376 COILED BASKETRY IN BRITISH COLUMBIA [ETH. ANN. 41 
tially Klickitat or Californian, nor yet of the Plains, but seem to 
have been carried along with the technique, as they resemble the 
patterns on coast bags of similar weave. There are three shapes of 
Klickitat bags, those square and flat (pls. 64, a, b, e, f, g, h; 65, a-d), 
those with rounding creased bottoms (pls. 63, b, d-—h; 64, d, e; 65, e, f; 
66, c, d), and round bags with flat round bottoms, which approach 
a basket form. (PI. 66, /, m, n.) 
On their imbricated specimens the Klickitat have adhered almost 
entirely to Californian diagonal effects and designs with more artistic 
good sense than many other tribes of weavers manifest. The pre- 
dominating design of the Klickitat is that called “leg” or “foot” 
among the Thompson. In California it is sometimes known as the 
“quail plume,” or often, when ranged along the diagonal sides of 
a zigzag or triangle, the whole pattern may be called “pine cone.” 
This the Klickitat have developed with every conceivable variation 
as well as another pattern which consists of a zigzag band, one edge 
of which is straight, the other serrated. Thus it is that Klickitat 
art possesses a homogeneity almost unsurpassed by the other basket- 
making tribes. Even though two styles of art come together in 
their twined bags, they are never combined on the same piece of 
work after the fashion of the Thompson. Like many other tribes, 
the Klickitat are introducing realistic figures into their more modern 
specimens in a way which is quite their own. A very interesting 
study could be made of the realistic basketry designs of the different 
tribes, for each has its characteristic ideas on these points. Plates 
63-75 give some other Klickitat baskets and also work of the Salishan 
Skokomish and Chimakuan Quileute which offer a good opportunity 
for comparing the twined and imbricated specimens, decorated with 
similar designs. 
Having thus attempted to outline roughly the relations which the 
tribes surrounding the Thompson had with each other in regard to 
their art development, it is now perhaps a little less difficult to dis- 
cuss the Thompson themselves. We have seen that in order to gain 
a proper perspective of their work and to obtain an idea, however 
vague, of the history of its decoration, it is not sufficient to compare 
the Thompson technique and designs with those of other tribes who 
also imbricate, but it is necessary rather to go much farther and to 
compare them with the decorative art of peoples far afield, who have 
woven baskets in entirely different types of technique or who possibly 
did not manufacture baskets at all, but painted or burned their designs 
on leather, or embroidered them by means of quills or beads on skin 
garments. 
In a comparison of this sort the student is struck by the great 
wealth of the Thompson art, not only in regard to methods of ar- 
rangement, but also as to various forms of elements, together with 
