point a little below it, is the center of the decorative field (figs. 274-276). A line drawn from the center of the lower border to the upper corners passes almost always along the corner of the mouth and often also through the sharp curve at the upper, outer outline of the face. The line drawn from the center of the upper border to the lower corner passes, generally, through the corner of the mouth. When the central field along the upper border is wide, so that it reaches down to the upper curve limiting the mouth, the eye is shown in profile (figs. 274 _b_, 276 reverse). When the central field consists only of a sharp short angle, there is a double eye (figs. 274 _a_, 275, 276 front, 277).
The general arrangement of lines on the box is such that the upper curves of the face are strongly curved downward. The curvature decreases downward; and in some boxes, for instance in those shown in figs. 275 and 276 reverse, there is a tendency to an arrangement of lines which are convex, upward.
The eye decorations are always so placed that they are not arranged in straight lines. It will be seen that in the best boxes they fall into curves that intersect the black lines of the design. In fig. 274 _a_, the eyes in the lower corners and those in the mouth are placed so as to form a continuous curve; in fig. 274 _b_, the arrangement of the eyes in the upper corners, the eyes of the large head, and those in the mouth form a fairly regular curve.
In the square boxes on which only one side of the face is shown on each side (fig. 280), the body is very much reduced in size. In most of these the large head is limited below by a straight line, while on the long boxes containing the full face on the front the lower line of the face is curved. In only one of these (fig. 278) do we find the face limited below by a straight line.
In fig. 280 _a_, the two sides shown on the left are occupied by a large head on top, corresponding to the blanket fields 1, 2, and 5. The ear (5) is much reduced in size. The sharp beak in the middle indicates that the hawk is meant. Under it is seen a small field corresponding to field 3 on the blankets and under it a face with its two eyes, corresponding to 4. The field 7 is occupied by the arms, indicated by the curved line running from the shoulder to the wrist of the raised hand. The whole lateral field of the blanket is condensed in the narrow strip to the right and left of the face and body. The designs on the upper corners are clearly ornamental and do not represent any particular part of the head; the eyes in the lower corners are considered as feet and toes; the large eyes over the lower corners as knee joints. The two sides of the box shown on the right hand side correspond in all details to those on the left, excepting the mouth, which is treated quite differently; the nostrils being shown in the center.
In fig. 280 _b_ the lower portion of the decorated side is much reduced in size and the marginal fields are simplified. The head may represent a hawk; the eyes in the lower fields are exceptional in so far as they are not placed in the corners but near the body and they may be considered ankle joints and below them the toes. The eye designs in the upper corners take the place of the ears. The reduction of the body is even more marked in fig. 281; here the eye designs and the adjoining curves on the upper margin are clearly fillers; the body has been completely dissolved. The eyes in the lower corners with the attached lower curve show an attempt to represent a flipper. The common character of these three specimens is the horizontal dividing line under the mouth and (excepting the one face in fig. 281) the general tendency to the symmetrical arrangement of lines in the upper and lower fields. The lines in the upper field point from the middle downward, and those in the lower, from the middle upward.
There are a number of peculiar developments of the head and body designs which are used on small food trays, the sides of which are bent out of a single plank. In one group of these (fig. 282) the two narrow sides represent, in front, the head of the animal; on the opposite, side the tail. This appears most clearly in figs. 282 _b_ and _d_; both representing the beaver. In fig. 282 _d_ the beaver’s head and tail are perfectly plain. In 282 _b_ there is considerable confusion; the beaver’s body below is provided with two human arms and over it is indicated the large characteristic head. The tail is shown on the opposite short side, together with the hind legs and the two disconnected eyes which ordinarily would form the hip joints and would be connected with the upper end of the thighs. On all these specimens, 282 _a_, _b_, and _c_, the other sides show an inverted face. This originates evidently in such a way that the eyes represent, at one end, the shoulder joints, at the opposite end, the hip joints, but instead of developing the sides as fore and hind legs, the inverted eyes have lead to the development of a face design which has no particular relation to the animal represented. In other words, we find here, as well as in many other places that elements which are in part derived from representations of parts of animals, have assumed a purely decorative function so that an explanation of the details is, to a great extend, arbitrary. The geometrical decoration on the long side of fig. 282 _d_ is also derived from the shoulder and hip joints, but instead of parts of a face, slit designs fill in the rest of the side.
The trays shown in fig. 283 are of the same make as those shown before, with the only difference that on the long sides the shoulder joints, knee and foot are shown in the ordinary way. The hind limbs are here represented on the short side, where the hip joints are shown by two large eyes in the upper part of the design. It will be observed, however, that in these cases also there is a considerable amount of arbitrary use of decorative elements that have no particular significance, but which must be considered simply as fillers. This appears most clearly in fig. 283 _e_, which represents a dish with a design of a human being. Here the arms are represented on the long sides, the shoulder joint by an eye which, however, is provided with lids. The space under the eye is filled in with a mouth which has no function in this position. It is evidently introduced in the same way as the profile faces which serve as fillers on the blankets. The most distinctive specimen of this type is shown in fig. 283 _f_. It represents a beaver, the face indicated by disconnected eyes, mouth, and ear; the nose showing the form of one of the conventional copper plates used by the northwest coast Indians, while the face in the middle of the upper border is purely ornamental. The opposite short side shows very clearly a tail, hip, legs, and feet and on the long side also the large shoulder joint in the form of an eye with ear; the arm and the foot are distinctly shown but here also, by the addition of four teeth, the shoulder joint is elaborated in the form of a face; the eyes in the corners of the long field are purely ornamental.
To the same group belong also the carved trays cut out of a single piece of wood, shown in fig. 284. Here we have only the head design which is adjusted to the curvature of the upper border of the decorative field. The lines of the face are drawn so as to conform to the decorative field.
It will be observed that the eyes of the large head in the blankets are always almost horizontal while those on the boxes and trays are strongly inclined. I presume this is due to the tendency to avoid massing of parallel lines.
The large head design found on the blankets and boxes occurs also on the paintings in the center of the front of slat armour. The lateral panels are missing and the design consists simply of the head with attached shoulder, arm, and hand (fig. 285).
A number of square food trays, bent of a single piece of wood, are not decorated according to this plan. The face, consisting of two symmetrical halves, is replaced by a series of profiles (fig. 286); the short and high sides have the large eye in the left hand upper corner; the mouth in the lower right hand corner. The design on the long sides represents the sides of the body. The large eyes stand, presumably, for the shoulder joint and are placed in the center of the side; wrist and fingers are in the lower left hand corner. The significance of the design in the right hand upper corner is not clear. The general distribution of the design elements is evidently determined by the central position of the large eyes.
The boxes shown in fig. 287 illustrate that still another pattern is used on square boxes. Each of the four sides of the two boxes shown in figs. 287 _a_ and _b_, is divided into four rectangles of unequal size. The general plan of the two designs is almost the same, although there are considerable differences in detail. It is quite evident that in 287 _a_ the lower part of the first and third sides represents legs and feet. A distinct wing design appears in the left hand upper rectangle of the fourth side, but otherwise the arrangement of the elements is so arbitrary that a safe interpretation is impossible. It seems plausible that in this case also the attempt at decoration was much more important than the attempt at interpretation. An interpretation was given to me for the box shown in fig. 287 _b_. Although obtained from Charles Edensaw, one of the best artists among the Haida, I consider it entirely fanciful. The first side to the left, corresponds to the third side, which is opposite to it on the box. The second side corresponds to the fourth side. Edensaw explained the design as showing four interpretations of the raven as culture hero. The upper right hand rectangle of the first side he claimed to represent the head of the raven surmounted by the ear; the large eye to the left of it, in the left hand upper corner, the shoulder and under it the wing and tail. The design in the right hand lower corner he interpreted as the foot; the toes are clearly visible in the lowest right hand corner of this field. He claims that the head turned upside down in the left hand upper rectangle of the second side represents the head of the raven and under it the hand; the raven being conceived as a human being. The rectangle in the upper right hand corner contains the shoulder; the right hand lower corner under it, the tail; and the left hand lower corner, leg and foot.
The box shown in fig. 287 _c_ is related to the general design of fig. 287 _b_. The somewhat slanting lines between the upper and lower fields occur in both cases, but the vertical division of each side, which is characteristic of the specimen just described, is lacking in the last named specimen.
A fairly fixed formal arrangement may also be observed on horn spoons moulded of a single piece (fig. 288). On the back of the spoon is a design, the center of which is a large face. In many specimens the space above the eye is filled by two ear designs which are doubled and unusually large on account of the space that they have to fill. In these specimens the space between the ears is taken up by a narrow decorated strip. In a few simpler forms parts of the bowl of the spoon remain undecorated.
A closer examination of the decorated objects shows that even apart from the decorative use of symbolic motives, geometric elements are not by any means absent. The most striking use of geometrical forms is found on wooden trays, which bear at the ends the characteristic faces, but which are decorated on the sides by groups of short parallel lines (fig. 284, p. 273). The line and circle pattern on the dish (fig. 168, p. 191) illustrates also the use of geometrical forms for decorative purposes. On the berry spoon (fig. 215, p. 221) the space left vacant by the symbolic design is filled in with a net of crossing lines. This specimen shows that the cross hatching which occurs in many specimens,—on the beaver tail (fig. 157, p. 186), on berry spoons (fig. 182, p. 197), on spoons (fig. 189, p. 201) and often in red or black as a filler on boxes (fig. 274, p. 263) has a decorative value even when it may be given at the same time a symbolic meaning. The dish of big-horn-sheep horn (fig. 289) shows a bear’s head at each end. At the same time it has a decorative border which seems to imitate the border of a basket and which is purely ornamental. It serves to close off the rim which without it would seem to end abruptly. A similar device is used on a Kwakiutl mask (fig. 290). Although the encircling ornament is explained as a ring made of twisted, shredded cedar bark, it is obviously essentially ornamental. The circular and spiral designs bring out the ornamental character most clearly.
It seems not unlikely that the symbolic style and the desire to cover the whole field with ornaments have developed exuberantly only recently. In early times geometric ornaments were probably more widely used than is the case now. We shall see presently that they are in extensive use in basketry.
A number of ancient blankets show that angular geometrical ornaments played an important part in earlier weaving. Plate X represents a blanket of mountain-goat wool, in the Ethnological Museum at Copenhagen, formerly belonging to the old collections in Leningrad. It is decorated entirely with geometrical designs arranged in horizontal bands. The same zig-zag pattern in short panels that occupies alternating bands in this blanket appears in a second ancient blanket (Pl. XI) which contains also curiously conventionalized faces and triangular designs. This is a cedar bark blanket in the British Museum transferred from the United Service Museum about 1868, collected at Nootka. It has a border in brown and yellow wool (?), consisting of obtuse triangles, assimilated to an eye design. A series of photographs of blankets in the hands of Dr. Newcombe of Victoria, British Columbia, shows that these types were in common use in Bella Coola (Pl. XII, see also p. 292).
Our consideration of the fixed formal elements found in this art prove that the principles of geometric ornamental form may be recognized even in this highly developed symbolic art; and that it is not possible to assign to each and every element that is derived from animal motives a significant function, but that many of them are employed regardless of meaning, and used for purely ornamental purposes.
The symbolic decoration is governed by rigorous formal principles. It appears that what we have called for the sake of convenience dissection and distortion of animal forms, is, in many cases, a fitting of animal motives into fixed ornamental patterns. We infer from a study of form and interpretation that there are certain purely geometric elements that have been utilized in the symbolic representation. Most important among these are the double curve which appears always as a filler in an oval field with flat base, and the slit which serves to separate distinct curves. The typical eye design is presumably related to the circle and dot and may have developed from the double tendency of associating geometrical motives with animal forms and of the other, of standardizing forms derived from animal motives as ornamental elements.