FOOTNOTES:

[1]H. Balfour,The Evolution of Decorative Art, 1893.

[2]P. J. Veth, “De Mandragora,”Internat. Arch. für Ethnogr., vol. vii., 1894, p. 199 (with references to the literature).

[3]Illustrated Archæologist, vol. i, 1893, p. 108.

[4]The Decorative Art of British New Guinea: A Study in Papuan Ethnography, Cunningham Memoir, No. x., Royal Irish Academy, 1894.

[5]I hope to publish shortly a paper in theInternationales Archiv für Ethnographie, on the designs which are incised on the skin of these natives.

[6]“Holz- und Bambus-Geräthe aus Nord West Neu Guinea,”Publicationen aus dem Königlichen Ethnographiscen Museum zu Dresden, vi., 1886.

[7]I have adopted the term “eye-area” to denote the eye device, which includes the eye, the eye-lashes, and often the cheek-fold of that side.

[8]According to Mr. A. C. English, Government Agent for the Rigo District, among the Sinaugolo tribe, the design Fig.21,D, is calledmulavapuli, and is tattooed on both sexes as a distinction for taking life; Fig.21,H,I,biubiu, have a similar value; the angled chest-marks (Fig.20,A,B) are calledboaroko. (Ann. Rep. British New Guinea, 1893-94, pp. 68, 69.)

[9]Southward of the Papuan Gulf, and in all the islands of the south-eastern extremity of New Guinea, the natives chew the betel-nut, and when chewing transfer quick-lime from gourds (“lime-gourds”) to their mouths by means of flat carved sticks (“lime-spatulas”). These vary greatly in form and in the character of their carving. The intaglio is filled in with lime, so that the design appears white on the polished ebony handles. These objects are often called “chunam spoons,” but they are never spoon-shaped, and there is no need to introduce an Anglo-Tamil word for lime.

[10]S. H. Ray and A. C. Haddon, “A Study of the Languages of Torres Straits,”Proc. Roy. Irish Acad., 1893, p. 509.

[11]The Decorative Art of British New Guinea, p. 263.

[12]S. H. Ray, “The Languages of British New Guinea,”Jour. Anth. Inst., xxiv., 1894, p. 32.

[13]Haddon, Sollas, and Cole, “On the Geology of Torres Straits,”Trans. Royal Irish Acad., vol. xxx., 1894, p. 419.

[14]Architectural Record, ii., 1893, p. 412.

[15]The Academy, 30th May 1891, No. 995, p. 519; alsoJournal of the Cambridge Ant. Soc., vii., p. 293.

[16]The Decorative Art of British New Guinea, 1894, p. 256.

[17]See, for example, PlateVII., Figs. 2, 5.

[18]Fromτὰ σκεύε, implements, utensils, tools, baggage, tackle, dresses.

[19]G. Semper,Der Stil in den technischen und tektonischen Künsten oder praktische Aesthetik. Munich, 1860-63, 2 vols. (Second Edition, 1878-79.)

[20]G. Perrot and C. Chipiez,A History of Art in Ancient Egypt, ii. p. 356, 1883.

[21]The Western Pacific and New Guinea, 1886, p. 138.

[22]Chalmers and Gill,Work and Adventure in New Guinea, 1885, p. 334.

[23]H. Stolpe, “Utvecklingsföreteelser i Naturfolkens Ornamentik” (Ymer1890), translated by Mrs. H. C. March, “Evolution in the Ornamental Art of Savage Peoples,”Trans. Rochdale Lit. and Sci. Soc., 1891.

[24]“Polynesian Ornament a Mythography; or a Symbolism of Origin and Descent,”Journ. Anth. Inst., xxii., 1893, p. 307.

[25]H. Colley March, “The Meaning of Ornament, or its Archæology and its Psychology,”Trans. Lanc. and Cheshire Ant. Soc., 1889.

[26]Copied from J. Evans,Bronze Implements, p. 148.

[27]F. Keller,The Lake Dwellings of Switzerland and other parts of Europe. Second edition, 1878, p. 565.

[28]“Pagan Ireland,”The Century Magazine, xxxvii., 1889, p. 368.

[29]F. Keller,The Lake Dwellings, etc, p. 565.

[30]O. Montelius, “Sur les Poignées des Epées et des Poignards en Bronze,”Congr. prehist. Stockholm, 1874, ii. p. 891.

[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.23is 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.

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.

[32]E. H. Man, “Nicobar Pottery,”Journ. Anth. Inst., xxiii., 1893, p. 21.

[33]J. D. Hunter,Manners and Customs of several Indian Tribes located west of the Mississippi. Philadelphia, 1823, p. 296.

[34]Squier and Davis,Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley, 1848, p. 187.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[39]G. Klemm,Allgemeine Cultur-Geschichte der Menschheit, vol. i. p. 188.

[40]Pottery is made in Fiji, but not in Tonga.

[41]D. Wilson,Prehistoric Annals of Scotland(2nd ed.), 1863, i. p. 430.

[42]E. B. Tylor,Researches into the Early History of Mankind(3rd edit.), 1878, p. 273.

[43]G. J. French,An Attempt, etc., 1858.

[44]Charles Rau, “Indian Pottery,”Smithsonian Report, 1866, p. 346, and 1882, p. 49.

[45]W. H. Holmes, “Origin and Development of Form and Ornament in Ceramic Art,”Fourth Ann. Rep. Bureau Ethnol. Washington, 1886.

[46]Cf. p.334, which is an abstract of what that author says.

[47]C. Fellows,A Journal written during an Excursion in Asia Minor, 1839.

[48]A remarkable example of inappropriate skeuomorphic decoration occurs among some of the tribes of Central Brazil, where the small triangular covering of the women is copied and made into patterns (Fig.52) on various objects, some being on the bark tablets which run as a frieze round a chief’s house (pp.97,175).

[49]φυσικός—of or concerning the order of external nature; natural, physical.

[50]A Study of Pueblo Pottery, etc., 1886.

[51]“A few Summer Ceremonials at the Tusayan Pueblos,”Journal of American Ethnology and Archæology, ii., 1892.

[52]Maize or Indian corn.

[53]Loc. cit., p. 517.

[54]Annual Report Bureau of Ethnology, iv.

[55]Cf. map by author in a paper “On the Geology of Torres Straits,” by Professors A. C. Haddon, W. J. Sollas, and G. A. J. Cole.Trans. Roy. Irish Acad., xxx., 1894, pp. 419-470.

[56]An interesting example of reversal is found on a bamboo tobacco-pipe which I obtained on the island of Mabuiag in Torres Straits, and which I have given to the National Museum at Washington, U.S.A. On one side of the pipe was cutᑎAЯIЯ, and on the otherMÖRAP; the latter is the name for a bamboo pipe, and the former I understood was the name of the place in Daudai where the owner had cut the bamboo from which he made the pipe; possibly it was his own name. It will be observed that this name, which is reallyRIRAU, is printed backwards, and the finalUis upside down. I suspect that the occasional reversal of words is due to the method of counting on the fingers which these people employ. They always begin with the little finger of the left hand, and pass from the thumb of the left hand to that of the right. If a man was spelling out a word letter by letter as if he were counting he might readily fall into the error of putting down the first letter in a place corresponding to the little finger of the left hand, and so on. If the man who carved the pipe began withRIRAU, that word would utilise all the digits of the left hand, and soMÖRAPwould come right end foremost on the right hand.

[57]F. H. Cushing, “A Study of Pueblo Pottery as illustrative of Zuñi Culture Growth,”Fourth Ann. Rep. Bureau Ethnol., 1882-83. Washington, 1886.

[58]According to a legend collected by the author in Torres Straits.

[59]Dr. Codrington,The Melanesians, p. 126.

[60]M. Uhle, “Holz- und Bambus-Geräthe aus N.W. Neu Guinea,”K. Eth. Mus., Dresden, vi., 1886, p. 6.

[61]M. D’Estrey, “Étude ethnographique sur le Lézard chez les Peuples Malais et Polynésiens,”L’Anthropologie, iii., 1892, p. 711.

[62]Dr. Codrington,The Melanesians, p. 126.

[63]“Holz- und Bambus-Geräthe aus Nord West Neu Guinea,”Dresden Ethnograph. Mus., 1886.

[64]P. Mantegazza, “Studii antrop. ed etnogr. sulla Nuova Guinea,”Arch. per l’Antrop. e la Etnol., vii., 1877, Pl. X., No. 914.

[65]W. H. Goodyear,The Grammar of the Lotus, 1891.

[66]J. G. Wilkinson,The Manners and Customs of the Ancient Egyptians, ii. (3rd edition), p. 407.

[67]Brugsch,Religion und Mythologie der Alten Ægypter, i. p. 103; cf. Goodyear, p. 6.

[68]Brugsch,Religion, etc., i. p. 121;loc. cit., p. 6.

[69]Histoire de l’Art Egyptien d’après les Monuments, 1878.

[70]Maspero,Histoire ancienne des Peuples de l’Orient, p. 31, cf. Goodyear, p. 11.

[71]A. J. Evans, “Primitive Pictographs and a Prae-Phœnician Script, from Crete and the Peloponnese,”Journ. Hellenic Studies, xiv., 1894, p. 328.

[72]Cf. also G. Coffey, “The Origins of Prehistoric Ornament in Ireland,”Journ. Roy. Soc. Ant. Ireland, 1894, 1895.

[73]G. Perrot and C. Chipiez,A History of Art in Chaldæa and Assyria, 1884, i. p. 303.

[74]A. H. Layard,Discoveries in the Ruins of Nineveh and Babylon, i. p. 184, note.

[75]Nineveh and its Remains, ii. p. 212, note.

[76]Perrot and Chipiez,Assyria, i. p. 194.

[77]Newspaper Report of a Lecture delivered at the Royal Institution in May 1894.

[78]Grammar of the Lotus.

[79]W. M. Flinders Petrie,A History of Egypt, i., 1894, p. 251.

[80]Perrot and Chipiez,Egypt, i. p. 19.

[81]G. C. M. Birdwood,The Industrial Arts of India, 1880.

[82]I have a note to the following effect, the origin of which I cannot now trace:—Art under the Mahommedans in the first centuries appears to have been much encouraged, as many drawings and pictures are shown, thus upsetting the general belief that the Koran forbade the representation of human and animal figures. The picture of a rider belonging to the period of Arab civilisation is remarkably spirited, the folds of the rider’s garments, as well as the figure itself, being admirably portrayed.

[83]G. C. M. Birdwood,The Industrial Arts of India, ii., 1880, p. 167.

[84]G. Perrot and C. Chipiez,Art in Phœnicia and its Dependencies, 1885, ii. p. 427.

[85]Iliad, xxiii. (Lang, Leaf, & Myers.)

[86]The reader is also referred to Dr. E. Bonavia’s studies (The Flora of the Assyrian Monuments and its Outcomes, 1894) for another theoretical origin of these designs. He lays stress on the practice of fixing horns on trees, and other places, by the Assyrians. We not only see horns and modifications of horns symmetrically used on the stem of their sacred trees, but we meet with them as decorative terminations on the poles of the royal tents (PlateVIII., Figs. 2 and 7). “They were symbols of power against the evil eye and evil spirits” (p. 205). Sooner or later they were sure “to have been taken up by artists, and modified in various ways into decorations for walls of temples, palaces, etc. And so, in truth, we see these horns, at first probably used solely from superstitious reasons, passing afterwards into motives for various decorative purposes” (p. 141).“What is called the honeysuckle pattern, or anthemion, is nothing but the date-tree head supported by horns.... This so-called honeysuckle pattern is not, I think, the only outcome of the superstition of tying horns on trees, for I believe the fleur-de-lys, so much used in heraldry as a royal emblem, and on many coats-of-arms, seems but a modified imitation of the real horns tied on trees or posts” (p. 142). Dr. Bonavia discusses the history of the latter motive. It appears probable that it was introduced to French heraldry by LouisVII.on his return from the Crusades, and it is also likely that the device was independently associated with the lily and the iris in various countries after its real origin had been forgotten. (This applies equally to Goodyear’s or to Bonavia’s theory.)“The top of the Assyrian sacred date-tree, with its supporting horns, was probably taken up by the Greeks and modified into ornaments for friezes.” In support of this proposition Dr. Bonavia illustrates an anthemion from the Erechtheium (Fig.82).“There are numerous architectural and decorative designs which, I think, are traceable to the Assyrian date-tree and its horns. The Prince of Wales’ feathers are perhaps also a descendant of the same motive. There are in it three elements held together by means of a crown, which may be a modification of the ligature” (p. 154). The trident and the caduceus are also supposed by this author to be “luck-horns” attached to a wand.It must be remembered that the ligatures are usually very distinct in Assyrian anthemia (PlateVIII., Figs. 9 and 10), and they require an explanation as much as any other detail of the design. Dr. Bonavia regards them as the lashings of luck-horns which have become modified into volutes. Dr. Colley March, as we have seen, attributes them to a textile origin. On the other hand, we find ligatures in Egyptian lotus designs, as in Fig.77, where there is no suspicion of Assyrian influence; future research will doubtless show whether the central ligatures in Figs.85and89Aare Assyrian, Egyptian, or local in origin.

“What is called the honeysuckle pattern, or anthemion, is nothing but the date-tree head supported by horns.... This so-called honeysuckle pattern is not, I think, the only outcome of the superstition of tying horns on trees, for I believe the fleur-de-lys, so much used in heraldry as a royal emblem, and on many coats-of-arms, seems but a modified imitation of the real horns tied on trees or posts” (p. 142). Dr. Bonavia discusses the history of the latter motive. It appears probable that it was introduced to French heraldry by LouisVII.on his return from the Crusades, and it is also likely that the device was independently associated with the lily and the iris in various countries after its real origin had been forgotten. (This applies equally to Goodyear’s or to Bonavia’s theory.)

“The top of the Assyrian sacred date-tree, with its supporting horns, was probably taken up by the Greeks and modified into ornaments for friezes.” In support of this proposition Dr. Bonavia illustrates an anthemion from the Erechtheium (Fig.82).

“There are numerous architectural and decorative designs which, I think, are traceable to the Assyrian date-tree and its horns. The Prince of Wales’ feathers are perhaps also a descendant of the same motive. There are in it three elements held together by means of a crown, which may be a modification of the ligature” (p. 154). The trident and the caduceus are also supposed by this author to be “luck-horns” attached to a wand.

It must be remembered that the ligatures are usually very distinct in Assyrian anthemia (PlateVIII., Figs. 9 and 10), and they require an explanation as much as any other detail of the design. Dr. Bonavia regards them as the lashings of luck-horns which have become modified into volutes. Dr. Colley March, as we have seen, attributes them to a textile origin. On the other hand, we find ligatures in Egyptian lotus designs, as in Fig.77, where there is no suspicion of Assyrian influence; future research will doubtless show whether the central ligatures in Figs.85and89Aare Assyrian, Egyptian, or local in origin.

[87]G. Semper,Der Stil in den technischen und tektonischen Künsten(2nd ed.), 1878.

[88]J. T. Clarke, “A Proto-Ionic Capital from the Site of Neandreia,”American Jour. of Archæol., 1886, ii. p. 1.

[89]W. M. Flinders Petrie,Naukratis, i., 1884-85;Egyptian Exploration Fund, 1886, Plate VII., Figs. 1, 6.

[90]W. H. Goodyear, “Origin of the Acanthus motive and Egg-and-Dart Moulding,”The Architectural Record, iv., 1894, p. 88.

[91]W. H. Goodyear, “Are Conventional Patterns Spontaneously Generated,”The Architectural Record, ii., 1893, p. 291.

[92]Prof. Goodyear acknowledges (Grammar of Lotus) that P. E. Newberry had independently arrived at a similar conclusion in 1885, and that Owen Jones in 1856 and Léon de Vesley in 1870 had suggested a lotus original for the egg-and-dart pattern.

[93]F. E. Hulme,The Birth and Development of Ornament, 1893, p. 86.

[94]O. Schellong, “Notizen über das Zeichnen der Melanesier,”Internat. Arch. für Ethnogr., viii., 1895, p. 57. (Plates VIII., IX.) A. C. Haddon,The Decorative Art of British New Guinea.

[95]Isaac Taylor,The Origin of the Aryans, p. 158.

[96]M. Uhle, “Holz- und Bambus-Geräthe aus N.W. Neu Guinea,”K. Eth. Mus., Dresden, vi., 1886, p. 6.

[97]W. H. Holmes, “Ancient Art of the Province of Chiriqui, Colombia,”Sixth Annual Report of the Bureau of Ethnology, 1884-85. Washington, 1888.

[98]“Mittheilungen über die zweite Xingu-Expedition in Brasilien,”Zeitschrift für Ethnologie, xxii., 1890, p. 89.

[99]“Beiträge zur Völkerkunde Brasiliens,”Veröffentlichungen aus dem königlichen Museum für Völkerkunde, Berlin, ii., 1891, pp. 24, 25.

[100]Unter den Naturvölkern Zentral-Brasiliens: Reiseschilderung und Ergebnisse der Zweiten Schingú-Expedition, 1887-88. Berlin, 1894.

[101]Loc. cit., p. 269.

[102]Origins of Pictish Symbolism, 1893.

[103]Pp.49-56, and at greater length in my Memoir on the Decorative Art of British New Guinea.

[104]H. Stolpe,Evolution in the Ornamental Art of Savage Peoples. Figs. 3, 34.

[105]C. H. Read, “On the Origin and Sacred Character of certain Ornaments of the S.E. Pacific,”Journ. Anth. Inst., xxi., 1891, Plate XII.

[106]H. N. Moseley,Notes by a Naturalist on the “Challenger,” 1879, pp. 504-511.

[107]J. G. Wood,The Natural History of Man, ii., 1870, p. 161.

[108]S. Tsuboi, “On the Degeneration of Tongue-thrusting Figures in New Zealand Carvings,”Tōyō Gakugei Zasshi(Oriental Scientific Magazine), No. 112, Jan. 25th, 1891.

[109]Oriental Scientific Magazine, Nov. 25th, 1889.

[110]Squier and Davis,Ancient Monuments of the Mississippi Valley, 1848, p. 195.

[111]W. H. Holmes, “Pottery of the Ancient Pueblos,”Fourth Annual Report Bureau of Ethnology, p. 271.

Back to Index Next