OF THE BUREAU OF ETHNOLOGY. LIU 



tional use of a wide range of decorative motives. Its forms 

 present many striking analogies to the wheel made ware of the 

 Mediterranean, regarded as classic. 



The mythologic stage of the builders of these graves is 

 shown by the fact that in their ceramic art there is no attempt 

 to render the human face or figure with accuracy. The per- 

 sonages of their religious philosophy were zoomorphic and 

 some of their forms may be discerned by a skillful analyst in 

 or on all the ornaments and vessels. On each of the latter all 

 decorative devices and delineations have some reference to 

 the mythic creature associated with the vessel and its functions. 



Mr. Holmes has made an important discovery in the evolu- 

 tion of decoration in Chiriqui from which are deduced instructive 

 generalizations of wide application. All the decorations orig- 

 inate (doubtless under the influence of the stage reached in 

 mythologic philosophy) in life forms of animals, none being 

 vegetal. Coming from mythologic concepts thev are signifi- 

 cant and ideographic, and coming from nature they are prima- 

 rily imitative and non-geometric. Nevertheless the agencies 

 of modification inherent in the practice of art through its me- 

 chanical conditions are such that tlie animal forms early em- 

 ployed have changed into conventional decorative devices, 

 among which are the meander, scroll, fret, chevron, and guil- 

 loche. 



That this was the course of evolution of the classic forms of 

 ornan^ents is not asserted ; indeed, it is not necessary to form 

 such a hypothesis, as by the interacting principles, well classi- 

 fied by Mr. Holmes, the course by which the same result was 

 accomplished may have been wholly diverse. It is, however, 

 shown that this was in all probability the particular and inde- 

 pendent course in one region of America, being in that respect 

 in distinct contrast to other art regions, such as that of the 

 Pueblos, where the rise of geometric figures through techno- 

 logic channels is equally obvious. It follows that in seeking 

 to divide peoples by the criteria of their decorative arts the 

 examination must embrace what is far more fundamental than 

 a mere C(»mparison of their finished products: these may be 



