368 Philip Ainsworth Means, 



breast ornament of the figure on the larger stone. Once more 

 the culmination of the process is at Chavin. Indeed, in the lesser 

 Chavin stone one may see an excellent example of what Mac- 

 Curdy describes as "transposition."^^ It is to be observed in 

 the breaking up of the hitherto harmonious and comprehensible 

 design into a chaotic melee of component parts and ill-assorted 

 decorative motifs. One would be but reasonable in thinking the 

 lesser Chavin stone to represent the art-stream, which we have 

 watched so long, at its vanishing point. 



Such, then, in very broad outline, is the general trend of the 

 evidence afforded by a study of the application of the four great 

 principles to Proto-Chimu, Proto-Nasca and Tiahuanaco II art.^^ 

 We must now endeavor to interpret the evidence in terms of 

 probable cultural migration'. There is not space here to go into 

 a detailed comparative analysis of the minor decorative motifs 

 in Middle American and South American cultures, but the writer 

 is convinced by careful study that the evidence of such an 

 analysis would not differ from that afforded by the broader lines 

 of modification.^® 

 \ To sum up the whole matter briefly, we find that a series of 

 I closely related arts is associated in turn with Chimu, Nasca, 

 iTiahuanaco (mountains and coast) and Chavin. We find the 

 [art a little older step by step as we go from one of these regions 



*®MacCurdy, 191 1, p. 127. 



"One piece of pottery, reported on by Uhle (1913b, p. 363), almost con- 

 stitutes in and of itself a proof of the blending or fusion of Proto-Nasca 

 art into Tiahuanaco II art. The vessel in question is a shallow bowl 

 from Tiahuanaco. On the broad rim is painted, in easily recognizable 

 Proto-Nasca style, a serpent, the head of which is strikingly like the 

 puma heads so often found in Tiahuanaco II art. The fact that the vessel 

 comes from Tiahuanaco proves that Proto-Nasca art was carried thither, 

 and the association of it with Tiahuanaco II art on the same vessel proves 

 their close relationship. 



** The reader's attention is here called to the art of Chiriqui. In many 

 ways strikingly similar both in form and in content to the three early 

 Peruvian arts, the art of Chiriqui is also similar to them in the matter of 

 its development toward conventionalism from realism. It may well be 

 that some day a close connection will be proved between the earliest 

 (realistic) forms of Chiriqui art and the earliest (realistic) forms of 

 Peruvian art. The reader is urged to consult the following works: 

 MacCurdy, 1906, 191 1, pp. 127 fif., 1913 ; Holmes, 1885, 1887; Joyce, 1916,, 

 pp. 144 ff. 



