BoAs] BASKETRY OF NEIGHBORS OF THE THOMPSON 337 
are less apt to turn them prematurely. On most specimens there 
is only a slight leftward twist of the walls, which is hardly noticeable. 
That some Lillooet women have as much trouble as their Thompson 
neighbors in securing proper circumference spacing is evident in 
Plates 55, a, and 56, d, in the droppers in the lower fields. 
On the whole the designs are remarkably well arranged, so that 
one feels that perhaps the division of the decorative field is a little 
more perfect than among the Thompson. No doubt the improved 
manipulation of the coils when turning the corners is an influential 
factor as well as the large, rectangular patterns which are so typically 
Lillooet. Here the women have secured an excellent type of decora- 
tion for the form of basket used. These designs practically fill the 
field and are very satisfying in their symmetry and form. They are 
probably also much easier to place than a number of vertical stripes 
or small figures, since they require merely a single division of the 
field into two equal 
parts. Miscalcula- 
tion in circumfer- 
ence spacing is 
chiefly evident in 
vertical stripes or 
in the ‘‘droppers’’ 
which occupy the 
lower field; and 
: ied when they do not 
SS Se Se come in approxl- 
Fic. 100.—Lillooet basket mately the right 
places in relation to the large rectangular designs the effect is even 
more noticeable than the incongruity of Thompson fillers. Plates 
31, f, and 57, b, d, h, show the almost perfect adjustment of the large 
figures to the upper field, and also the miscalculations in placing 
the droppers. Doctor Haeberlin has made sketches of one of these 
baskets in which the upper field is merely beadwork on three of the 
faces, while on the fourth the ‘‘droppers’’ run to the rim of the basket. 
(See fig. 101 and note how the woman has begun her beading in the 
upper corner of the first side as pictured in sketch ¢, in order to fill 
the gap left by crowding the droppers too far to one side.) 
It will be seen that the Liliooet women have not succeeded even 
as well as most of the Thompson in solving the difficulty of the 
leftward leaning vertical. They are more successful in horizontal 
diagonals and flying bird designs or in meanders. (Pls. 55, f; 56, c; 
and 57, c.) 
An interesting example of a Lillooet woman’s struggles with the 
placing of vertical stripes is shown in Plate 43, c,d. As was the case 
in one or two Thompson specimens, some of the stripes were widened 
to fill the gap occasioned by wrong spacing. 
BsSecs 
=o B-b-F 
Fae 
Poe 
ESS 
UCL ta rhe 
a ea a 1 ive evern iu 
a 
Sth 
Hy 
th 
i Tt 
te} 
*s3J5, 
