1902.] Kroeber, The Arapaho. 1 45 



fieche or moccasin or pouch signify. Usually an Indian re- 

 fuses to interpret the ornamentation on an article belonging 

 to some one else, on the ground that he does not know ; but 

 he may give a tentative or possible interpretation. 



Where such a wide variability exists, and where every in- 

 dividual has a right to his opinion, as it were, it follows that 

 it is impossible to declare any one interpretation of a given 

 ornamental design as correct or as incorrect. Even the 

 maker or possessor of an article can give only his personal 

 intention or the signification which he individually prefers. 

 Since the decorative symbolism on his article is not intended 

 as a means of communication, he is satisfied to follow his own 

 fancy in private ; and if any one else chose to attach a differ- 

 ent meaning to his ornamental designs, he would probably 

 make no objection. He might criticise the other for his pre- 

 sumption, but he could not well prove him incorrect. 



Naturally there is great difference in the degree of interest 

 shown in the symbolism of decoration by different individuals. 

 One person thinks about the significance of his designs, 

 another chiefly of their appearance. The former will prob- 

 ably give a coherent interpretation of his designs if he is 

 questioned; the symbols of the latter will have their most 

 common conventional meaning, without much reference to 

 each other. Young people especially are likely to think and 

 care little about designs that they make or see. On the other 

 hand, a person interested in symbolism sometimes has two or 

 three interpretations for one symbol or for a design. Such 

 double sets of significations given by one person are generally 

 not hesitating or doubtful, but apt and happy, as well as 

 elaborate and coherent; the reason being that the maker of 

 the design has planned it with more than the usual amount 

 of attention to its meaning, or has subsequently studied it 

 with interest. One must not be misled on this point by 

 analogy with the pictorial, undecorative, unceremonial art of 

 our civilization. The Indian, in embroidering a moccasin or 

 painting a parfleche, never dreams of making a picture that 

 can be recognized by every one at sight. 



It is probable that, among the hundred and $fty and more 

 \August, igoz^ ■''' 



