ITRANSAOTIONS

OF‘ THE

MERICAN PHILOSOPHICAL SOCIETY,

HELD AT PIIILAD ELPIIIA,

FOR PROMOTING USEFUL KNOWLEDGE.

_ a.,_, w W ; .
"(Rf

VOL. XV—NLWVSEfiffiSW ”7

PART II.

ARTICLE V.~—Sfupplement to tile Extinnt Batrw-Yala and Reptllm of North America.
L I Edward D7 Cope, AJW. - .. - /- - _ - _ . -

ARTICLE _VI.‘—-An Analysis of the Lg'fe-Form 7'.» Art. 11/ g’farm'son Allen, M.D.

@nilnflvlbuiu: 1
PUBLISPIED BY THE SOCIETY,

AND FOR SALE BY

HENRY 0. LEA, PHILADELPHIA;
N. TRUBNER & 00., 57 & 59 LUDGATE HILL, LONDON>\

PRINTED BY M’CALLA & STAVELY.

1875.

 

m
H
w
A
M
R
F.
L
n_.
D
M
m
L
H.
w

; cm or
‘ WILLIAM DILLER MATTHEW

 

 

 

 

 

ARTKHJYV. h"

SUPPLEDIENT
TOTHE

EXTINCT BATRACHIA AND REPTILIA OF NORTH AMERICA.

I. CATALOGUE OF THE AIR BREATHING VERTEBRATA FROM THE COAL MEASURES
‘ OF LINTON, OHIO,

BY EDWARD D. COPE, A.M.

Read before the American Philosophical Society, Feb. 6, 1874.

In the last descriptive catalogue of the species of the character here considered,
that contained in the author’s “Synopsis of the Extinct Batrachia, etc., of North
America,” nine only were described ; the number is now increased to twenty-six.
This addition, as well as the creation of the original collection, is due to the attention
of Professor J. S. Newberry, new Director of the Geological Survey of Ohio, for
whom an extended and illustrated report is now in course of preparation.

The result of the newer investigation into their structure confirms the opinion to
which the author was originally led, that all the air-breathing vertebrata of the coal
measures were Batrachians, and that true Reptiles did not then exist. Any gene-
ralization to this effect extending to the whole earth is premature, and scarcely likely
to be verified ; nevertheless, it is still applicable to the localities with which we are
now acquainted. The Batraehians from Linton present the most varied forms; some
are broad and stout bodied, others lizard—like ; some exhibit heavily mailed surfaces,
and others are slender and attenuated as snakes. They are here referred to twelve
genera. These may be arranged as follows, in accordance with their general appear-
ance and structure. A

Group I. Snake-like forms without limbs: Phlegethontz'a, Dolichosoma, Molgophis.

Group II. Elongate forms with limbs and lanciform heads 3 0éstocephalus, Pty-
om'us, Lepterpeton.

Group III. Lizard-like forms with limbs and broad frog-like heads : Pelion,
Sauropleum, Tudz'trmus, ?£eptophractus.

A. P. S.—VOL. xv. 3N.

78?3fi6

262 SUPPLEMENT TO THE EXTINCT BATHACHIA

Group IV. Ambulatory limbs and unossified vertebral column: Colosteus, Am-
phibamus. '
Group V. Vertebral column osscous, the branchial hyoid bones well developed:

0903! it"??? :
. The lobality from which these fossils were procured is near Linton, Columbiana

:73CQiiirtyé near‘:iYellow Creek, and is thus near the Pennsylvania State line, and the

Ohio River. They occur in a small basin near the middle of the series, in the lower
part of the “diamond bed,” which is eight feet in thickness, on the slate which is in
contract with the lower three to six inches of the seam, which is cannel coal.

It is to be observed that the specimens are, in some cases, quite obscure, and
although little or nothing of a doubtful nature has been introduced into the following
descriptions, yet the elements are sometimes c0vered by a thin layer of carbonaceous
matter, which prevents their entire definition.

PHLEGETHONTIA, Cope.
Proceed. Amer. Philos. Soc., 1871, 177.

This is one of the most interesting genera of the present series. It rests chiefly
on'a single specimen of one species, which is not perfect, but which displays the fol-
lowing character.

Head elongate triangular; body and tail extremely elongate, the dorsal vertebra}
without ribs, and the caudals without dilated spines. No ventral armature nor limbs.

As a great portion of the length is preserved and no ventral rods nor scales are
visible, and as this character is confirmed by a second species, it probably belongs
truly to the genus. ‘ The pectoral shield is also wanting in the specimen, but, as there
is a considerable hiatus behind the skull of the specimen, it may be that these were
lost with other parts. Chevron bones are not observable on the caudal vertebrae.
This form is a true batrachian snake.

PHLEGETHONTIA LINEARIS, Cope. Sp. Nov.

In the only specimen, the dorsal vertebrze are much involved anteriorly, so that the length is not readily ascer—
tained. Theentire outline of the skull is preserved ; it is elongate triangular in form, with the angles of the man-
dibles produced backward and the outlines of the rami a little convex. Nothing definite remains as to sculpture or
dentition. The vertebrae have longitudinal diapophysial keels, and have a zigzag interlocking of neural arches,
probably by an external zygosphen above the zygapophyses. The latter are distinctly turned outwards. The ver-
tebrae are very numerous, and the tail very attenuated. The total length of the coils unwound is about In .295 or 11
in. 8 lines; but there are interruptions not measured, and some confusion not unraveled. The number of dorsal
vertebrae in .005 m., two; of distal caudals, three and a-half. Length of cranium, .022 ; with behind .009. Its size
is about that of the skull of Ptyom‘us marshz‘z’, Cope. The slenderness of the body may be estimated from the~
diameter of the dorsal vertebrae, m. .0023; and of the caudals .0014. The whole number of vertebrae preserved
is fifty-six.

AND I’tEPTILIA on NORTH AMERICA. 26:

Another specimen embracing fifteen vertebrae without processes or ribs or other parts, resembles this speCIes.

There is nothing additional to be learned from it.

PHLEGETHON TIA SERPENS, Cope. Sp. .Nov,

This batrachian is much larger than the last, approaching nearly in its dimensions the Jilolgophz's mammrus.
It is represented by a series of twenty-two vertebrae, which like those of P. linear-is, are devoid of ribs, abdominal
armatures, dilated neural spines, etc. The series when complete must have been very long, as there is little differ-
ence in size between the first and last of the twenty-two. They are emarginate fore and aft, and much contracted
medially, owing to the transverse expanse of the diapophyses. There may be indeed a diapophysial element beneath
these, but if so, the two are undistinguishable. They are connected by longitudinal impressions, indicating the
existence of the tendinous bands in the longitudinal muscles seen in Amphiuma, or the osscous spicules seen in the
same situation in birds. The neural spines, as indicated by their narrow bases, occupy the length of the neural arch,
and remind one of Amplzz'uma. Width of one of the vertebrae, three lines.

This species appears to be rare at Linton.

MOLGOPHIS, Cope
Proceed. of the Acad. of Nat. Sci., 1868, 220. Transac. Amer. Philos. 800., XIV., 20.

The characters of this genus are: Body long serpentine, without dermal arma-
ture, so far as known. Vertebrae large and broad with very prominent zygopophyses
and moderate neural spines; ribs large, convex.

N o limbs nor cranium can be ascribed with certainty to the type of this genus.

The ribs are long, and though the head is not bifurcate, there appears to be both
tubercle and head on the dilated extremity. Where crushed, they display a large
median vacuity.

This genus differs from Ophideijmton, Huxl., in the character of its dorsal verte-
brae, which in their projecting zygapophyscs resemble those of Amphiuma. The lack
of ventral armature distinguishes it from Oéstocephalus, while its well developed ribs .

separate it from Phlcgetlzontz'a.

MOLGOPHIS MACRURUS, Cope. ~
Transac. Amer. Philos. Soc, 1869, XIV., p. 21 (part).

MOLGOPHIS WHEATLEYI, Cope, Sp. Nov.

Established on a specimen which exhibits about twenty-five vertebrae, with ribs, and the posterior portion of
the cranium. No traces of abdominal scales or rods, thoracic shields or limbs are visible. By such negative char-
acters it is referable to the genus Molgophz's, although the definition of the latter is as yet incomplete. The present
batrachian may indeed be ultimately found to be an Ophz‘derpeton, to which it also bears resemblance.

The specimen is that of an animal of very much smaller size than the M. macrm‘us. The vertebrae are of
moderate length, with a low neural spine, and centrum angular at the sides and truncate at the articular extremities
when in place. The ribs are rather short, slightly curved, and apparently hollow. Although the vertebral centra are
ossified, the elements of the cranium have a larval appearance. These consist of two parallel flat bony plates,
which resemble the frontoparietal bones of a frog ; they are slightly separated from each other, but do not enclose a
fontanelle. A wedge—shaped bone extends from the outside of the front of these, acuminate behind and widening
anteriorly, in the position of a post frontal bone. In front of the posterior border of each (?) parietal, on its outer
side, a bonyenlargement arises, which contracts outwardly and forward into a narrow element which curves for-

I

264 SUPPLEMENT TO THE EXTINCT BATRACHIA

wards beneath the (‘1’) post-frontal. These look like an anteriorly directed quadrate with articular bone, such as are
seen in larvae and some adults of existing batrachians. These determinations will require confirmation from addi-

tional material. In the meanwhile it is evident that the present specimen cannot be referred to any of the species
herein described.

Illeasurements. M.
Total length of specimen, ' 0'0650
“ “ a rib, .0050
“ “ parietal and post-frontal bones, .0085
Width of head at (‘9) quadrate, ‘ .0080
Length of a vertebra, - .0020
Depth “ “ .0025

This animal is dedicated to Chas. M. Wheatley, A. M., of Phoenixville, Pennsylvania, one of the original in-
vestigators of the deposit in which’it occurs.

PTYONIUS, cope.

Genus novum. Sauroplcum part. Cope, Proceed. Acad. Nat. Sci., Philadelphia, 1868, 217. Oéstorephalus
part. Cope, Transac. Amer. Philos. Soe., XIV, p. 20.

Form elongate, with long tail and lanceolate cranium. Limbs weak, a posterior
pair only discovered. Three pectoral shields present; abdomen protected by packed
osseous rods which are arranged en chevron, the angle directed forwards. Neural and
haemal spines of caudal vertebrae expanded and fan-like. Ribs well developed.

This genus is the most abundantly represented by species and individuals, among
those found at Linton. These are almost snake-like in their proportions, and vary in
length from three to ten inches. The muzzles of the known species are acuminate,
and the upper surfaces of the cranium in the three species, where it is preserved, are
sculptured by rather distant crests and tubercles. 'l he squamosal is evidently more
expanded than in recent Batrachia either of the tailless or tailed orders. In P. pecti-
natus and P. vinclzellianus it is a broad plate concealing the quadrate, and apparently
readily separated‘from it, as it is loose in some of the specimens. This is an inter—
esting point, as the homology of the squamosal with the preoperculum of the fishes
has been proposed by Parker and the writer,* and the View is confirmed by the re-
semblance of the former to an opereulum in these the most fish-like of the Batrachia.
The teeth are numerous, small, and some of them apparently simple; others appear
to be grooved. In a cranium (No. 140) perhaps of P. pectinatus, they extend to the
tip of the slender jaws, are rather stout, acute, and evidently marked with a few
strong grooves on the shank. The form of the head is a curious miniature of
Ichthyosam'us.

Remains of limbs have only been observed in the position of the posterior pair,
and that in several individuals.

*See Proceed. Amer. Asso. Adv. Sci., Vol. XI V., p. 222.

AND REPTILIA on NORTH AMERICA. 265

The present genus resembles 'Lepterfmton, Hqu., of the Irish coal-measures, in
the form of the cranium and in proportions of body, but that exhibits divided abdomi-
nal rods, or “oat-shaped scales” and the caudal vertebrae have not the fan-like
processes. In the last point they agree with Urocordyluv, Huxl, but this genus is
not represented as possessing ribs, and the abdominal rods are also divided, forming the
“oat-shaped scales.” I formerly referred the species of Ptyom’us to Oéstoccphalus,
but in that genus no pectoral shields have been observed. The vertebrae in .0. remea:
are of rather more elongate form than in the species of Ptyonius. Should, however,
the pectoral plates be found in 0. remem, this genus must be united with that one.

Four species have been detected by the geological survey of Ohio.

I. Vertebrae shorter; fan—like processes of caudal vertebrae broad, equilateral.

a Abdominals rods coarser, not more than ten in .005 m.

P Median pectoral plate broad, radiate ridged. P. MARSHII.

aa Abdominals rods hair-like, fifteen or more in .005 m.

P Middle pectoral shield with radii from the centre, the principal forming a
cross; form wider. ,. P. viNoHELLIANUs.

1’ Middle pectoral with pits at the centre and few or no radii; form narrow.
P. I’ECTINATUS.

1’ Middle pectoral shield narrow, closely reticulate medially, and radiate
towards the circumference, size half that of the last. P. SERRULA.

PI‘YONIUS MARSHII, Cope.

Colosteus marshz’z‘, Cope, Transac. Amer. Philos. Soc, XIV., 1869, p. 24; Oéstocephalus mcrshz'z', Cope, Proceed.
Amer. Philcs. Soc. 1871, p. 177.

PTYONIUS VIN CHELLIANUS, Cope.

Oéstocephalus cinchellz'anus, Proceed. Amer. Philos. Soc. 1871, 177.

Represented by the opposite halves of a single specimen, which includes only the cranium and anterior half of
the body. The fan-shaped neural spines commence but a short distance behind the line of the pectoral shields ; they
are low, and with a few coarse ridges; the margin entire. The abdominal rods are delicate and hair-like. The
pectoral shield is an oval, with a few radiating crests which originate at the centre ; in the areas between these there
are a few scattered tubercles. The lateral shields are ridged near the margin.

The cranium is lanceolate in form, and the bones of the superior walls are marked with a few raised points and
ridges. There is a thin bone which I have already alluded to as the squamosal or preoperculum, shaped like a right-
angled triangle separated from the outer posterior angle of the head, which exhibits a few similar marks.

M.
Length of cranium, 0.020
Width “ “ i .008
Length median pectoral plate, .0042

This small Species is about the size of P. pectinatus, and should be especially compared with it. In specimens
A. P. s.—voL. XV. 30.

266 SUPPLEMENT TO THE EXTINCT BATRACHIA

of that species in which the cranium has the same size, the median pectoral plate is narrower and more prolonged
longitudinally, and exhibits tubercles and a few ridges near the circumference, but no cross-like figure.
Dedicated to Prof. Alexander Winchell of the New York University, at Syracuse, author of the “Sketches

of Creation,” etc.
PTYONIUS PECTINATUS, Cope.

Sauropleura pectinam, Cope, Proceed. Acad. Nat. Sci., Phila., 1868, 218; O'éstocephalus pectinatus, Transac.
Amer. Philos. Soc., 1869, XIV, p. 20.

PI‘YONIUS SERRULA, Cope.

Proceed. Amer. Philos. Soc., 1871, p. 177. (Oéstocephalus)

Represented especially by a single almost complete specimen, and perhaps by another originally referred to
the P. pectinatus. It is only half as large as that species, but displays a more complex sculpture of the pectoral
shields, indicating that it is not immature. The tail is relatively longer.

The remains of the head indicate a trigonal outline ; but the muzzle is lost. The pectoral shields are narrow
and elongate, both median and lateral a little wider behind. The median has a considerable smooth anterior pro-
longation. Its surface is near the middle sharpl’y reticulate-ridged, then closely radiate-ridged to the margin. The
lateral shield is reticulate-ridged behind and sends out radii, those on the anterior part sub-parallel. The triangular
haemal spines begin far forward; with the neurals, they are rather elongate-deltoid in form without the distinct
peduncle seen in P. pectinccms, but instead, a short concave or cresent shaped base from the concavity of which the
sculpture rises. This consists of ridges which extend beyond the intermediate spaces, like teeth. Abdominal rods
hair-like. Ribs distinct. Remains of limbs not discernible.

In the second specimen alluded to, weaklimbs are seen on each side of the posterior part of the abdominal
cavity. On the right a moderately stout femur is given off, which is followed by a broken tibia and fibula, arid then
by five closely appressed metatarsals. The last are 2—5 as long as the space between them and the femur, beyond
them a few slender phalanges are moderately distinctly defined. The tibia is more distinct on the left, but there are
no tarsus nor phalanges; some of the metatarsals remain. Length of limb to end of metatarsals equal to five juxtaposed
vertebrae measured along the edge of the neural spines. The limb, especially the foot, is slender. -In this specimen
there are ten neural spines included in a length of half an inch.

In the typical specimen twelve neural spines are included in a half inch. The dorsal vertebrae are somewhat
dislocated in the anterior region, nevertheless it appears that the length from the front of the pectoral shield is
contained twice in the length of the tail ; in the smallest example of S. pectinata, it enters the same .75 of a time,
though perhaps a very little should be added for the missing extremity.

M.
Length of type from anterior edge of pectoral shield, 0.085
Length of median pectoral plate, 0.006
Width of neural and haemal spines at first caudal vertebra, .0045
“ “ , “ “ at middle of tail, .0040

o'Esrocn PHALUS, Cope.

Proceed. Acad. Nat. Sci., Phila., 1868, p. 218. Transac. Amer. Philos. Soc., XIV., p. 16. Sauropleura, pt.
Proceed. Acad. Nat. Sch, Philada., 1868, p. 217. Proceed. Amer. Philos. Soc. 1871, p. 41.

Another genus resembling in its fan—like haemal and neural spines of the tail,
the European form Urocordylus, and differing from it as Ptyom'us does, 2'. e. in the
rod—like abdominal scales, and the well developed ribs. Its form is long and snake-
like, and it thus resembles Uphidezywton, Huxl. But in the latter there are no limbs,

AND REPTILIA or NORTH AMERICA. 267

and the cranium is very differently constructed; in Oéstccephalus it is much as in
Ptyom’us and Lepterpeton. The characters then are as follows :

Form slender and snake-like; caudal vertebrae with dilated and sculptured neural
and haemal spines. Cranium lanceolate. Teeth numerous, of nearly equal~size. N0
pectoral shields; abdomen protected by very numerous bristle-like rods, which con—
verge forwards; scales none. A pair of weak posterior limbs; branchihyal bones
present.

In the only well-preserved species, the cephalic bones exhibit no sculpture from
the parietal region forward. The angles of the mandibles are prolonged backwards
as in Apateon and the Amara, and the well developed ribs commence but a short dis—
tance behind the head. The vertebrae are slender and furnished with well developed ‘
diapophyses. The neural spines of the dorsal vertebrae in 0. remain are flattened and
antero—posteriorly expanded and weakly grooved to their superior margin.

The character which separates this genera from Ptyom’us is the absence of the
three usual pectoral shields. In two specimens the pectoral region is presented, and
no trace of the shield appears; on the contrary the ventral armature of bristles or
rods extends to the head.

A pair of Symmetrical bones, whose impressions are seen posterior to the occi-
pital bone, I once thought might belong to rudimental limbs. They however appear
to be the elements of the second or third branchial haemal arch ; the first or haemal is
followed by a second element which is probably the inferior pleural segment of the
arch. A third piece follows, which is the superior pleural element of the same. The
other branchial arches are lost, but some impressions are visible.

Before I was fully acquainted with the structure in this genus, I referred some
of the species to Sauropleura, which is quite distinct. The name is from 02'0‘2‘0:, a
javelin or dart, in allusion to the form of the head. My friend, Dr. Benjamin H.
Coates, informs me that this Greek word retains the dieresis in composition, and
should not be spelled with a dipthong.

I am acquainted with one species from more or less completely preserved skele—
tons, with portions or wholes of crania, and another species from cranial remains alone.

They may be distinguished as follows :

I. Vertebrae elongate; fan-like caudal processes narrower. Size large; mandi-
bular teeth of unequal lengths, with the apiees turned backwards. O. REMEX.

II. Species only known from cranial bones with teeth; teeth equal, erect, with
acute conic apiees, eleven in .005 m. 0. RECTIDENS.

268 I SUPPLEMENT TO THE EXTINCT BATHACHIA

l
OESTOCEPHALUS REMEX, Cope.
Transac. Amer. Philos. Soc., XIV, 1869, p. 17.

OESTOCEPHALUS RECTIDENS, Cope, Sp. Nov.

Indicated by a left dentary bone with its teeth and external surface preserved. The latter is nearly smooth
and without sculpture. The outer face is convex, and the general form is slender, but not curved upwards at the
extremity. Teeth straight and conic, apex acute; no visible grooves of the surface; eleven in m. .005, closely
placed, and of equal lengths. The extremity of the dentary does not exhibit teeth, but they may be concealed.

M.
Length of dentary, 0.022
“ tooth line, .0152
Depth dentary at last tooth, .0027

This represents a smaller animal than does the skull of 0. currm'dens, and differs much from the latter in the
more closely placed and perfectly straight teeth.

I describe here a specimen which is closely related as to size to the 0. rectidens, and is probably a member
of this genus; but the specific reference will remain uncertain till other portions of the skeleton are discovered.
Those preserved consist of twenty-five caudal vertebrae, probably from the anterior part of the column. There are
therefore no ribs nor ventral armature. The centra are rather elongate and expanded at the extremities. The neural
arches have a close union. There are no diapophyses, but the fan shaped and striate neural and hzemal spines are
present. They are, however, shorter than in 0. remcx, and not so expanded as in the species of Ptyonius. The
bases are quite narrow. Their reduced size may be derived from the following measurements. Length of three
centra, m. .0086; extent of neural and haemal spines, .0087. The same dimensions in 0. remea: are .012; extent of
spines, .02. While this species is smaller than the latter, it is larger than any known Ptgom'us, its elongate vertebrae
are most like those of Oéstocephalus.

BRACHYDECTES, Cope
Proceed. Acad. Nat. Sci, Philadelphia, 1868, 214. Transac. Amer. Philos. Soc., 1868, XIV., p. 14.

This genus is indicated by two rami of a mandible and a portion of a premaxil-
lary only. These, when compared with those of Oé'stocephalus and Dmdrmpeton,
from the same locality, and with others described by authors, are so much stouter, i. 6.,
shorter and more elevated, that they evidently belong to a peculiar genus. The
genus further difi'ers from Oéstocephalus in having the teeth of equal size to the
posterior parts of the series, that is, to the base of the elevated coronoid process.
The teeth are elongate'cylindric cones, with their acute tips turned a little poste-
riorlyf The fractured ones display a large pulp cavity. The three premaxillaries
preserved are similar, but without curvature of the tips. They do not exhibit striae
or any other sculpture.

So far as the remains known go, the genus is nearer H'ylerpeton than any other.
According to Dawson that genus is provided with a large canine-like tooth, at the
anterior extremity of the maxillar , on the inner row, which is inserted into a dis—.
tinct socket. No such tooth appears among those of this genus. The latter does
not give any indication of the very elevated coronoid process of Brachydectes, though

AND REPTILIA OF NORTH AMERICA. 269

the external portion of the dcntary bone in that region being lost,little can be said
about it. Professor Owen’s plate indicates a ramus whose depth at the last tooth
enters 8% times the total length. In our species this depth enters about 5 times.

BRACHYDECTES NEWBERRYI, Cope.
Proceed. Acad. Nat. Sci., Philadelphia, 1868, p. 214. Transac. Amer. Philos. Soc., XIV., 1869, p. 14.

PELION, Ingan.

Proceed. Acad. Nat. Sci, Philadelphia, 1868, p. 211. Transac. Amer. Philos. 800., 1869, p. 9. Ram'seps,
VVyman, Amer. Jour. Sci. Arts, 1858, p. 158, not of Cuvier (Pediculati).

Three genera are here indicated as pertaining to a lacertiform type of Stegoce—
phali. In one of these there are abdominal chevrons and no thoracic shields
( Sauropleum) ; in another (Tudz'tanus) no abdominal chevrons, and thoracic shields
present. These genera are doubtless well defined, but one or the other of them may
possibly, not probably, be identical with Pelion. '1 he only specimen of the only
species of the latter exhibits an inferior View of a portion of the skeleton, and the
obverse, on which the thoracic and abdominal armor could have been preserved, has
not come under my observation. The specimen however, does not exhibit any ribs,
although the vertebrae are well preserved ; in the two genera above mentioned, well
developed ribs are preserved.~

As observed by Prof. VVyman, the genus presents some points of similarity to
the Anura. The prolongation of the angles of the mandible is of this character, as
well as the general form of the head. The bones of the forearm may be united as in
frogs, and the length and curvature of the femur, are seen among these animals rather
than the Salamanders. The form of the femur is different from that of Amphibamus
grandz'ceps, which also differs in the unossified condition of the vertebrae and presence

of dermal scales.
PELION LY ELLII, Wymam.

Loci citati.
SAUROPLEUR A, Cope.

Proceed. Acad. Nat. Sci., Phila., 1868, p. 215. Transac. Amer. Philos. Soc, 1869, 15.

Vertebrae and ribs well developed, no fan—shaped processes of the former. Limbs
four, well developed and elongate. Ventral armature of slender rods arranged en
chevron, the angle anterior. ‘Probably no thoracic armature.

This is the most lacertilian of the Carboniferous genera, and might almost be
suspected to be a reptile were it not for the ventral armature, which is precisely that
of Ozistocephalus and other genera. It appears to lack the thoracic. shieldsii” of those

*When I state, Transac. Amer. Philos. Soc, 1869, 16, that Sauropleura lacks the ventral armature of O'e'stoce-
phalus, thoracic armature, is intended.

A. P. S—-VOL. XV. 531?.

270 SUPPLEMENT TO THE EXTINCT BATRACHIA

genera, for no trace of them can be seen in two specimens and their reverses of S.
digitata and 8. 1071961963, though the thoracic region is well preserved in both.

Unfortunately the structure of the cranium in this genus is quite unknown, the
part preserved in S. Zongz'pes being too much injured to furnish characters. The only
genus with which it can be compared in the structure of the skeleton remaining, is
Tudz'tamis, and it is possible that some of the species of the latter in which the
cranium only is known, should be placed in Sauroplem'a. The type however, T.
brevirostm's, has thoracic shields and very weak limbs, so that the genera are well
distinguished. As to species, the only one of Tudz'tamus which could, by reason of
size, belong to either of those of Saaropleum, is T. mordax ,' the T. raclz'atus and T.
obtusus being larger than either 8’. digitata or S. longz'pes.

The vertebrae are not elongate and the ribs are quite well developed. In S.
longipes the neural spines of the dorsal vertebrae are vertical laminae, subquadrate in
outline. The tail is elongate, being proportioned in S. longzjoes much as in lizards of
typical forms. Of scapular arch I can find nothing, but in S. longipes the iliac bones
are preserved. They are short flat rods slightly narrowing towards the base, which
is a transverse expansion, with the distal margin presenting two faces separated by an

angle. The limbs are well'developed, the ulna and radius separate. In S digitaita
there is no osseous carpus.

The sizes of the species known are about that of our medium and larger lizards.
The S. dig/item is the larger, and of shorter body and more robust limbs than the S.
longz'pcs. While the former has thirteen pairs of ribs, the latter has nineteen, perhaps
twenty-one.

The dermal abdominal rods are arranged en chevron with the angle anterior, and
are separated by interspaces.

SAUROPLEURA LONGIPES, Cope, Sp. .Nov.

Body long, slender, with long neck and long tail, ribs 19 or 21 pairs, moderately curved, the anterior stouter,
and with widened extremities, the posterior slender, and drawn out to a fine point. Dorsal vertebrae 1.5 times long
as wide, with well developed neural spines. These are rather narrower than high, the height about equalling the
length of the eentrum. They are rugose with small tubercles which are sometimes confluent into ridges.

The humerus is longer than the ulna and radius, which are of equal lengths, that is about as long as four
dorsal vertebrae. The ulna and radius are not widely separated, and expand at the carpal region. The humerus is
rather more slender, and is distally expanded. The digits are not all preserved. One metacarpal is seen at an
interval beyond the forearm, and series of phalanges extend beyond the metacarpal. The latter is about half as
long as the forearm, and a little larger than the first phalange, which is, like the former, very slender. Parts of two
or three phalanges of perhaps other digits appear along side, as though turned backwards. The femur is about as
long as the humerus, equalling six and three quarter posterior dorsal vertebrae. Proximally it is enlarged gradually
and terminates regularly so far as can be seen, as it is partially concealed beneath the distal extremity of the ilium.

AND REPTILIA or NORTH AMERICA. , 2'71

, Measurements. M.
Length of vertebral column between pelvis and humerus, 0.070
“ “ “ “ in front of humerus, .0235
“ “ caudal series preserved, / .070
“ “ humerus, about .0185,
“ “ ulna and radius, .012
“ “ part of fore limb in line, .0455
“ " ilium, .007
“ “ femur, .020

Number of chevron rods in .004 ; seven.

A single specimen of this Batrachian was obtained by Prof. Newberry, at Linton; it is in a good state of
preservation.

SAUROPLEURA DIGITATA, 00226.
Transac. Amer. Philos. Soc, 1869, XIV., p. 15.

TUDITANUS, Cope.
Proceed. Amer. Philos. Soc., 1871, 177.

Cranium broad flat, orbits anterior, bones more or loss sculptured. Teeth on
premaxillary and maxillary bones of nearly equal sizes. Three pectoral shields sculp-
tured externally. Form lizard like ; two pairs of limbs of medium proportions.

This genus is established on two species of which the collection contains nearly
entire specimens. In these no chevron abdominal rods or scales can be discovered,
and it is not probable that they exist. The presence of the pectoral shields distinguishes
this genus from Dendremeton, Owen, while the thoracic plates and lack of ventral rods
separate it from Sauropleura. The plates may, however, be found in the latter;
should the rods be found in Tudz'ta'nus, which ,is not probable, these genera must be
united. I associate with the T. punclulatus, and T. brevirostrz's three other species
known only from crania, a reference to be finally criticized when more is known of
them. They are all evidently allied. The largest is T. Immleyz' ,' the next, T. radiatus,
is named from elevated radiating ridges of the cranial sculpture, T. mordam has a
strongly sculptured cranium, and large premaxillary teeth, while in T. obtusus the
orbits are less anterior, and the teeth small. I formerly described it as a Dendrer-
peton.

TUDITANUS PUNCTULATUS, Cope, Sp. Nov.

This amphibian is known from a single individual well preserved on the Opposite halves of a block of slate.
The head, forelimbs, and twenty-three consecutive vertebrae with ribs are well defined, but of pelvis and hind limbs,
nothing is visible.

The cranium is less exposed posteriorly than in the other species referred to the genus, and has a triangular
outline with narrowed but obtuse muzzle. If I do not mistake the outline of the left orbit, it is near the transverse
line which divides the head equally. The surface of a conSiderable portion is preserved, and is sculptured by small
pits placed closely, the intervals in a very few parts assuming the form of ridges. The sculpture is thus more minute

272 SUPPLEMENT TO THE EXTINCT BATRACHIA

than in any other species. The under jaw of the right side is partially preserved, and displays longitudinal grooves.
The ramus is stout and straight, and approaches the form seen in Brachydectes newberryi. Its teeth are not pre-
served, but the extremities of the opposing maxillaries remain. They are small and acutely conic ; both they and
the ramus are ‘much less robust than in the above mentioned species, and the enamel preserved is smooth.

The three pectoral shields are preserved, and as the exposed surface is the interior it is smooth. The laterals
resemble imperfectly, spherical triangles. The outer margin is thin and convex, and the anterior angle curves round
the apex of the median shield and joins that of the opposite side forming a coarse interlocking suture. The median
scute is formed like some of the patterns of ancient mirrors. ' It is a Wide oval excavated on each side behind, and
produced from between these concavities into a long flat sternum-like process. The latter thus resembles the
xiphisternal production of frogs and of some lizards ; as in the former, the ribs having no heemal elements, have no
connection with it. Its extremity is simple and obtuse.

The humerus originates at the outer posterior angle of the lateral thoracic scutum. It is relatively as large as
that of a frog, is contracted medially, and much expanded distally. It is followed at a short interval by a shorter
ulna, which is also expanded at the ends and contracted at the middle. Then succeed numerous well developed
phalanges, which are so scattered as to render it impossible to ascertain the number that compose the digits and
how many of the latter existed. -

The vertebra are osseous and with slightly concave extremities on a lateral view; they are subquadrate in
outline ; their spines are not distinguishable. There are 22~3 pairs of osseous ribs, which are slender, rather short,
and strongly curved backwards.

Measurements. M.

Length of specimen as preserved, 0.097

“ “ head, .024
Width of head posteriorly, .020
Depth of ramus mandibuli, .004
Eight apices of teeth cover, .005
Length of 23 vertebrae. . .063

“ median pectoral scute, .010
Width “ “ “ .005

“ of the three scuta, , ‘ I .010
Length process of median scute, .005

“ humerus, V .009
Width “ - .004
Length ulna, .006
Width ~“ ‘ .002
Length phalange, .003
Expanse of longest ribs, .015
Length of a long rib, .009

Besides the generic characters already pointed out, this species differs from the Sauropleura. longipes, to which
it has some resemblance, in the much shorter fore limbs, and shorter vertebral column in the anterior region of the
body.

TUDITANUS BREVIROSI‘RIS, Cope, Sp. Nov.

Represented by two individuals and probably by part of a third. Those with the cranium show that this part
is large in comparison with the size of the body, and is as wide as long, with broadly rounded muzzle. The orbits
are large, and situated for the greater part in front of a line marking the anterior third of the length of the head.
. The bones of the head are coarsely sculptured with radiating ridges, and with some tubercles posteriorily ; the
supratemporal exhibits radii which extend outwards. The teeth are in two rows on that part of the maxillary arch
anterior to the orbits ; they are of equal sizes ; the outer row appears to be directed more obliquely outwards than

the inner. The former number five in .002 M. The thoracic shields are rather large, and have coarse radiating
ridges. '

AND REPTILIA OF N ORTH AMERICA. 273

5

Vertebral centra and arches are not well distinguished in two individuals, but instead, an axialkmass which
may represent chorda dorsah‘s. In one, three diapophyses are distinctly developed at the sacral region. In a third
individual without head or thoracic region, but in which the ribs and hind limbs are similar, as well as the general
proportions, the vertebrae are distinctly ossified ; but its reference to this species is uncertain.

Remains of both fore and hind limbs are preserved. They are rather stout, not large, and with short pha-
langes. The number of these is not distinguishable.

Measurements of Limbs. M.
Length femur, No. 1 0.060
“ tibia and fibula, No. 1, .050
“ anterior phalange, No. 1, obverse, I .0285
“ femur, No. 2, .060
“ tibia and fibula, No. 2, .070
“ femur, No. 3, . .052
“ posterior phalange, .026

The deficiency of length of the tibia in No. 1, is probably due to imperfection of the specimen. There are
bones of the fore limbs in No. 2 which are not determinable. The ribs are rather long and rather curved. The can-
dal extremity is not complete, but was evidently well developed.

M.

Length from head to femur, 0.0356
“ head, , .0154
Width “ behind, .0175
“ “ interorbital, .0042
Length of orbit, .0040

TUDITANUS RADIATUS, Cope, Sp. Nov.

Represented by crania of several individuals, one of which is nearly perfect, and is selected for description ;
otheIs are more or less complete ; and present the prominent peculiarities of the species.

The marked character of this form is seen in the very anterior position of the orbits and contraction of the
muzzle. The orbits are large and separated by a little more than their own diameter; the posterior border is in
front of a linemeasuring the anterior third of the length to the supra-occipital crest, and nearlyat the line marking
the fourth of the length to the quadrate region. The posterior outline of the skull is deeply concave, the quadrate
angle projecting beyond the occipital condyles, which are themselves; quite prominent. The osseous segments com-
posing the cranium are from the orbital region p‘osteriorly, three median, and four lateral on each side. The supra-
occipital is rather small, and is broader than long. Its posterior border is straight, as are the short lateral margins.
The anterior suture presents an obtuse angle forwards. A large rhombic plate occupies the parietal region, which
is probably divided longitudinally by a suture, and represents the parietal bones. It extends narrowing, nearly to
the orbits, when the middle line is occupied by the much smaller frontal. The suture between the two is obscure,
but seems to form an emargination of the parietals. There is a subtriangular post-frontal which expands posteriorly
and is succeeded by a supra-temporal which narrows and becomes acute posteriorly, being wedged between the
parietal and what may be an anterior production of the plate representing the epiotic. A very large jugal plate
extends from the orbits two-thirds the distance to the extremity of the quadrate, the remaining third being covered
by a quadrato-jugal. After the jugal the epiotic is the largest of the cranial shields or bones, and sends a prolonga-
tion forwards between the parietal and supra-temporal, as well as on the outer side of the latter.

There is no trace of mucous canals. The sculpture consists of strong ridges radiating and inosculating.
Radiation is more uninterrupted on both jugal, supra-temporal and anterior part of epiotic ; in the first, they origi-
nate in front of the middle exteriorly ;' on the supra-temporal, near the anterior part. The inosculation is honey-
comb like on the parietal, supra-occipital and posterior parts of the epiotic.

A. r. s.—v0L. XV. 3Q.

274 SUPPLEMENT TO THE EXTINCT BATRACHIA

Measurements. M.
Length to middle of supra-occipital, .055
“ “ angle of quadrate, .0711
Width at “ “ .069
“ “ orbits (approximate), .031
Interorbital Width, .0085

No teeth are preserved with this cranium. A second specimen exhibits nothing more distinctly than the
one described.
TUDITANUS OBTUSUS, Cope.

Proceed. Amer. Philos. Soc, 1871, p. 177. Dendrei-peton obtzbsum, Cope, Transac. Amer. Philos. Soc., 1869,
XIV., p. 12.
TUDITANUS MORDAX, Cape, Sp. Nov.

Represented by a partially complete cranium and some other fragments.

The muzzle is broadly rounded as in T. obtusus, and the premaxillary teeth are relatively much larger. The
bones are sculptured with delicate acute radiating and inosculating ridges. The maxillary bone is preserved for the
length of an inch ; its teeth are smaller than those of the premaxillary bone ; I count four in a line, which have a
simple conic crown. The external surface of the maxillary is not very strongly sculptured. The orbits and nares

are not well defined in the specimen.
TUDITANUS HUX LEYI, Cope, Sp. Nov.

Represented by a considerable portion of the face and muzzle of a single individual. A portion of the left
mandible, supporting three teeth remains in place, and almost the entire boundary of the right orbit is preserved.

The fragment indicates a much larger species than any other referred to the genus, and next to the Lapto-
phmctus obsoletus, the largest of the Batrachians of the Ohio Coal Measures. Without more complete remains it is
not easy to determine its generic relations finally. It differs from the Leptophractus in the absence of the symmetri-
cal scutellation of the cranium.

The form of the head is probably elongate and the muzzle neither very obtuse nor elongate. The orbit is
rather small and near the middle of the length of the specimen, which is, however, incomplete at both ends. The
sculpture of the surface of the head posterior to the orbits, as well as round their borders and for some distance in
front of them, consists of a rather coarse pitting. 0n the middle line between the orbits and on the muzzle, the
intervals become narrower, and are confluent into transverse ridges or a delicate reticulation. The surface of the
mandible displays a coarse reticulation.

The teeth are stoutly conic, and with delicately striate grooved cementum. They are slightly recurved.

This species differs from the T. radiatus and T. obtusus, in the absence of the segmental areae into which the

sculpture is thrown in them.

Measurements. M.
Longitudinal diameter of orbit, 0.019
Length of alveolar border supporting three teeth, ~013
Diameter of basis of tooth, ' .003
Eight pits in, .010

Dedicated to Professor Thomas H. Huxley, facile princeps among English systematists, and an important con-
tributor to the knowledge of the extinct Batrachia. /

LE PTOPHRACTUS, Cope.

Proceed. Acad. Nat. Sci., 1873, 340.

LEPI‘OPHRACTUS OBSOLETUS, Cope.
Loc. cit., 1873, p. 341.

AN D REPTILIA OF NORTH AMERICA. 275

EURYT HORAX, Cope.

Established on a large thoracic shield of peculiar form. It is a median, and
exhibits broad smooth surfaces for the contact of the overlapping margins of the
lateral plates. The form is subround with a large excavation from the posterior mar-
gin on each side. The narrowed portion left has a convex outline. Sculpture none.
The form resembles remotely the corresponding scute of Tuditanus punctulatus, the
posterior narrow face representing the Xiphisternal process of that species.

EURYTHORAX SUBLZEVIS, Cope.
Proceed. Amer. Philos. Soc., 1871, 177.

The specific characters expressed by this shield are best perceived in the measurements :

M.
Length, .0715
Greatest width (imperfect), .078
Width of lateral concavity, .039

Some delicate radiating grooves are seen on the exposed surface, but they are very shallow. They are not
visible on the faces of contact. '

This represents one of the largest species of this fauna, having pertained to an animal of probably four feet in
length, perhaps longer. It Will be desirable in future to compare it with the corresponding part of the Tuditanus
humleyz‘, though the latter, so far as known, is the smaller species. ~ '

_ COLOSTEUS, Cope.
Transac. Amer. Philos. Soc, 1869, XIV., p. 22.

COLOSTEUS SCUTELLATUS, Newber’ry.

Cope, Proceed. Amer. Philos. Soc, 1871, p. 41. Pygopterus scutellatus, Newberry, Proceed. Acad. Nat. Sci.,
Philadelphia, 1856, p. 98. Colosteus cvrassisautatus, Cope, Transac. Amer. Philos. Soc., XIV., 1869, 23.

UOLOSTEUS FOVEATUS, Cope.
Transac. Amer. Philos. Soc, 1859, XIV., p. 24.

COLOSTEUS PAUCIRADIATUS, Cope, Sp. Nov

Established on median and lateral pectoral plates of two individuals, the latter of which I formerly referred
to the 0. scutellatus. It belonged to a larger specimen than either of the preceding, and is distinguished by the
paucity and weakness of its ridges. These are entirely transverse on the posterior third of the length, but are inter-
rupted and irregular on the median portion; the anterior third is almost smooth.

The lateral shield is little larger than the largest of 0. scutellatus, but resembles the median plate in its low
and distant carinae. An are drawn at about the middle of a radial line from the outer angle crosses about eleven of
these ridges ; in 0. scutellatus, twenty in the same Space.

The median plate is pyriform with the posterior angle little produced, and the anterior not narrowed and

rather short. The lateral shield is a right angled triangle, the inner or thin edge concave posteriorly, the posterior

convex.

lM.
Length of median, i 0.063
\Vldth “ “ .040
“ “ lateral behind, .0242

Length of lateral, .045

276 SUPPLEMENT TO THE EXTINCT BATRACHIA

COCYTINUS, Cope.
Proceed. Amer. Philos. 800., 1871, p. 177.

Vertebrae and ribs osseous 3 anterior limbs, thoracic shields and abdominal arma-
ture apparently wanting. Teeth on the premaxillary bone, none on the maxillary.
Hyoid elements largely developed. An axial hyal with basihyal on each side, closely
united with the corresponding ceratohyal, at the end of which is an element in the
position of a stylohyal. Haemal or basal branchihyals three, the anterior two each
supporting one pleural branchihyal, and the third supporting one also. The first or
anterior haemal branchihyal on the inner side of the ceratohyal, approaching the
median line, and with elongate pleural element. Urohyal not seen.

Such are the characters of a genus, whose affinities are interesting but somewhat
obscure. The hyoid apparatus is better developed than in any other here described,
but it is by no means certain that it was branchiferous at maturity, nor does this
character on the other hand render it certain that the animal is the larva of one of the
other forms here described. The well ossified ribs and vertebrae are favorable,
though not conclusive evidence for adult age, while the structure of the hyoid appa-
ratus is more like that of the gilless genera Amp/zimna and Pro’onopsis, than it is
like the branchiferous genera Siren and lVecturus, or the branchiate young of Sala—
manders. Thus it differs from Proteus in the presence of the first axial hyal and the
two first basihyals, from this genus and Necturns in the possession of four distinct
pleural branchihyals. In this it agrees with Amjflzimna, as it does also with Pro 0-
nopsis, in the three hzemal branchihyalsfie Siren has only two of these elements, the
first and second Without the third. As a consequence in Siren the third and fourth
pleural elements have no corresponding haemal support, an arrangement totally different
from thatof Cocytinus. The arrangement in larval Amblysz‘oma and Triton is quite
similar to that in Siren, excepting that in Triton, the small basihyals are present.

The question as to whether this genus was in life branchiferous or not, is not
easily decided, since the hyoid apparatus is about equally developed in the branchi-
ferous genera Siren and Nectnrus, and the air breathers Amphiuma and Protonopsis.
Some considerations however point to an air breathing type, like the last two, though
the individual may possibly have been immature. In the gill—bearing genera, as well
as in the larvae of Amblystomaz, Tritons, etc, the branchial arches approach nearest
to archetypical perfection. Thus .in the Siren lacertina, two of the four superior
branchihals are supported by corresponding inferior or hasmal branchihyals, and these
in turn are articulated each to its proper axial hyal. The absent elements are the two

*For the nomenclature of these bones, I follow Fischer’s Ueber die Perennibranchiaten und Derotremen:
Hamburg, 1864.

AND REPTILIA OF NORTH AMERICA. 277

axial and two haemal elements which exist as supports of the posterior two inferior
brachihyals in the fishes. In the branchiferous Necturus maculatus a considerable
modification ensues. The four superior branchihyals are present, but according to
Fischer, the first and second haemal elements are confluent. A third inferior branchi-
hyal is added. If we now turn to the air—breather Protonopsis horrida, we observe
a marked peculiarity. The third haemal branchihyal remains, while the second is
confluent with the corresponding superior element, and the first is similarly confluent
or, as Fischer interprets it, the first branchiyal of the superior series extends to the
axialhyal. In Muroenopsz's (Amphiuma), a greater divergence from the archetype
exists. With all the peculiarities of Protonopsz's it further almost loses the second
haemal element, which appears at maturity as a process on the first pleural element.

These characters may be tubulated as follows:

A Third haemal branchihyal present.
a First and second haemal branchihyals free and distinct.
_ COCYTINUS.
am First and second haemals separate from each other but confluent with their
pleural elements.

PROTONOPSIS.
‘ AMPHIUMA.
am First and second distinct from pleurals, but united with each other. .,
. NECTURUS.
AA Third haemal element wanting.
2 Second haemal element reaching the axis.
' SIREN.
AMBLYSTOMA.
Larvae, { TRITON.
SALAMANDRA.
12 Second haemal element reduced, not reaching axis.
PROTEUS.

N ow it has been pointed out that Cocytz'nus agrees with the air-breathing genera
in the larger development of the first pleural and haemal branchihyals, and that it
agrees with them both in the presence of the second and third haemal elements. But.
these are more distinct than in either of these genera, and the third is larger, and
supports the fourth as well as its own pleural element.

The presence of the maxillary bone furthermore excludes this genus from near
affinity to either the Trachystomata and Proteida, and allies it to the Amphiuma, and

A. P. s.-——vor.. xv. 3n.

278 SUPPLEMENT TO THE EXTINCT BATRACHIA, ETC.

Pro'tonopsz's. It differs from both these genera in the absence of teeth from this bone
as well as its apparently small development. This may indicate that the animal was
not fully grown. In the hyoid region it differs from these in the apparent absence of
the second axial hyal, and in points of the haemal segments. Thus the second is con-
fluent either with the 1st or 2d pleural element in those genera, and the third haemal
element is much reduced and does not support the fourth pleural in either.

The present genus is then to be referred to the neighborhood of Amphiuma and
Protonopsz’s, but as forming the type of another family. The branchial apparatus is
more fish-like than in either of these, in (1) the three distinct‘ and well developed
haemal branchihyals, (2) the four distinct pleural elements of the same 3 (3) the
distinct ?stylohyal.

Its weak maxillaries have a larval aspect, but the ossification of all the bones and
the small size of the pleural branchihyals as compared with the rest of the cranium,
render it probable that the form is no more larval than the genera to whose neighbor-
hood it is referred. That it passed a portion of its existence as an aquatic branchi-
ferous animal is no less certain.

COCYTINUS GYRINOIDES, Cope, S10. Nov.

The only specimen of this batrachian, embraces the inferior bones of the cranium in a complete state of
preservation, with the muzzle with its teeth ; also the anterior eight vertebrae. with their ribs. The condition of the
hyal elements is as follows: The haemal element of the first branchial arch is partially concealed on both sides by
the ceratohyal. An expanded truncate face of attachment to the axial element is visible on both sides, but the
body of the bone is flat, and presents the edge in the specimen. The first pleural element proceeded from just behind
and Within its extremity ; it is longer than the other pleural elements. A slender bone is visible extending from the
space between the ceratohyal and mandibular angle ; it may therefore pertain to the suspensiorium of the jaw as
well as to that of the hyoid arch, or be squamosal as well as stylohyal. The second haemal bone is slender, but with
enlarged axial extremity ; that of the right side is not so well preserved as to be safely determined. The third luemal
elements are the smallest, and originate immediately in front of the occipital condyles and diverge outwards and
backwards. They are little curved, subcylindric and slightly expanded at the extremities.

Of the pleural elements the first and second are little curved, the first is marked by a pit or foramen on the
under side near the distal end, which is clearly visible on both sides of the specimen. The third and fourth pleurals
are more curved, and the outer ends slightly expanded and directed backwards. ’

The obverse of the specimen shows that the anterior axial hyal is wedge-shaped. The lateral basihyals are
massive. The second haemal branchihyal is dilated fan-shaped distally, and supports two pleural elements.

The muzzle projects over the lower jaw, and was rather broadly truncate. The premaxillary teeth are cylin-
dric and six in number on each side. The maxillary bones represented by a lamina at each lateral extremity of the
premaxillary. The mandibular rami are very stout, as are also the ceratohyals. The vertebrae have possessed some
apophyses, apparently keel-like diapophyses. The ribs are slightly curved.

Length of head and eight vertebrae, M. .0335; of head .0152 ; expanse of mandibular rami .013 ; length of left
ceratohyal .0085.

ARTICLE VI.

AN ANALYSIS OF THE LIFE-FORM IN ART.
BY HARRISON ALLEN, M. 1).,
Professor of Cmnparative Anatomy in the University of Pennsylvania.

Read March 6th, 1874.

 

GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS.

SECTION 1. The Imitatz've. We are informed on the highest authority* that
the language-character of primitive people is largely if not entirely composed of signs,
which are either direct copies of familiar objects, or can be shown to be derivatives of
them.

A language or letter—type and an art-form have thus much in common, although
the processes are different by which they are evolved. To produce the letter—type, a
series of abridgments must be practiced for a long time, with the result of simpli-
fying the form by the elimination of non-essential attributes. Of course the resem-
blance to the original design is, by such treatment, sooner or later lost. To produce
the art-form the rude outline becomes in time a reasonably faithful copy of the
natural model, and from this realistic stage may pass under favoring conditions to
an art-type capable of expressing the highest culture.

From among the innumerable objects surrounding man, those selected by him
for delineation have been relatively few in number. He appears to have been
influenced in his choice by his necessities, both real and imaginary. Among the
first may be placed the objects he sought for food, and those he dreaded as enemies.
Thus we meet with figures of birds, fishes and the grazing animals, as well as those
of rapacious and venomous creatures. Next in order may be placed representations
of the heavenly bodies and the signs of the elements, indicating his dread of the violent
phenomena of the earthquake and thunder-storm, or his appreciation of the benefits of
rain and favoring winds. Outlines of his own form are often of great antiquity.

* Egypt’s Place in Universal History, London, Chev. Bunsen, I, 333. Five Ancient Monarchies, etc., London,

Geo. Rawlinson, I, 81. Dissertation on the Nature of, and Character of the Chinese System of Writing, Phila., 1838,
XV, Duponceau. ' '

280 AN ANALYSIS on THE

They are for the most part, expressive of an anthropotized deity, or of himself in
heroic action.

With such simple factors many secondary figures may arise by specialization of
the details of the more complex. .T he human figure yields the head, and its separate
parts, the eye, mouth, ear and limbs, particularly the hands and feet. The house
with the gable and door is appropriated, each with its special significance; and as
the use of weapons and household utensils become gradually adopted, a system of
picture-signs is elaborated sufficient for the purposes of the people inventing it.

The difficulty of identifying the objects of such a system is apparent. Apart
from the rudeness of the execution, we find objects closely resembling one another
having diversive significances. Many figures, for example, are circular in form, which
we cannot, from that fact alone, place together. 'Upon the monuments of Central
America the circle is often used to designate both the human eye and the ear drum
of reptiles. It also represents the moon,* mammae, and a variety of other things.

SECTION II. The Elventive. But many designs can by no force of ingenuity
be included in the list, either of organic objects, of implements, or their derivatives.
Some of these are inventions. This is a natural result of human effort. As earthen
pottery could easily have been suggested by the gourd, or hollow stone, so the
designs upon fietile implements may have arisen from the minor accidents oe- ,
curing during manufacture. The unintentional imprint of the finger tip may have
passed into the ornament adopted in the pottery of the stone age of Europexl‘ In the
same manner the stamp made by the end ()f a hollow reed: may have originated the
circular ornament, as the impress of a fibrous cord created. the almost universal spiral
border.

Excluding this group of objects, there yet remain many markings such
as. those seen upon early pottery, which cannot be so explained, and are probably
examples of inventive design. Such are the herring-bone patterns and chevrons, and
the numerous crossed lines, which do not form determinate figures. What the
ultimate shapes would have been, originating from a basis so meagre, it is difficult to
surmise. There are many elaborate examples of carvings among the South Sea
Islanders in which the simple repetition of the lines above mentioned is never de-

parted from. The result is pleasing, but without other interest.
* According to Lt. Simpson (Reconnoissances in New Mexico, Texas, etc , 1850), the circle, among the Pueblo
Indians, means the sun and moon, —the half-circle, clouds,———the zigzag, lightning, etc.
+Prehistoric Times, Sir John Lubbock, p. 469. It is assented by “7111. Chafl‘ers (Keramic Gallery, II, 1872.
185), that the gourd, pumpkin, or the fruits with a hard rind or shell, were in England the most primitive vessels.
iAntiquity of the Southern Indians, palticnlarly of the Georgian Tribes, Charles C. Jones, Jr., New York.
1873, 459.

LIFE-FORM IN ART. 281

When an attempt to produce symmetrical designs upon the same supposed
inventive basis is recognized, it is doubtful whether at some earlier stage of its
development a class of natural objects had not been the original source of inspiration.
In the later examples only of the ornamentation of the so—called Iron Age and the
Saracenic styles, namely at the time of approaching decadence, do we find engrafted
upon them imitations of the life form. In the former, it is of an animal type, and in
the latter, it is a vine—like tracery.*

But even here it is not by any means certain that imitation did not form the
basis of design. Worsaae claims that the embellishment of the ornaments of the Iron
Age was derived from the Roman tasteft while for the Saracenic. it would be very
difficult to prove that at the time of the rapid development of this style, much was
not unwittingly copied from the ancient monumental ornamentation constantly before
the Moslem people. I

The ease with which designs, either apparently or really the outgrowth of man’s
ingenuity, rather than direct copies from nature, run into set figures, endlessly re-
peating themselves, is very noticeable. The time at which a given people will adopt
a pattern holds a direct relation to the tendency of their art. If the art inclines to
invention, the patterns will appear early; if it inclines to imitation, they will appear
late. We have seen that primitive man copies the animal forms about him; now of
these the serpent is the only one which is facile to the purposes of the pattern-maker,
if we exclude that exceptional accessory, the feather. As a result, the animal form
is excluded from the arabesque, which is noted for its involved and apparently arti-
ficial ornamentation; and towards its decline when its typical expression has been
modified, the vegetable form is introduced instead of the animal. It is, indeed, almost
a necessity that the animal, or at least the footed form of it should be so excluded,
both from the style of the Iron Age and Islam. It is interesting to compare these
examples of traceries with the elaborate entwinings of Celtic ornament. The labors
of the Celtic artist to construct monograms and mouldings from the animal form,
ended in a tangle of eccentric lines; and in order to make the four-footed shape in
any degree obedient, it has been stript of all characteristic proportion and made as
snake—like as possible:

* The Arabian Antiquities of Spain. J. C. Murphy, 1813.

f ‘I‘ The characteristic ornamentation of the iron period are symmetrical windings and arabesques. As they not
infrequently terminate in a rude representation of the head of some fantastic animal, these symmetrical Winding
ornaments have been regarded as the figures of snakes, whence they have been called snake ornaments. * * *
These occupy the place of What were originally leaves.” J. A. VVorsaae. The Primeval Antiquities of Denmark,
Loud, 1849, 72.

tFor a good example see Grammar of Ornament. Owen Jones, London, 1856, p1. lxiii.

282 AN ANALvsIs or THE

SECTION III. The ethnic ealue of Design. Having defined two distinct bases
for design, the natural and artificial, and concluding that the former is by far the
more frequent, it would yet be unsafe to deduce the tempting theory that peoples may
be graded by the choice of one or the other of them. Prescott* truly says “ coinci-
dences naturally spring up among different nations under the same phase of civiliza—
tion.” May we not go farther and say that coincidences spring up as well under differ-
ent phases of civilization? Tribes upon the same level may differ widely in their art
methods, as well as in the love for the art performance. Wallace‘t found the Papuans ex—
cellent carvers in wood, yet living in a state little better than Andamanders—proba
bly the lowest of men. The Tahitians when discovered by Cook were found using
none but stone implements. Lubbock: considers that we have in this people a fair ex-
ample of one living in an age of stone. Now among the remains of the people of the
stone age in Europe have been found fragments of bone covered with etchings. In
instituting a comparison of the art-products of these two races so far removed in time
and location, yet restricted to the use of the same tools, we find striking contrasts.
The Tahitian was content to repeat indefinitely a simple pattern composed of oblique
lines, zigzags and lozenges, a thing over—wrought and tasteless, without a trace of the
gracefulness of the life-forms which were so abundant about him; while the pre—historic
designer drew what he saw so accurately that his limnings have scientific value.
Prof. Owen§ informs us that some of the characters of the horse, employed by zool-
ogists to distinguish this animal from its congeners, to wit: the small pointed ears, the
bushy tail, the beard—like hairs in the stallion, are all faithfully represented in etchings
on bones found in the cavern of Bruniquel. The same authority says that the reindeer
is recognizable among similar pre—historic drawings. See also the deer (Fig. 1).

Surely. while we should make every allowance for the differences in motive, these
two people were far removed in their inclinations as well as their ability to execute.
But how could it be shown which was the more advanced? In no way we think with
certainty, though conceding the accuracy of the statement, that picture-painting leads
to alphabet making, a tribe early evincing a tendency to copy accurately from nature
possesses a higher capacity for development than another in which such tendency is
imperfectly manifested.

Many illustrations have been given by travelers of the dullness of perception of
the savage to artistic forms, a defect brought out in strong contrast to the well-known

* History of Conquest of Peru, I, 175.
+TheMalay Archipelago, A. R. Wallace, New York, 1869, p. 21.
i Lubbock, Ibid, 1865, 372.

,S Description of the Cavern of Bruniquel and its Organic Remains. Phil. Trans, Lmd., 1869, Part II, 553.
Ibid, rm I, 1864. ’

LIFE-FORM IN ART. 283

acuteness of observation he shows in the trail, and the remembrance of the human
face. “Of the Alfouras (New Hollanders), Oldfield narrates that on being shown a pic-
ture of one of themselves, one said it was a ship, another a kangaroo, not one in a dozen
identifying the portrait as having any connection with himself.”* Other examples
to the same efiect could be quoted. This peculiarity evidently could not apply to the
Indians of the northwest coast of North America, who long before any European in-
fluence was possible among them, produced elaborate carvings of animal forms on
pipes, tent posts and other objects.

 

Realistic pre-historic design. 1‘

It is highly probable, that a tribe might be proficient in shaping a mass in the
round, and yet be defective in appreciating it in the flat. Wincklemanni has given it
as his belief, that “ art began with the simplest shape and by working in clay, conse-
quently, with a sort of statuary; for even a child can give a certain form to a soft
mass, though unable to paint anything on a surface, because”——he continues, “merely
an idea of an object is sufficient for the former, whereas for the latter much more
knowledge is requisite.” Herbert Spencer§ would lead us to the opposite conclusion.
He traces the gradual evolution of sculpture from painting, and infers that in advancing
from the rude outline on the wall, rock, or slab of wood or stone to a perfect statue,
the painter has in time became a sculptor. We recall the fable of the Siscyonian
potter’s daughter, who drew her lover’s profile on the wall, and therewith began the
art of sculpture, and wonder whether after all it may not be true. We are in no po-
sition to decide which of the positions cited be the correct one, although we would
not be surprised if both hypotheses prove correct within definite ranges of art-growth.

*Lubbock (l. 6.), 348.

+Mortillet Matereaux pour l’IIistoire de l’Homme I, 73. Also, Man’s Origin and Destiny. J. P. Lesley, Phila.
1858, 259.

1 Ancient Art, I, 193, Wincklemann. Trans. by G. Henry Lodge, M. D.

g First Principles, 165. Dr. J. '1‘. Rothrock has informed us that he has actually traced such a transition among
the art-products of the people of the northwest coast of North America, from the interior country westward to the sea.

2284 AN ANALrsis or 'rHr;

In some parts of the world art may have arisen from the making of clay images, in
others from outline drawings.

SECTION IV. The Realistic. \Vithout entering into disputations of the origin
of the art-form, it is more to our purpose to analyze those designs which have origi-
nated from models found in nature. The art—record of an autocthonous race——
particularly that including the manner of representing animals and plants—is a fair
subject for study, entirely apart from the origin or meaning of the outlines, or the
\ bearings they may have on ethnological questions.

It will at once occur to the student that the natural productions of a country be—
ing given, we are in the best position possible to study its art. But such a proposition
can have a very limited application. It is true that withlan isolated people the
images must of necessity be confined to the fauna and flora of the surrounding
region; but if we are correct in the statement that a race with whom the artistic
faculties are as yet dormant, Who are driven (if we may so express it.) to etchings or
paintings by the combined forces of superstition and hunger, will! secure but very
general likenesses in their results. We may be satisfied, indeed, if we can assign even
as much as the class to which the animal represented may belong. A fish, a serpent, a
bird, a quadruped—these are seen, and was probably all that was intended. No dis—
tinction could be expected between serpents and serpent-like fishes, or between
cetaceans and fishes. But when the shape is especially striking we are enabled to
identify it more exactly. The kangaroof‘ the manateefi turtle,* shark:e trepang,* and
star fish,* have been repeatedly delineated by savages. Acquaintance with the
remains of more enlightened races, such as the Aztecs, Incarians, Egyptians and
Eastern Asians, yield numbers of highly specialized shapes which can with case be
assigned to the genus and even to the species intended. In illustration of this remark
we may refer the student to the box—lid of Incarian designing figured by Dupaixi
Here can be recognized, through the veil of conventionalism shrouding many of the
representations, figures of the lizard, alligator, capuchin monkey, opossum (Fig.
“2.0) and b‘ustard (Fig. 2). The Aztecs“ although less noted for their exactness of
rendition, make the distinction between the tortoise and the turtle; and are particular
in preserving the carination upon the scales ofthe rattlesnake. It must be remembered,
however, that this people used the same character to form the shaft of the feather in their

* Lubbock, loc. cit., 317.
’r Prehistoric Man, Dan]. Wilson, London, 185:3.

iKingsborough COIL. IV. See also Dupaix, 2, 1. 4; Voy. Pittoresque et Archaeologique dans la Province
d’Yucatan pendant 1834 at 1836, F. de Waldeck, Paris, 1838, p1. xi.

|| Kingsborough, Ibid. IV, Fig. 23.

L] FE-FORM IN ART. 285

Fig. 2. Fig 3
_ I
Bustard of Incarian design. Didelphian Mammal of Incarian design.

delineations of plumage. Fishes are so well delineated on Chaldean remains, that two
closely allied forms, the carp and the barbel, can be distinguished.* In Egyptian
art, noted for its realistic tendencies, we have animals so truthfully portrayed that
naturalists have been enabled to identify many of them 1‘ We also find well-
defined realisms in the early stage of Assyrian art: It is not our purpose to
enumerate the examples of realistic art to be met with in the more familiar monu-
ments of Greece and Rome; but may mention in passing the really fine representa—
tations'of crustacea,§ (such as crabs and lobsters) and mollusca,“ in the Pompeian
style.

The figures of animals and plants upon coins are often rendered with great
fidelity. We may direct special attention to the tunny upon Spanish-Roman coinsfil

Palissy, in his Rustic Figulines, gives realistic examples of frogs, fishes, serpents,
etc., while his representations of fossil shells from the Paris beds- are so faithful, that
in many instances the species can be given.“ In marked contrast to the average
Polynesian designs may be mentioned the admirable figures of terns, cetaceans, and
sharks, carved on a beam of a but at Uji, one of the Solomon Group of Islandsxfl'

SECTION V. The Conventional. (CL) General Remarks. By far the greater
number of designs adopted by man are not of the realistic type. It is a tendency of
the mind to cling to a model when it has been once removed from nature. The entire
fabric of society is made up usages, the origin of which is either forgotten or
ignored. “Ubi homines sunt mode? snnt. It is the deepest law of man’s nature;
whereby man is a craftsman and a ‘tool-using’ animal ; not the slave of impulse.”I]:
Since art is in no wise exempt from the operation of such influences, we find

* Rawlinson, Five Ancient Monareliies, I, 107. ' 1- Selections from Egyptian Ant. in British Mus, Birch.
i Botta. Mon. de Ninive, pl. 95, A, fig. 17.

§ Museo Borbonico, Vol. IV, 29; Vol. VI, 38 ; Vol, XV.

1| Agancourt, History of Painting, Tab. 4, fig. 4.

{I Archaeologia.

** Morley’s Life of Palissy, Boston, 1853, I, 203. (Also, Keramic Gallery, Wm. Chalfers, I, pl. 60.)

H Jottings during a Cruise of the Ourucoa, Lieut. J. S. Brenchley, London, 1873, Frontispiece.

it Carlyle, French Rev., II, 178.

A. r. S.-V()L. xv. 3s

286 AN ANALYSIS or TlIE

mannerisms early appearing; and persisting to a degree varying with the general
character of the people maintaining them. We have found that primitive people
are realistic in their tendencies; early art being the purest so far as faithful—
ness to the model is concerned. We are informed by Dr. Brinton‘“ (who is speaking
of the construction of language), that “fidelity to form is everywhere the test of
excellence.” This must be true of all systems dependent on the purity of types—
whether it be of word-roots or of life forms. It is especially noticeable that nations
, just emerging from darkness into the light of civilization, when they have attained
sufficient mastery over their material to satisfactorily produce what they intend, that
their art is more vigorous and truthful than at any subsequent periodrl' -

But in time, the figures are distorted by conventionalities, or encumbered with
the attributes of an obscure symbolism. They no longer reflect the grace of untram-
meled motion, but the formalities of national prejudice. In some phases of art, as for
example that seen iii-Egypt, it is said development was stunted by the enactment
of rigid laws. But no legal restrictions are needed to fix the customs of workmen.
They are a law unto themselves. It would have been a more difficult task, we be—
lieve, to induce an Egyptian artist of the later dynasties to change his method by
force of law than to restrain him within the familiar limits which had been handed

down to him through many generations.

(5.) Conditions Favoring the Conventional. Glancing at the conditions which
appear to favor the conventional, we find, first, a rapid grthh in the arts of ‘ design
without a corresponding development of the perceptive powers. Numerous examples
of this fertile course of formalism are met with in Central. America and in Budd-
histic India; secondly, the acceptance of a given_f0rm as a symbol; thirdly, deca-
dence in art: of the last mentioned we have two varieties, either an abrupt descent
from excellence incident to the influence of the schools, in which the style of the
master is lost in the mannerism of the disciple, or where art becomes tainted by the
whims of uncultured patrons; fourthly, the gratification of the aesthetic sense at the
expense of the form. This is easily derived from the preceding, and is either char-
acteristic of it or is indicative of its approach.

(0.) The Fantastic. Thus when we see a sphinx delineated in the cincquecento
style (it is furnished, let us say, with an enormous tail volute, the basis of which is
the aeanthus leaf and stem), we are convinced that the artist has deliberately
deserted his model for one of those “hazardous caprices sure to please.” Equally

* Myths of the New World. D. G. Brinton, M. D., New York, 1868, 8.
+ Layard. Nineveh and its Remains, II, 222. The author makes the same application to Egyptian Art, p. 223.

LIFE-FORM IN ART. 287

beautiful is the combination of the man and dolphin, from the ruins at Athens ”*
(Fig. 4), and that of the woman and fish of the popular myth of the mermaid.
We copy a curious figure (Fig. 5) of a mermaid—like outline (possibly its prototype),
Which is suggestive of a strictly natural origin of this formxf'

Fig. 5.

 

Man-Dolphin, from Athens.

 

\J iii
\ \\\:‘ ‘ _ »

 

Mermaid—like form, after Richter.

. It is easily seen that with the changes incident to the development of an aesthetic
taste. conventionalities will present many varieties. With luxurious people they
merge into travesty and caricature, Where may be grouped those fantastic figures
derived from Greek symbols, seen in Roman and Etruscan Art: [Fig 6].

 

Fantastic form of Pompeian design.

*Antiquities of Athens, I, Chap. ix, pl. 22. Jas. Stuart, Lond., 1762.
+Icthyology, Joh. G. O. Richter. Leipzig, 1754, pl. 1.
iMus. Borbonio, X,tab. 8.

288 AN ANALYSIS or Tm:

o

(d) Ethnic styntficancg 0f the “Fantastic.” Selections of objects for their beauty,
or for their power of effecting fanciful combinations indicate an elevated position of
the people so employing them. Their appearance in the record is evidence of im-
proved facility in execution (hereby implying an advance in the use of implements),
since a primitive people are too much occupied with the vulgar necessities of living
to perpetuate a design for its shape alone.

What is vaguely called “grotesque” and “fanciful” are often the “reading of our
own ideas into the labors of others.” We may, without violence, assume that a peo~
ple who, while portraying animal and vegetable forms with a conscientious regard to
detail, occasionally produce a beautiful shape of a more or less whimsical character, are
rapidly attaining perfection in design. Were all other evidence wanting to prove the
culture of the Peruvians under the Incas, the single figure of a deer, whose body
furnished with wings terminates in the tail of the dolphin* (Fig. 7), would in our
judgment do much toward re-establishing the claim. The representation of Quet-
zacoatl of Aztec]: (Fig. 9), in its boldness and grace illustrates the same idea. We
have found the Incarians prone to realisms ; and it is worth while in passing to insti-
tute a comparison between this “ half-civilized ” race, and the Chinese and Japanese.
Both the realistic and the fantastic tendencies of the Incarian is found in the Chinese
art. We find here, copied with slavish fidelity, figures of fishes, birds and mammals,
side by side with monstrous “ grotesques.”

We may say, in conclusion, that, should the above proposition be received, its
application to the study of pre-historic remains may ultimately prove useful.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Composite of Inca-rial) Design.

*Kingsborough, Coll. II, Codex Vatieensis, pl. 44.
fKingsborough. Dupaix.
fKingsborough, IV. Dupaix.

LIFE-FORM 1x ART 289

   

(‘omposite of ancient Mediterranean design. (*) Composite of Aztec Design.

(6.) The Grotesque. The grotesque forms, so-called, are always inventions or
rather composites suggested by natural models. They conform to our standard of
What is ugly or bizarre more by accident than intention. Had the conceptions of the
designers of the startling and hideous been in consonance with our own, such forms as
the toad and the bat—those traditional sources of metaphors of the ugly—would be
more frequently seen. But these animals are rare in art. The toad occasionally makes
its appearance in Aztec and Peruvian records, While the bat is met with, so far as we can
recall, but in four instancesd‘ and each of these is simplicity itself compared to the
creations from their own art resources. Had the native Mexican sought in nature
for examples of ugliness, he must have been a poor observer to overlook the Centurioj:
(Fig. 10), whose claims to a position among the ugly things of this world must be
conceded

 

Centurio.

( f.) Tendencies of tile Conventional. Let us glance at some of the common

*Inghrami, 11, pl. 138.

+Galindos, account of Men. about Lake Yashau, Archaeologia, xxv, pl. 60; Kingsborough, IV. Dupaix ; Bollaert,
S. Ant. of A., 1860. Frontispiece; W'aldeck, F. de. l. a. See also Whipple, (1. v., p. 45.

tVoyage of the Sulphur, Mammalia, pl. '7. Brasseur de Bourbourg identifies a profile serpent-head as a bat’s.
See “Manuscrit Troano,” 1859, 209.

290 AN ANALYSIS on THE

tendencies of conventionalisms before passing to the considerations of the mythic and
symbolic forms.

One of the most common features of conventionalisms is to repeat the normal
lines of the model—the proportions being accurately preserved. We notice this in
Assyrian art, Where the tendency to multiply and make prominent the lines of the
muzzle andibrow of the lion—their favorite animal—is very noticeable (Fig. 11). EX-
travagant at best, it becomes eccentric to a degree when applied to other animals (Fig.
12). In the front—faced View of the Egyptian figure* (Fig. 13), we find the entire
spacebetween the eye—and the brow occupied by a number of lines drawn parallel
with the edge of the upper eye-lid, whose multiple they represent. Examples 0:“
the same tendency exist in some rock markings of North America. As another
example we may refer to a pre-columbian mask'l’ (Fig. 14), where such lines pass
entirely round the eyes and mouth. See also Fig. 1 of the Aztec skull variants, (q. v.)
for multiplication of the malar line.

Fig. 12.

 

Fifi. 14.

    
   

     

Full-faced Egyptian head. Pre-Columbian mask, from the Mosquito shore.
* Birch, 1- 0- Jr Archieologia. Chas. Rogers, VI, pl. 11, 107.
:The Mouments of Nineveh. A. H. Layard. Lond., 1829. pl. 10. § Ibid. pl. 152-

 

LIFE-FORM IN ART. 291

Another, and a very beautiful class of conventionalisms result from an oppo-
site process, viz., by diminishing the number of the lines (f the model,—thus pre-
serving all that is essential to the artistic form without violence to nature. The
figures of the torpedo* (Fig. 15) on some of the Greek vases may be mentioned in
this connection. Nothing can be more simple than the lines composing this pleasii'ig
form—yet all the essential parts of the animal have been retained.

 

Torpedo from Greek amphora.

(9.) The Symbol. The most interesting conventionalisms, however, are those
arising from a symbolic basis. The forms of ancient symbolism with which we are
most familiar, are those belonging to the history of the Indo-Germanic branch of the
human race, including some engrafting received from the Chaldean stocksf' Since
much of the interest in studying symbols is inextricably connected with the meanings
originally attached to them, we will begin our remarks with the consideration of
one concerning which much is known—the griflin. We made the acquaintance of
this form comparatively late in its development, when it is reasonable to suppose
that it may have undergone many modifications in form, if not in significance.
The griffin has been traced to an Assyrian source; whence it appears to have
passed westward to Greece, and southward to Persepolis and Babylon, if indeed it
may not have passed from the latter place primarily. M. Roulin§ endeavors to
trace the griflin to an Indian origin, and asserts that its natural prototype is the
tapir (I) (Fig. 16). We are informed by Dennis,” that the Etruscans symbolized

* Die Gattung Torpedo in ihren naturhistorischen und antiquarischen Beziehungen. J. F. M. v. Olfers, Trans.
Berlin Academy, 1831, pl. 3, fig. 3.

‘rRawlinson, Five An. Monarchies, etc., l. c.

t Layard, the Monuments of Nineveh, l. c.

g Roulin, M.——Ann. Sci. Naturelles, 1839, vol. XVIII, pl. 5.

fl Etruria, I, 220.

292 AN ANALYSIS on THE

Fig. m.

   
    
 

. nut
M!~\'\F\\

' NR

' .\\x‘

“e se-

 
   
 

/ rt‘

, l

  
   

 

Roulin‘s Tapir-Grifiin.
destructiveness in the griffin, and that its several parts were representative
of aerial with terrestrial rapacity. After the same manner the hippichthys,
was held to be a union in the flesh of the earth and the sea—an amphibious
art-form denoting a .soul in a state of transition. However much the spirit of
speculation may enter into our attempts to interpret such symbols, of this, there
can be no doubt, that many of them in their purer forms clearly expressed complex
ideas.* Ferguson in speaking of the Turanians (i. 6., the central western Asian
races), remarks: “With them it is not sufficient that a God should be colossal,
he must be symbolical; he must have more arms and legs, more heads, than
common man; he must have wings and attributes of power, or must combine the
strength of a lion or a bull with the intellect of humanity.” “We cannot,” says
Montaigne, “ couple common faculties, such as our own, with the other faculties that
astonish us, and are so far out of our sight. Therefore it is, that we give such savage
form to demons; and who does not give Tamerlane great eyebrows, wide nostrils,
a dreadful face, and a prodigious stature, according to the imagination he has con—
ceived in us, by the report of his name ‘3” Here is the motive which accounts for
much apparent extravagance. As closely allied to the foregoing, may we not find in
the wild and otherwise almost expressionless combinations of the Aztec paintings a
faint meaning suggested by clearer methods? The curious composition of a death’s-
head and insect might resolve itself into a symbol of the leaf-devouring locustq"

(Fig. 17).

 

Composite of Aztec design.

* Hist. of Architecture,Ferguson, I, 51. ’r Codex Viennensis, Kingsborough 0011., pl. 1.

LIFE-FORM IN ART. 293

The hypothesis of Ehrenberg* that the Sphinx-head was derived from that of the
baboon is ingenious if not in full harmony with the theory of Birch]r that this mystic
form is of Indian origin—and is part of the primeval stock of “daemons of terrific
form, who roam as bears and lions through the vast forest, or rest in the mountain’s
caverned sides.” The figure of a leonine monster, common among Chinese wood-
carving, is undoubtedly a lion, as can be seen by comparing it with the Sinhas of
the Hindoo—Buddhistie ornament. It is a noteworthy fact that the flank of this image
is marked by a stellated figure, almost identical with an ornament similarly placed
in the Hindoo Sinhas, in the Assyrian lion (Layard, pl. 131), in the Moslem animal
figures (Murray, leiii), and in the Egyptian lion (Lepsius, A, vol. II, pl. 89).

(7a.) The Zoo-Myth. It would be an error to suppose, however, that “monsters,”
either by addition of parts like unto themselves, or of combinations of diverse natures,
are of necessity symbolical. Many of these have doubtless originated through miscon-
ception of the shapes of little known animals.

What we may term fabulous animals in the proper sense of that term, that is
those drawn up from fabulous aecounts,———may be placed in this division of conven-
tionalisms. We can readily explain their appearance in art by one word—ignorance.

A migrating people no longer content with the products of their own land, and
endeavoring to secure advantages by incursions into another, would, naturally
encounter many novel forms of life. The more striking of these would be accredited
to the miraculous or the monstrous. Shapes when thus once established, might
persist for an indefinite time and serve in their turn to furnish models for yet another
series. When we recall the narrow limits which sometimes separate faunas, as for
example the deep channel of but fifteen miles in width, which flows between the
islands of Bali and Lombok, and serving as the boundary between the Indo—Malayan
and the Austro-Malayan faunas; or what is better known, though less distinctive,
‘ the narrow Dardanelles, which divide the Asian from the Mediterranean life,—it is a
matter of surprise that figures of exotic forms are not more frequently seen in the
primitive art record.

‘Vhat will apply to the invader is true of the invaded, conceding of course that
a people thus encountered, is sufficiently advanced to embrace the opportunity of
enriching its own designs. In an Esquimaux drawing in the National Museum. of
‘Vashington, we find recognizable figures of the reindeer, along side of a monstrous
outline significant of nothing that is on the face of the earth, or in the waters under

* Ueber (lenOynocephalus und den Sphinx der Egyptien, etc, Trans. Berlin Acad., 1834.
‘r Birch, Egyptian Antiq., I, 2‘26.

1 The Malayan Archipelago, Wallace, 45.

A. P. s.——v0L. XV. 3T.

294 AN ANALYSIS or THE

the earth. Lubbock,* in speaking of similar outlines, ascribes their origin, very
happily we think, to the figure-head of some vessel which had been seen by the
native artist.

The ship itself may become a part of the mythic system, if we are to credit
the following,—which is thought to refer to the first remembered appearance in
the Euphrates, of ships from a civilized country, and of the introduction into
Chaldea of the arts of civilizied life :‘t “In the first year there appeared an animal
destitute of reason, by name Oannes, whose whole body was that of a fish with
feet also similar to those of a man. * "' * This being was accustomed to pass the day
among men, * * * and When the sun was set 23‘ * 3‘ retired again to the sea, and passed
the night in the deep.” \Ve have abundant evidence that ships have at all times
impressed coast-haunting tribes with wonder. The Aztecs: called the vessels of
Cortez “water-houses,” and faithfully recorded after their fashion, every particular
concerning them.§

As an illustration of the difficulty encountered by an artist in representing an
object with which he is not familiar, we may cite the following:

It is well known“ that when the Spaniards under Cortes landed on the coast of
Mexico, they were subjected to delays prior to their march to the capital. During
this time some of the natives hovering about the invaders, were observed sketching.
Fac—similes of these drawings are to be found in the Kingsborough Collec-
tionfll We find among them figures of the soldiers, priests, ships, horses, etc.
The artists had apparently no difficulty in representing the warrior and the priest, for
they differed from their own people only in color and costume. But the horse had
evidently puzzled them. It was a novel shape, and their conventional lines were not
mobile enough to receive it. It was natural, under the circumstances for them to
represent it as a puma (Fig. 19), for this figure they had repeatedly drawn. This
puma-headed horse might well have stood for some such expression as the following,
had written language been employed: “The soldiers are in part mounted upon
strange animals, whose necks and tails are furnished with long hair, and whose single
toe—nail of eaCh foot is encased in a stone-like shoe.” Afterward the horse was more

* Prehistoric Times, p. 570, new edition.
+Prehistoric Nations, Baldwin, p. 186.
1 Conquest of Mexico, Prescott, I, 304.

§ Sir Walter Raleigh, following the prevalent belief of his times, thought that (log-headed men inhabited El
Dorado, i. e., the Valley of the Amazon. Humboldt says of this statement, “that it was a gigantic lie.” Kingsley
(Miscellanies, Ticknor & Fields, 1859, p. 31) remarks that they were probably Indians, wearing animal masks,

probably from the Aguara-head.
|| Conquest of Peru, Prescott, I, 304-. HT Codex Reminensis, pl. 3?.

LIFE-FORM IN ART. 295

 

Mounted Spaniards 0f Aztec Design.

accurately drawn (Fig. 20).* N 0w let it be supposed that the Spaniard immediately
after this incursion had withdrawn from the coast—is it not possible that the puma-
headed figure would have passed into the traditions of the Aztecs as a fabulous visi-
tor? Nor is it asserting too much to say that under similar circumstances a Centaur-
like myth might have thus sprung into existence ; for we are told that the horse ex-
cited great alarm in the minds of the Peruvians upon witnessing the Spanish cavalry
dismount ; “these simple people thinking that the rider and the horse were, one.”‘f‘
(i) The Errors of Naturalists in depicting Animals. In proof of the manner
in which figures of exotic animals may undergo modifications, even when drawn for
zoological purposes, we may allude to the history of the Walrus as given by Gray};
(Fig. 21). Surely this figure is no more than the merest dream-portrait of Trichetus,

  
  
 
    

      
   

     

Fig. 21.
7'; v .
9.3. 4’ W
o — ,
DIS’J" v» ‘ a.
gazsefgaf"
F .3,ij22’3',

   

Figure of Walrus. after Olaus Magnus.

yet it was at one time, no doubt, a fair diagrammatic expression of what was
known of its proportions.
Paré§ has given us an illustration of a combat between an elephant and

* Codex Bodleianae, Kingsborough 0011., pl. 41.

‘1 Conquest of Peru, Prescott, I, 254.

1 Attitudes and Figures of the Morse, J. E. Gray, Proc. Z001. Soc. of Lond. 1853, p. 112.
55, The works of that famous chirurgeon, Ambroise Pare, (Trans) London, 1649, p. 45.

3296

AN ANALYSIS OF THE

a rhinoceros. The animals are placed in most amusing attitudes.

The elephant
with tusks pointing upward as in the above figure of the walrus, advances With

lowering head, using his proboscis as a weapon of offense.

The description and figure of the opossum* (as we interpret it) given by the

\\\\E
d ' \\
*\\

\
x
\‘

K\\\

\y‘“
. .\.
\

\\\\§\\\
\ii‘ \\\\.
\l

xx
' iii.
\ir

\\
ill

)

\ '\\
..\x\

aim“.
in .
l

l
\

/‘ ‘

       
  

J
i\\

{\l

\

“u

\\
\

,J. m)“

\ M
.1 \\\\
munium

;\\\\

\\’;

Didelphian Mammal from Ineari.1n design.
same writer, is worth mentioning in this connection.

The absurdity of the elaborate
figure of Gresner, from whom Pare quotes, is only equaled by the fidelity to the

idea preserved in the rude and uncmbellished outline (Fig. 22), of the opposum-like
animal drawn by a native artist.

One of the most curious of all mal-constructions
is found in Aldrovandusxi’ It is the figure of a saw—fish, given as a cetacean, with

the saw in the position of a horn projecting forward from the middle of the head
(Fion 23). It is an easy task to explain these absurdities. They are all dependent

 
  
  
  

     
 

Fig. 23 i
\ :3 ‘2“.
‘ “n
\ 59,,
{3" fig
".5? \“- "/_ _ '\
\Mner' ’6'
KW) “‘ ‘ . M “We?
”Mk: V" 4 M1
an .MM mm" \
MM‘v,’ v v Weiss.» \
-- ‘ w‘x‘ukil. d’v “my.“ \
‘ - WW 8%wi .~\ .
\l- , ‘0 \« ' .\ n \
Mu 'flxwiim. we.
' \ . .' ‘ “9t \
“if? saiéggggpw \l
‘ . A
Q3331?"

Figure 0f Saw-Fish, after Aldrovandus.

upon attempts either to reconstruct an entire figure from a fragment—or in endow-

* Kingsborough COIL, IV, (Dupaix). (lncnrian box-lid.)
JrAldrovandus, Pisces, p. 695.

LIFE-FORM IN ART. 297

ing an animal which is of unknown habits with functions in harmony with those
familiar to the writer. The walrus and elephant tusks, and the saw-fish’s maxillaa
doubtless found their way to European museums long before the illiterate traders
who brought them, could give any other accounts than those into which their
imagination largely entered. The naturalist would draw the tusks of the walrus
and elephant in the position of the wild boar, the only animal he had ever seen which
possessed such appendages.

Akin to the above are the numerous examples which crowd the zoological
record of errors of identification of actual forms. For the explanation of the fact
that Aldrovandus* described the shriveled skin of a plagiostomatous fish as the
remains of a dragon (Fig. 24), we have only to look .over the distorted specimens

Fig. 24.

   

        
  

"‘\‘~ 2

ix\\\\\\\\\i , ”/

          
  

\
\
r
- \
‘2;
‘

W

,m , *.
i

i
‘\

r)

sag?

Figure of Ray, after Aldrovandus.

of every ichthyological cabinet. We could fill many pages with this kind of illus—
tration, but will content ourselves with referring to one of the most curious of them.
Leibnitz, who was gifted with a marvelous intellect in which it has been said,
“ mathematics and moral philosophy, history and philology for the first time found a
common seat,” was so far led astray as to describe the bones of a rhinoceros as those
of a unicorn, and to attempt to restore them in normal position (Fig. 25). The
tusk in this figure evidently did not belong to the rest of the skeleton. “This skele-
ton of the unicorn was found,” says he, “ with the hind part of the body reclining as
is usual with animals, but the head elevated, bearing on the front a .long extended
horn of nearly five cubits, of the thickness of the leg of a man.”‘l’ That a fossil
unicorn had existed in past times, when, in common with all cotemporaries, the
author believed that a unicorn was to be found in Abyssinia, was after all a natural
* Aldrovandus, Pisces, 316.

+Physicam Generalem, Chymiam, Medicam, Botan. Ilistor. Natur. eta, 1778.

2298 AN ANALYSIS or THE

Fig. 25.

 

A restoration of the Unicorn, after Leibnitz.

inference. Itiis the first step that costs ; once having accepted the existence of the
unicorn, the rest was easy.

Even When an actual animal is described,——0ften figuratively, never faultlessly,
-—-is there not a wide margin left for error to roam over? In a scientific sense, the hip-
popotamus described by Herodotusf‘ as having the hoof of an ox, and the mane and
tail of a horse, is of course absurd; in an artistic sense, a quadruped thus hoofed and
maned would be simply monstrous. The intention of Herodotus to convey the notion
that the hippopotamus was an animal combining OK and horse-like characters was cer—
tainly successfully carried out by the use of figurative expressions, which, so far

from suggesting a portrait of the creature itself, would directly misleadfl,‘

* Swayne’s Herodotus, 50.

tThere is a curious example of this kind of misinterpretation in Retsch’s outline drawings of Goethe’s Faust. In
the first scene with Mephistopholes a poodle (which contains, as a “nucleus,” the essence of the demon) undergoes

transformation.
“ FAUST. Er hebt sich mit Grew-alt 1

Das ist nioht eines Hundes Gesfalt .’ -
Welch ein Gespenst bracht’ ich ins Hans I
Schon sieht er wie ein Nilpferd ans,
Mit feurig'en Augen, schrecklichem Gebiss.”
Retsch draWS as appearing before the eyes of the astonished Faust, not a liiplmpotamus. (Nilpferd) but an

(enormous poodle.

LIF E-FORM IN ART. 299

SECTION VI. The Dragon. The myths which have been grouped under the
name of “dragon,” are of such diverse character, and have been through so many
ages associated with popular fancies, that we have thought it of interest to give some
account of its possible origin and meaning.

The Asiatic dragon is evidently a very different form from the European. At
least the “fabulous animal ”. of Chinese and Japanese ornament, is based apparently
on the salamander type of body, with bird-like feet. This is well shown in recent
examples of this design upon Japanese bronzes. The heads are more nondescript,
and are furnished with some piscine characters, such as barbels, and an outline sug-
gesting the catfish-like fishes found in the waters about Japan. The early form of
the European dragon, according to Aldrovandus (l. 0.), is probably based upon the
lizard type. It is scaled, and has a well-marked lacertilian body, and, it may be a
mammalian head. The tail and neck are often those of a serpent. The artistic
interpretation of the dragon varies from the realistic forms of Durer, who, in his St.
George, favors us with a very fair zoological figure of a lizard, through the humanized
bat-winged outlines of Giotto, to the curious compound of owl and serpent of Lucas V.
Leyden, and the equally odd combination of man and insect of Martin Schoen. There
is no doubt that much of this kind of work is purely whimsical. It is quite impossi-
ble to surmise with any nearness to truth what the models were like from which they
sprung. The combination of parts sometimes suggests that rapacity was'always in-
tended; and at least in the latter forms of the myth it has been the symbol of oppres-
sion and cruelty.

In a Very curious pamphlet* preserved in the library of the Academy of Natural
Sciences of Philadelphia, an elaborate effort is made to prove that the dragon was
extant at the latter part of the last century. From a vast amount of evidence the
author favors us with the following description of this animal: “The dragon is from
eight to nine feet long, rarely more. Its color varies ; commonly red, it is at times of
a black or ash color. The heads of some individuals are crested, and the jaws are
furnished with sharp teeth. The mouth can be opened to an extiiaordinary extent.
The wings, which are without feathers and resemble those of a bat, maintain flight
with some difficulty. The body is covered with scales of such strength that they
have resisted balls. The strength of the dragon is such it can engage .the eagle and
the elephant to. advantage. The tail is no less feared than its mortal bite. It is used
with success in squeezing the prey, or striking it when thrown to the ground.”

'The congruity of parts expressed in such a creature, which is “ neither fish, flesh,
fowl, nor good red herring,” was probably prominent with those who have a lingering

* On the History of the Dragon. 0. I.. M. Dorfeuille.

300 AN ANALYSIS or THE

belief that the origin of the dragon is to be found in the remnants of the paleozoic world

“Where,” in the language of Thackaray, “mighty monsters floundered through the

ooze—and dragons darted out of the caves and waters before man was made to Slay

them.” Mr. VVaterhouse Hawkins, the well-known scientific artist, entertains the be-

lief that the dragon is a reminiscence of an extinct reptilian shape, noticeably the

Pterodactylian type. We cannot agree with him in such a conclusion. The form OI

the dragon is not a fixed one, and its varieties can better be accounted for by reference

to familiar models than in seeking figures among such absolute novelties. Amid all

the combinations making the dragon, the idea is cramped and limited. He is a mere
piece of of patch-work—a monster by addition—each portion, when dissected, turns

out to be an old acquaintance—here a bird—foot, there an owl’s head, or a serpent’s tail.
Indeed who could expect man to have reconstructed to such suggestive forms the im-'
pression of a Pterodactyl, possibly received from a fossil! Surely after the blunder of a

Leibnitz, we may well declare the average man of the Middle Ages, if not of an earlier
time, diSqualified to testify on such a topic. To say that by coincidence man may

have invented a “fabulous creature” like unto those that have lived in the past, is to

make an assertion which cannot be supported. Man has never invented a single artistic
figure. He has analyzed and infinitely re—arranged the integers of organic form,
but he has never in all his vagaries or in his groupings after truth struck out a new

form.

Fig. 25.

 

Dragon, after Aldrovandus.

*Prof. E. D. Cope (Synop. of the Batrach. and Reptilia of N. A. Trans. Philo. Soe., Philn., 1870, 182) remarks
that the “restored figure of Mosasaurus is not badly represented by old Pontoppidan’sfigure of his sea-serpent, and that
in‘this group of reptiles we almost realize the fictions of snake-like dragons an .1 sea—serpents in which men have been
ever prone to indulge.”

LIFE-FORM 1N .urr. 301

PART 11.
THE STUDY OF VARIANTS.

SECTION I. General Remarks. Mr. Tylor in his work on Primitive Culture has
treated of the several articles composing the armamentarium of early man as species.
Thus the hatchet is a species, so are bows, arrows, etc. We have taken a hint from
this and believe it to be instructive to call the forms of life of the art-record “species.”
The range within which they are encountered may be termed the limits of distribu-
tion, and the forms in this way included, as the faunae or florae respectively. The
Asio-European lion, for example, has a distribution from Chaldea to Western Europe.
Its varieties have established themselves along the route of man’s migration and are
seen to vary in style from the Chaldean to that of the modern stone-cutter. It is
convenient to push the comparison between an archaeological and a zoological pro-
cess yet farther and name the ways by which a given species may be represented
as variants of that species, adopting a term already employed by Bunsen in his re-
searches among the Egyptian ideographs, and by Abbe Brasseur de Bourbourg
among the Aztec. '

This history of an art-species is in some cases almost as definite as that of the people
of whose remains it constitutes a part. It is evident, therefore, that the study Of variants
should go hand in hand with chronology. With it, we can trace with ease their muta-
tions and prove the order of their succession; Without it—the premises falsely as-
sumed—imagination may select the forms and specious reasoning determine their
positions.

But are we on that account to restrict our studies to cultured races ? No, if we can
find standards of comparison among the forms themselves ; and as the zoologist seeks
for standards by which to classify living objects, so the student of art, we hope to
show, can secure in the art remains of a given people certain types of construction.
These may be in harmony with chronology; and if so, their value is doubtless in-
creased. But even without this aid we believe they can be made interesting. In
proportion as the material for the elimination of such types is more or less complete,
so will the types themselves be more, or less accurate, a conclusion again in exact
harmony with the results of the naturalists’ method. In a word we propose to study
the animal form in art as though it were a natural form, employing chronology, when
we can, as an accessory of acknowledged value.

In studying variants we propose the use of the following terms :

The primitive designs found in painting, etc., we term primals.

A. P. S.—VOL. XV. 3U.

302 AN ANALYSIS or THE

The final forms resulting from a series of variants starting with the primals we
term ultimates. By divergence of variants from the primal stock (one to the letter
type, and the other to the realistic) we must have to every primal two ultimate forms.
‘ By a radical is meant that figure which preserves the essential lines of a natural
series of variants. It is best seen in forms leading to an ideographic system. The diffi-
culty of distinguishing a primal from the equally naked and unsuggestive letter-ulti-
mate is apparent, and without aid from another source is often impossible.

Radicals will necessarily vary according to the method of execution. The parts
which are produced with the greatest ease are naturally those which persist in the
process of reducing a complex form to its simplest expression. In drawing, stress will
be laid on the lines; in moulding, the lines will be subordinated to the general figure,
as shaped by the figures. The picture radicals will thus differ from'fictile radicals, as
also will architectural and numismatic radicals. Neither should it be forgotten that
to the females of many tribes has the work been allotted of ornamenting the pottery
and other articles, While the recording of exploits, etc., has been reserved to the males.

In presenting a number of variants from a few types of life we propose the follow-
ing method:

A radical will be taken, which has been developed through many variations from,
a primal form. The time required to have accomplished this is, in every instance,
unknown. We must assume from what we see in the art of savages that in figure-mak-
ing, as in everything else of man’s creatiOn, there has been an ever-active though gradual
process of evolution at work; and that in the primals of an art series this has but
begun. Neither can we form any idea from contemplating the ultimate expressions
of forms belonging to old and cultured races what their crude primals may have been.
Such imperfections of the art—record compel us to take the radical as it is presented
and trace from this the most probable ultimate rather than to take the ultimate and
trace it back to its radical.

Let us accept A to be a primal, and B an ultimate, and C a radical. \Ve cannot

 

conceive the Egyptian lion at B, to have sprung at once into a realistic ultimate,
but rather that it has been evolved from the unknown primal. at A. And we infer
that C is a letter-type abridgment of B. a descent from the completeness of the

1.1 FE-FonM IN ART. 303

artistic figure, but nevertheless a sequence of it. The natural order of the compari-
son would be from B to C, the chronology being given. But we think it may prove
more interesting in reviewing the entire range of art—in many portions of which we
have no literary complement—to present the problem and seek the solution rather
than to give the solution and create the problem.

From the study of variants, the following conclusions may be drawn :

(1.) That the conditions determining the forms of variants must be exceedingly
diverse. A full series may be confined-within the space of a sheet of manuscript——
as is often the case in the Dresden Codex, or (as may be seen) in the ornamentation
of a batch of earthen pots of the same baking. On the other hand, a series may
extend through the entire art-range of a given people—and taken many years to have
completed.

(2.) That it is necessary to remember that in some phases of variants, a single
feature will be selected from a complex form and serve as the basis of a distinct series
of changes. Thus the curve of the open mouth of the serpent seen in profile, and the
rattle at the end of its tail, are often dismembered from the rest of the trunk, as
though they were parts of a mosaic,vand allowed to exist separately. The occurence
of this dismemberment proves that the type is not concrete. One cannot imagine
the Egyptian sign >< (priest) being rendered by either or 9 . for one
is as essential to / 6) the other as a cross is t) the i letter 1’.
\Vhen, in speaking of a form, like the genus Hydra, which permits self-division,
a likelihood exists of the severed parts surviving, a low type of organization is
thereby implied. “

(3.) As one in studying the water—lily, finds the petals gradually turning into
stamens as he passes in observation from the margin to the centre of the flower, so
we find strange transitions occuring in the many-times repeated objects of early art ;
transitions so strange that unless we carefully observe them we would have declared
them to be improbable.

(4.) In Aztec design so vast is the labyrinth of shifting form, so slight the
thread 0f consistency that guides 11s through it, so cumbersome, whimsical and
tasteless, is much of its ornament, that'it is no wonder that we are occasionally
puzzled, and sometimes defeated in our attempts to identify its objects. The outline
for example, may stand for a human leg, a hand, and a human face seen in
profile. In some instances we have been unable to name outlines, and guessed
only at others. The latter we have withheld from the series illustrating Aztec
design, and can conscientiously say of such what Prescott* would say of the whole,

* Conquest of Mexico, l, 104._

304 AN ANALYSIS OF THE

that “the fantastic forms of hieroglyphic symbols may afford analogies for almost
anything.”

Fig. 26.

I"

 

Associated variants of parrot, Dresden Codex.

(5.) The often repeated signs of apparently the same value, so common in Aztec
art, must express a repetition of the same idea. Were it otherwise, the ideographs
would degenerate into the figures of a pattern. We must acknowledge that repeti-
tion is often a law of force. Such expressions as “Hail, hail, hail, Macbeth!” and
“Holy, holy, holy, art thou Lord of Hosts!” are strengthenings,—the result of unions
of simple factors. After the same method the parrot-head sign $29 of the Dresden
Codex is emphasized by _ _‘ II as though the meaning were : “ Great, great,
‘ is this symbol.” But in a zoological sense repetition of similar parts—or, as
it is technically termed, “vegetative repetition,”—is an evidence of low organiza-
tion. An idea when repeated through its symbol is thereby emphasized, but when a
form or part of a form not symbolic, is repeated, it remains the same, or exists with
impaired vitality. Should this reflection prove true, we may determine the value
of certain variants by their positions and number as well as by their form.

Before enterng upon the subject of variants, a series of ultimates may be sought
for among the higher phases of art-portraiture, the members of which may be termed
“types.” Thus the following ultimate forms of lion-heads of Asia, Egypt and

Europe, are presented as art-types, many of which have never sat as models for
lineal abridgments, or radicals.

Thefullfaced Lion Head with muzzle lines. This series is designed to exhibit the
style of lion-head marked by pronounced labiate or muzzle lines.

LIFE-FORM IN ART. 305

LION WITH MUZZLE LINES.
Fig. 27. 0*) m Fig. 28. (+) Fig. 29. (1)

 

Roman. Etruscan. Roman.
Fig. 30. (§) Fig". 31. (1]) Fig. 32. ('{D Fig. 33. (**)

 

,‘,.i,...i;\
E».

       

Etruscan. Greek. Egyptian. Egyptian.
Fig. 34. (H) Fig. 35. (ii) '1 Fig. 36. (§§)
I \ '
[I 'L\
H «
WM

     

Assyrian. Assyrian. Persian .

* From a Roman sarcophagus.

1' From an Etruscan bronze at the Campodoglio.

2t Mus. Borbonico, VIII, tab. 61.

§ L’Italie avant 1a domination des Romains, M. J. Micali, Paris. 1826, pl. 92, 2.
|| Mus. Borbonico, LXII, fig. 2.

‘1 IIirt. Trans. Ber. Acad., 182], p]. 4, fig. 35.

** Biroh Selections of Egyptian Art in British Museum.

H Botta, Monuments do N inive, IV, pl. 151.

11‘ Botta, Monuments (1e Ninive, II, pl. 47.

§§ Flandin at Coste, Voyage en Perse, p]. 102.

306 AN ANALYSIS OF THE

The Profile Lion Head. In a series of profile heads confined to Western Asia,
it is probable that Fig. 37 was derived by abridgment from a model such as Fig. 41,
or even 42, permitting Fig. 40, an Etruscan form, to come between. The pertinence of
an Etruscan outline in a series of this kind, may be doubted by many. Is the
resemblance between these heads any less exact than between. many figures of
Etruscan and Persian, and even Mesopotamian art, as seen in Micali and Lajard ?

Fig. 37. (*) Fig. 38. (+) Fig. 39. (1) Fig. 40. (s) Fig. 41. (n) » Fig. 42. (a)

3»:
/

  
 

WI?»
' )&5

   

In a second series of profile heads selected from Persian and Etrurian sources,
we hope that the order of the figures, and the references at the bottom of the page
will serve for sufficient explanation. It is highly instructive that the ultimate (Fig.
49) is the source of the abridgment (Fig. 43). At first sight, it would appear absurd
to associate a Persian outline with another in Etruria. But a comparison between
many figures of Inghrami, Mieali and Lajard, must convince the observer that more
than a superficial resemblance exist between Persian and Etruscan figures, however,
the historian may explain it. And we ’assume from what we have seen in the
lion heads (Figs. 28 and 30), as well as from the series to be presented, that the art-
forms of Etruria were moulded upon types which originated in Asia and Egypt.”

* Travels in Georgia, Persia, Armenia, Babylonia. 810., Sir R. K. Porter, Loml., 1831, opp., 13. 4‘24.
‘r Culte dé Mithrae, F. Lajard, pl 37.

j: Lajard, l. 6., pl. 25, fig. 6.

§Micali, l. c., pl. 24.

fl Rawlinson, Auc. Mom, 1. 6., III. 334,

ST Layard, l. c.

LIFE-FORM IN ART. 307

Fig. 43. (*) Fig- 44. (i) Fig. 45. (1;) Fig. 46. (s)

     

Fig. 47. '(11) Fig. 48. (1T) Fig. 49. (H)
.$45Wfl
Q s
Q»

%

The transition is from hair-tuft 43 to Fig. 46, and from that to the horn of
unicorn-like figures, Fig. 47 to 49.

The Greek Lion—Head. It is very evident from the above groupings of lion-
heads, both full—faced and profile, that it would be a difficult matter to select any one
head from the forms of a given art—fauna and proclaim for it representative features.
Thorwaldsen, we are informed by his biographer, M. Theile, in modeling the lion-
head for the Lucerne monument, carefully studied the antique form and the modern
styles derived thence. (Fig. 50.) In another design of the same animal he as

\\\D\_

K K

 

* Lajard, l. 0., pl. 97.

’r Lajard, l. 0., pl. 19.

,t Flandin et Coste, Voyage en l’erse, Paris, 1844. pl. 69.
3' An. Mon., Rawlinson.

1| Lajard, l. 0., pl. 43.

‘T Lajard, l. 0., pl.13.

** Inghra'ui, l. 6., II, p‘. 138.

308 AN ANALYSIS or THE

Fig. 50. (*)

   

Thorwaldsen’s lion, after the antique. Thorwaldsen’s lion from nature.

carefully studied the natural model. (Fig. 51.) These two heads, therefore, are
very fair examples of a conventionalized and natural art-form. The distinctions pre—
‘ sented in the two figures are so great that comment is unncessary. VVe allude to

the subject to contrast Thorwaldsen’s conception of the antique head with that of
Ruskin’s. (Fig. 52.)

Fig. 52. (1) Fig. 54. (u)

     

Modern Lion-head. Lion-head, after Caylus. Lion-head, after Hamilton.

This critic claims for Fig. 52 (to condemn it), that it represents a modern conven-
tionalized lion—head treated after the Greek method. It surely belongs to the variety
of the lion without muzzle lines which is not the typical Greek head, but rather an
aberrant expression not often seen (Fig. 53), and is best marked on the vases
'—the source perhaps of the “reconstruction,” criticised by Mr. Ruskin.

THE PALM-TREE.

SECTION II. The Palm- Tree. The palm-tree is one of the most conspicuous
figures in the art of ‘Vestern Asia, and the countries bordering upon the Medi-

* Thorwaldsen and his works, edited by J. M. Theile, Trans. by Sindling. N. Y.. 1869, ll. 1)]. 108.

+Ibid, II, pl. 153.

iLectures on Art and Painting, John Ruskin, 1854, pl. 11, fig. 18.

§Recuei1d’Antiq. Egyptienne, Estrusques, Greques, et. Romaines, Caylus, Paris, 1761—67, I, pl. 56.

[1 Hamilton, Sir W. A collection of Etruscan, Greek and Roman Antiquities. London, 1797.

LIFE-FORM IN ART. 309

terranean Sea. Among the variants we have ventured to assign to this origin, there
are at least six, which at first sight have no connection with one another :

‘ Fig. 55.
. ,2 ‘\ 1. m .
a”)? an ..
A CD

A- (*) 11 (’r) C- (1‘) 13- (§) 13- (Ii) F- (ii)

(A.) The Sacred Tree of Assyria.

The first is seen upon the head-dress of Babylonian figures, and would appear
from the following sequence to be a miniature representation of the Assyrian Sacred

Tree.

Fig. 56. (H) Fig. 57. (H) Fig 58. (m Fig. 59. (gg)

iii SE.

 

 

 

(8.) The Palm-Tree proper.

The second is a figure of the entire tree found upon a cylinder and securing for

us through two variants, an origin in the conventional palm of Persia.

* From dress of Babylonian king, Rawlinson, Five An. Monarchies, III, 400.

+ From Babylonian cylinder, Sabaean Researches, John Landseer, Lond. 1823.

1 Egyptian hieroglyphic “Bunch of Dates,” Bunsen, I, 521. This figure has not been faithfully rendered. In
the main features, however, it is correct.

§ Persian figure upon coin. Wilson, Antiquities, and Coins of Afghanistan, pl. 15, f. 23. The central shaft
should unite all the transverse pieces. Prof. Lesley believes this to be of Egyptian origin.

[1 Greek honeysuckle ornament. Hope’s Ancient Costumes, 1, 72.

1f Ornament upon Etruscan tablet. Dennis, Etruria, I, 52.

**-H' Same as fig. 1, from lower border of the king’s dress.

it From Layard, l. 0., Rawlinson, ibid., II, 235.

§§ The Assyrian Sacred Tree, Layard, Nineveh and its Remains, II, 233.
A. P. s.—-—v0L. xv. 3v.

310 AN ANALYSIS on THE
Fig. 62. (i)

Fig. 60. (*) Fig. 61- (+)

        

(0.) The “Bunch of Dates.”

"\ ,. The third bears in many respects resemblance to the above figures. It, how-
ever, is from an Egyptian source. It stands alone; no forms intervening be—
tween it and the' Mesopotamian model aid us in its identification. Chronology

here comes to our assistance. It is described by Bunsen as the bunch of dates.

(D.) The Greco-Persian Palm.

In the fourth, found upon a Persian tomb, we have an ultimate which may have
originated in the transverse lines of Fig. 61. Development of this feature of the

palm-tree illustration is conspicuously seen in Fig. 64; also of a Persian source,
Fig. 65. (1r)

Fig. 63. (g) Fig- 64-, (II)

@‘flfli

   

acquaintance with which introduces us to the elaborate and characteristic ornament
of ancient Persia, Fig. 65, where the model is much disguised by Greek accessories.
It is interesting to notice that this development, based as it is upon the acanthus leaf

* Same as B. Fig. 55 (enlarged).

+Persian palm-tree. Rawhnson, ibid., III, 342. See also Rawlinson I, 433.

1Persian palm-tree. Rawlinson, ibid., IV, 822.

§Wi1son, l. c.
_ | From Persian ornamentation. Travels in Persia, Porter.

1 Ibid., pl. 62. For the sake of convenience, but one half (the left) of this symmetrical design has been figured.

LIFE-FORM IN ART. , 311

and bud, is hereengrafted upon a purely Eastern stock, and yet preserving a curious
mimetic relationship with the florid leaf and vine design so common in our own
decorations, and which, as is well known, is almost exclusively of acanthian origin.

The remaining ultimates, fifth and simth, find their respective models as 1007'-
tz'ons only of the conventionalized palm. Thus the objects of Fig. 65 are derivative
of the foliage of the Assyrian palm, while those from 65 to 73 inclusive are obtained
from the so-called “ ram’s horn” of the Assyrian Sacred Tree.

(E.) The “ Honeysuckle.”

Fig. 66.
7 \I
p m. K W\ \% - . c
6&4“ Wily gage, :9 4.
(*) (i) (1) (§) (ll) 6*
OJ
6"
('H')
a, transverse bands ; I), b, “ ram’s horn ;” c, rays ; (2, base of rays.

The first four of these outlines are examples of the honeysuckle ornament which
is so largely represented upon articles of Greek workmanship, and from these copied
into later European art. N 0 one design is more frequently seen. Under many
graceful modifications we meet with it over our door-ways and upon the cornices of
our dwellings and public buildings. It enters into our patterns of woven stuffs and
wall papers. It is well nigh the universal basis for symmetrical design. One of the
most striking of its modifications is the shell and acorn ornament abundantly used by
Michel Angelo, 011 thetceiling of the Sistine Chapel at Rome.

We are indebted to Layard** for our knowledge of the influence exerted upon
Greek design by the Assyrian monuments. According to this writer, the “similarity
between the Assyrian and Greek ornament is not accidental. * * * It seems to be
proved beyond a question,.by the alternation of the lotus or tulipfi'f’ whatever this
flower may be, with the honeysuckle. * * * The same ornament occurs in India on
a lath erected by Asoka, at Allahabad (about B. C. 250); but whether introduced
by the Greeks—which, from the date of the erection of the monument, shortly after
the Macedonian invasion, is not improbable—or whether derived from another source,
I cannot venture to decide.”

*Ornament on cuirass, Hope’s Anc. Cost, I, pl. 72 HLayard, from Allahabad. l. 0., 232
+Ibid., I, pl. 75. filRawlinson, l. c.

iLayard, Nineveh and its Remains, II, 231. ** Layard, l. 0., II, 232.

§ Ibid., II, 231. H We have ventured to call this caliciform.

312 AN ANALYSIS OF THE

(F.) The “Ram’s Horn.” While found together with much that is of Greek
origin in Etruria, the honeysuckle variant of the palm is less frequently determined
than that of the figure of the ram’s horn. The point of greatest constancy here
presented is the transverse band uniting a pair of horns which are so arranged that
their convexities are opposed. In the model {i Fig. 66, this is conspicuous. In Figure
69 a single band'is seen, as is also the ease in the simple forms, Figures 67 and 68.
The upper and lower portions of the horn-like figures are given in the last two of
these ; but the upper half of the design is absent in Figure 67.

Fig. 67. (9%) Fig. 68. (’r) Fig.69. (i) Fig. 70. (s) Fig. 71. (1|)
\ 6

 

Fig. 72. (17) Fig. 73- (**)

 

The lettering of Figs. 68 to 75 to be same as Tl Fig. 66.

* Dennis, Etruria, I, 52.

+ Dennis, Etruria, I, 52.

1 Dennis, Etruria, 1, 52.

§ Micali, l. 0., pl. '73.

H Micali, l. 6., pl. 23.

1T From ornament found at Praeneste. R. Garrucei, Archaeologia, XLI, pl. 10, 206.

** Bone spoon found in Isis tomb. Dennis, Etruria7 I, 424.

H Ornament upon the head-dress of lion, found at Praeneste. R. Garrucci, Archaeologia, LXI, pl. 5, 206.
ii Ihid., with Fig. 21.

LIFE-FORM IN ART. 313

Fig. 76.

%

Figure 76 might also represent the lower half of either this (Fig. 70) or the one
following, Figure 71. But here we are forced to remember the shape of the calici—
form design found at Allahabad, Fig. 77, more particularly since no connecting

band is seen in Figure 76.
Fig. 77.

Vh~

Were the Asiatic model ever represented as duplicated above and below a given plane,
which would thus serve as a base for both, we would feel inclined to refer Figure 70
, to such. The absence of this band is in our judgment sufficient to prevent such
reference. Were further defence of the position we have taken necessary, we could
refer to the bisected ram’s horn at base of Figure 58, which is almost an exact
inverted counterpart of ultimate F. Fig. 55.

We conceive that the continuous ornament presenting the palm-tree foliage, so
frequently met with in the remains at Nineveh, (Fig. 78,) is composed of the pro-
duced crescents of the ram’s-horn figure turned upward from the vertical to a more
horizontal position, while the upper of the three bands is alone retained. I

Fig. 78.

 

In another variety of this ornament found at the same locality, we find that the
fruit branches have been selected to give emphasis to the design. Thus Figure 79

, Fig. 79 .

"Lilli/.9210 «mg -.

is complete without the ram’s horn appearing in any guise.
Now it is highly probable, judging from the designs here selected, that the
Greeks choose for their continuous ornamentation (Fig. 80) the latter of these,

314 AN ANALYSIS OF THE

viz., the fruit branches, while the Etruscans favored the former, viz., the ram’s horn.
(See especially Figs. 72 and 73.) In the first of these the larger crescents are appa-
rently derived from an Asiatic source, while the smaller would claim for themselves
a Greek origin.

 

SECTION III. The 8673967225. - We have abundant evidence that the serpent
is an universal object of design with rude people, and a frequent one with advanced
races. For consideration of this interesting subject we would refer the reader to the
works mentioned below.* The radicals we have selected have been met with among
the monuments of Central America and Peru. The motive which we assign to the
artists of these countries for reproducing so frequently the ophidian shapes is easily
found in their religion. Preseottt tells us that the serpent was an emblem common
in sacred sculpture in Anahuac. The image of one of their deities was remarkable
for the “huge folds of a serpent, consisting of pearls and precious stones which
coiled round his waist.” In the Aztec calendar the serpent typified time: The most
common representation of Quetzalcoatl was that of“ the serpent.

In Peru, in addition to the figure of the serpent being associated with
images of the human formkas attributes,§ it was at times of votive significance.
When unable to procure an animal for sacrifice, such for example as the puma or
serpent, the Peruvians offered a golden or silver image of the same.“

We have in these statements sufficient reason for attempting to bring into a
series of derivatives a few outlines which we may term the radicals of tile profile
serpent-head. ‘

We find its variants scattered over tropical America in isolated inscriptions, in
the florid picture—records, in the yet more obscure so-called hieroglyphic system, as
well as discerned among the confusing elaboration of carved images.

*The Serpent Symbol, etc., E. G. Squier, New York, 1851 ; Myths of the New World, Brinton, l. c.;_Tree and
Serpent Worship, etc., Jas. Ferguson, Lond., 1868. Many other authorities might be quoted in this connection.

J{Conquest of Mexico, II, 142.

1 Ibid., I, 92.

§Antiquities of Peru, Rievero, 107.

“Conquest of Peru, Prescott, I, 523.

LIFE FORM IN ART, 315

THE RADICALS OF THE PROFILE SERFENT-I—IEAD.

Fig. 81.
6149.2 [7% tag? @S [E E f)
A. (*) B_(+) C. (1) D.(§) E.(I|) F-(‘UG-(H) I-(H)

Radicals of the Serpent—jaw from Aztec and Inearian sources.

Among these nine ilustrations which we have selected from the large
number apparently of the same significance, we detect considerable dissimilarity.
Yet they possess the common feature of presenting two more or less curved lines
joined at an angle. Each of the outlines could be written without the pen leaving
the paper. The angle is the result of a union between a vertically inclined member to
one nearly horizontal. We will endeavor to show (in absence of a chronology, or
the nomenclature of the artists themselves) that these signs represent the two main
lines of the open jaw of the serpent—head seen in profile, and that they are as near
letter-types, as it is impossible to be-with figures derived from a protean modelll

Fig. 82. (gg) Fig. 83. (Ill) Fig. 84. (111T) Fig. 85. (***) Fig. 86. (+++)
gsfi ~
000

*Stephens, J. 8., Yucatan, etc., 1843.

JrNicaragua, its People, Scenery, Monuments, ete., E. G. Squier, New York, 1852, II, 66.

¢Ibid., 1852, II, 66.

§ Ibid., 11, 66.

II—H From the Musca Alphabet, Humboldt, Vue de Cordilleras.

it Figure A of the above series although distinctive it is thought of the Aztec ophidian profile, is a natural curve

   

and is seen elsewhere, in the art of various people, when it is desired to represent the open mouth of an animal. We
find the same horizontal line representing the lower ' jaw joined to a curved upper jaw (the convexity of the curve ,
standing for the fold of the upper lip overlying the tooth-line of the upper jaw) in Europe and Asia. See Archaeologia
XLII, pl. 17, 312, for the head of a panther or lion of the Saxon period. \

§§ Incidents of Travel in Central America and Yucatan. Stevens, I, 1843, 309.
[H] Kingsborough Coll. (Dresden codex, 3d column.)

fil‘l Kingsborough Coll. (Dupaix.)

*** From photograph of Palencque cross ; see also Stephens, l. (3., ll, 1842, 345.
+++ Kingsborough Coll. (Borgian Codex.)

316 AN ANALYSIS or THE

Fig. 87. (*) Fig. 88. (11) Fig. 89. (1)

a:

(Fig. 92. ((1')

'EWMr—fi
L

 

Comparing the above series with the radicals we find that the first is evidently
intended for the head of an animal, and that this figure gradually assumes a. more
snake-like expression until, in Fig. 92, we see an indubitable rattle appendage. That
all the signs of Fig. 81 are derived from reduction of similar figures to those
just given must of course be probable only. In our judgment it forms a probability
that lacks but one degree of proof, namely, that derived from a fixed chronological

status. This of course cannot be furnished.
Fig. 93. (H) Fig. 94. (H)

      

* Kingsborough Col]. (Borgian Codex.) (1)

J{Kingsborough Coll. (Borgian Codex.)

iKingsborough Coll. (Borgian Codex.)

§ Voy. Pittor. et Archaeol. dans la Province d’Yucatan, etc. Waldeck, Paris, 1838, pl. 13.
I] From photograph of ruins at Monjas, Uxmal.

if Kingsborough Coll. (Dresden Codex, Col. 57).

** Six Months Residence and Travel in Mexico. W. Bullock, London, 1834, pl. 13.

H Squier, Nicaragua, l. 6., 52 (from Zipatero).

(1)111 proof of the Crotalian significance of this form we add the caudal appendage : m

LIFE-FORM 1 N ART. 317

In Figures 93 and 94.- (examples of a common variety in Aztec remains), we
see the curves of the open jaw traced upon the side of a solid mass. There can be
no reasonable objection to the conclusion that there is a close resemblance between
Figure 93 of these series and the second of the radicals marked E, or between radical

D and Fig. 9—1. g
It is also more than suggestive that the apparently arbitrary design and others

Fig. 95.

 

found among an embarrassing fullness of illustration in the Borgian Codex (Fig.
95), represents the profile head of the serpent with the mouth partially closed. And
may not the following figures have been suggested to a people who have been thor-
oughly acquainted with the profile lines already given?

Fig. 93. (*) Fig. 97. (+) Fig. 98. (1) Fig. 99. (s) Fig. 100. (n)

 

‘ V‘I
u. ( ll! IIIIIIA
In! v‘ . 1
Qlfiilfllilll. 1'}

 

Symmetrical Snake Ornament, from Squier’s Ancient Mon. of North America.

a, lower jaw; 1), upper jaw; c, eye ; d, rattle.

Kingsborough Coll. (Tellerian Codex.)
l From portion of elaborate full-faced human head, Stephens, I, 1843, 170.
1 Kingsborough Coll. (Borgian Codex,) p. 7 (human hand).
§ Stephens, l. 0., I, 171 (Architectural Ornament).

JCillgstI'ougli Coll. (Borgian Codex), p. 12 (pattern along a border).

A. I’. s.—-v0L. XV. 3w.

318 AN ANALYSIS OF THE

Another serpentine form is seen to be theradical of the following sequence,

1:1r

Fig.102.
'&
M. E

(*) (+) . (I) (s) (u) (11)
which may be called the series of the bound serpent. A third form belonging to the

same group may possibly be indicated in the coiled serpent, which leads us to the
figure found by Squier (Fig. 104) on a rock in N icaraguafi“

   

Fig. 104. (H)

fl
Fig. 103. (H) (\w
3%
J

THE MAN.

    

SECTION IV. (A.) The Head. If among the forms capable of but a few
expressions we find such variety, we may expect to meet in the human face with
its increased motility a yet larger number. To understand their analyses, it is
necessary to make ourselves familiar with the structures entering into the human
face. The “countenance” of popular language answers to the facial region of the
anatomist. The skull gives the main boundaries of this region, as well as valuable
hints for its subdivision. It is clothed with muscles, which, surrounding to move the
eyelids, nostrils and mouth, are conveniently arranged into the palpebral, nasal and
oral groups. The main acts of expression pertain to the first and last of these; for
the nasal group is composed of insignificant muscles both in form and function. N ow
it is a noticeable fact that the action of the palpebral muscles is one almost in

* Bartlett, I, 196. (From a rock carving in the Gila region.)

Jr Kings. 0011. (Dresden Codex.)

1 Kings. 0011. (Dresden Codex.)

,S Troano Manuscript.

|] Kings. 0011. (Dresden Codex, Col. 28.)

1f Troano Manuscript.

** Senate Ex. Doc., 1st series, 31st Congress, No. 64, p]. 35. (Reconnoisance in New Mexico, Texas, etc).
Report of Lt. Simpson.

H Squier’s Nicaragua, l. 6., I, opposite p. 406.

LIFE-FORM IN ART. 319

common with the muscles of the forehead. When the latter muscles contract the
brows are raised, and when the palpebral muscles act, the brows descend and move
toward the middle line of the face. This act, the result of the depression and
adduction of the brows, gives a severe expression to the countenance,—-—a noble one
when moderately pronounced, and to this end employed in the Jove-like heads of
Greek art* (Fig. 105) ; but when'exaggerated, leads to the grotesque, an advantage
not neglected in many ancient ornaments and the tragic masks (Fig. 106).

Fig. 105. Fig. 106.

   

Head of Apollo Belvidere. Head from late Roman ornament (+)

The muscles about the mouth tend chiefly to draw the oral angle from the
median line ; hence any change, no matter how small at’the angle, materially modifies
the expression. “ Give me a mouth,” says Thackerayj “ with no special expression,
and pop a dash of carmine at each extremity, and there are lips smiling.” The inner
extremity of the brow and the angle of the mouth may be called the centres of ex-
pression. The main face variants, in which these centres of motility have been
recognized, are seen grouping themselves into the frowning set' and the leering set,
either with the mouth closed and the angles slightly elevated, forming “the eternal
rietus ” of the archaic “Greek” head (Fig. 107), or the lips- parted and the teeth
displayed, or the lower jaw depressed, with the tongue protruded. The so-called
grotesques of Leonardo da Vinci (Fig. 108), and Durer (Fig. 109), appear to us to
be experiments in facial motility, both in myology and general proportion. They are
mere curiosities in construction. It is interesting to observe from the point of View

* Wineklemann, l. 6., II, 80.

+Mus. Borbonico, XI, tab. 28.
1 Roundabout Papers, 375.

320 v AN ANALYSIS or THE

 

Phoenician Head from Cyprus. De Cesnola. (*)
we are now erecting, viz., the relations between an inventive and an imitative art,

how exceedingly different these scholastic studies are from conventional art-types.
Fig. 109.

 

\j

Grotesque from Leonardo. (-f) Grotesque from Durer. (i)
The lines of the inferior border of the malar bone also serve as the basis of a series
of variants both in Egyptian and Aztec art. In addition to these, we have in Aztec

art the full-faced skull as a distinct model from that of the countenance.
In conclusion, we may say that the chief variants of the full-faced countenance

 

are as follows :
The brow lines ; the mouth lines, and the malar or transverse facial lines.§

* Harper’s Mag, Vol. XLV, 195.

i From photograph. .

1 Four Books, etc., on Art Anatomy, Book III, 85. Trans. in French, 1557.

§ TATTOOING. That the object of tattooing is to represent clothing is an idea commonly believed. That the
objects employed for this purpose should have been patterns we can readily conceive. We have endeavored in vain to
detect a relationship between the lines of tattooed skin and the normal folds and depressions of the face. The nearest
approach to it known to us, is the head of the Feejian, figured in Owen’s Grammar of Ornament, in which a symmetry
of ornamentation has been preserved, suggesting the muscular structure of the face. But this is evidently acoincidence;
for had natural lines been copied by the artist, the wrinkles would have appeared rather than the unrevealed fleshy
masses beneath the skin. Now if this were the ease the wrinkles would be placed transversely to the, line of action of
many muscles. We accept with some reservation, the statement of Lubbock (l. 0.), that the inhabitants of Formosa
“impress on their skin various figures of trees, flowers and animals.”

LIFE-FORM IN ART. 321

\Ve propose to trace in the following order a few of the variants of the face.
Many of them that relate to expression are found in the best examples of Greek and
Roman art, as well as in a few specimens of Aztec carving.

(a.) THE FULL-FACE.

(1.) The Gorgonez'on. The radical of this series would appear to have no
connection with the figures placed after it; yet we have ventured to hold as
the ultimate the figure from which it is the probable abridgment,——the head of
Phthah. In the absence of a corroborating prompter in history, these figures would
teach us that the Gorgoneion was common to Egypt, Greece and Etruria. The
symmetrical curved ornament at the lower portion of Figures 110—112, and the head-
dress of Figure 113, are derived from the skin of the head and fore—feet of the lion.
Can we go farther and trace from these derivatives the tongue-protruding heads of
the Gothic style, or the Buddhistic Sinhas? It is difficult to answer these questions
satisfactorily in the absence of all connecting links. More especially since we have
no proof that they may not have originated in other countries. The New Zea-
lander" carves a head with a lolling tongue on his temple column; the Aztecs?

have repeated the same figure in stone. See also Fig. 126.
Fig. 110. (1') Fig. 111. (g) Fig. 112. (n) . Fig. 113. (11)

    

Etruscan. Etruscan. Greek. Etruscan.
Fig- 114- (**) Fig. 115- (H) Fig. 116. (11) Fig. 117. (59

r

       

Greek. Egyptian (Phthali).

Etruscan.

* Natural History of Man, Wood, II, 180.

JrW'aldeck, l. c. ; Squier, l. 0., I, 204 and 313; figure in centre of Mexican Zodiac.

tMicali, l. 6., pl. 46, Fig. 24. § Micali, l. 0., pl. 102, Fig. 10. ll Hamilton, Vases, l. 0., III, 60.

'J Micali, l. 0., pl. 22. ** Dennis, Etruria, l. 0., II, 244. H Hope’s Ancient Costumes, 225. '
it Handbook of Archaeology, Westropp, 126. The tongue has been by an oversight omitted.

§§ Hirt. Trans. Berl. Acad., 1821, 115.

3'22 AN ANALYSIS OF THE

It is certain, however, that the Gorgoneion is very ancient. We suspect that
the remarkable head from N ebbi Yunas (Fig. 118), may have had an origin from the
Egyptian Phthah, the tongue being the only essential feature absent. A comparison
of the Greek face (Fig. 112) with that of the Assyrian relic, points strongly
to the conclusion that it has been wrought under the same influence that gave shape
to the others; but the absence of the protruding tongue prevents us from giving it
a place in the series.

Fig. 118. (*)

    

{ii
. J /.
W

l " "a

Assyrian.

I

(2.) The Transverse Facial Line. With regard to the series of the transverse
facial line we present the following:

Types of Full-faced Human Head, with Transverse Facial Lines.

Fig. 119. (+) Fig. 120. (i) Fig. 121. (s)

   

Etruscan. Etruscan. ' Egyptian.

From Mediterranean design.

* Layard, l. 0., pl. 95, Fig. 3 and 4. The treatment of the eye by numbers of concentric lines and an exag-
gerated internal canthus, is notably like the method of drawing this organ on Greek vessels.

+Hope’s Ant. Cost. (from Caylus, VI, I, 44.) The repetition of the malar line is here conspicuous, see p. 290
of this memoir.

iMic‘ali, l. 0., pl. 41, Fig. 4.

§ Birch, l. 6., in British Museum.

‘V

LIFE-FORM IN ART. 32.)

Fig122. on ' Fig. 123. (+) Fig. 124. (1) Fig. 125. (g)

I!)
r ' "
‘9‘},

   

From Aztec design.

The radical-like head (Fig. 119) succeeds to the fantastic head (Fig. 120), and
both would appear to be derivatives of the Egyptian head (Fig. 121). The Aztec
architectural (glyptic) radical (Fig. 122) is the ultimate abridgment of the full—faced
human skull of which Fig. 125 is the fullest development. There remains no doubt
that in this series the line of the lower border of the malar bones has been the line
characterizing the variants of the Aztec skull as a similar line will describe the most
prominent feature of the Egypto-Etruscan heads.

(3.) T/ze Radical 0f the .Fullface. But it is in the lower stages of art where we
must seek for the best examples of face radicals. Large number of primal forms are
found etched upon rocks, and have never passed beyond rude attempts at realism.
Of these we do not now speak. But rather of the most persistent lines seen in an
abridgment of a more elaborate model, itself an ultimate of unknown transitions
from the primal shape. Thus in the comparatively modern attempt to depict the
human countenance in metal, we may have face radicals rapidly eliminated.

T

The outline here presented we claim to be the most constant form in the follow-
ing sequence of figures obtained from Celtic metal ornamentation (Fig. 126).

* Views of An. Mon. in Central America, 0130., 1844. F. Catherwood, pl. 9.
’r Ibid., p]. 9.
i Kingsborough Coll. (Dupaix.)

§ Stephens, l. c. (Capan), I, 135, 1841. The author supposes this to be a monkey’s skull.

324 AN ANALYSIS OF THE

         

(*) (Jr) (1;) (§) (ll) (ll) (**) (H)

Full-face Human Face, from Celtic design in metal.

We have in such an arrangement the united brows forming the upper member of

the radical, the vertical member of which is the nose.

:3:

.In the same manner we may accept the outline of the above figure as one of the
Buddhistic face radicals, judging from the following series of figures (Fig. 127), from
East Indian coins. In this less perfect illustration, the brow line is separated from
the nose, and the cruciform outline given is the result of changes in the nostrils.

The figures 5 a} O gl are all nose radicals, as well as 5}: Can it be doubted that

 

 

 

 

 

 

they have had their origin in the same natural model ? Does not this simple contrast
between the constant brow and nose radical of the Saxon series, and the varying
separation of the brow and nose lines in the Indian series, as well as the variable
shape of the nose in the latter group, indicate widely remote tendencies of art-growth

in these two races ?
Fig. 127.

   

(%§) (II l) (W) (***)

Human figures of East Indian design, in metal.

*From a fibula found at Fairford, C. R. Smith, Archaeologia, XXXIV, pl. 10, 82.

+Found in a cemetery of the Anglo-Saxon Period. J. Y. Akerman, Ibid., XXXVII, pl. 3 97.
1—H Same as *.

it Figure upon a fibula found in Berkshire, Ibid., XIX, 352.

§§ Asiatic Researches, 1832, XVII, pl. 4, Fig. 89,11. H. Wilson.

|||| Wilson’s Afghanistan, pl. 25, 26.

fil'fl Ibid, pl. 25, 26.

*** Ibid, pl. 25, 26.

+H1hid, pl. 24, 26.

LIFE-FORM IN ART. 3‘) 5

4—

In looking through the radicals of the full-faced head in Aztec art and the
sources tributary to it, we find a number of rudimentary outlines, many of which have
had doubtless strictly limited significanees attached to them. The majority of these
we have selected from the Dresden CodeX,—so remarkable among Aztec remains for
the conciseness of outline, and relative absence of non-essential elements. The out-
line as seen in this Codex is proposed (+) as the radical of the front View of the
human face. It is essentially the same as the Asian radical enclosed in a circle.

We present the following as a demonstration :

Fig.128.

- . “7/ ° '
:2: £9 9
(*) (i) (1’)

 

<**>

 

Full—faced skull radicals from Aztec design.

May we not assert, assuming the correctness of the above sequence, that these are
but varieties of the full-faced symbol?

The radicals to be next described are those dependent upon the union of others.
These are comprehensive types and are of unusual interest.

We are informed by Dr. Brintonfl that many of the designs of the American
races have reference to the cardinal points. We hope to show that the cardinal
points are often represented by four full faces, and that each face is represented
by a well-defined radical. It might be expected that the radical already given, (+)
Would be the basis of this more complex design. Such, however, does not appear
from the sequence here given.

*-|! Kingsborough Coll. (Dresden Codex).

** Stephen, Yucatan, I, Frontispiece (Capan).

fiT Catherwood, l. a.
H Myths of the New World, l. c.

A. P. s.——-v0L. XV. 3x.

326 AN ANALYSIS OF THE

In the Landa (l. c.) alphabet there is a comprehensive figure @signify-
ing “space.” In the Algonquin Song of the Creation* there is seen the fol-

   

lowing symbols: 1st. _ which is interpreted, “First being, Omnipotent ;”

 

O O , . . .
2d. r', \7' 3 “All beings are friends.” Arranging these in order, we have:
V

 

O O

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

representing the radicals of the same composite type.
N 0w DupaiX figures a design attractive from its symmetry (.Fig. 130) :

Fig. 130. (l)

 

We cannot fail to recognize here a figure suggestive of the cardinal points, and
the resemblance borne by each of the four component parts to Figure 131 is so strik-

Fig. 131. (1:)

fl“

m:

ing that we are led to conclude that the Fig. 130 is a composition, resulting from the
arbitrary use of face-radicals, alike to those of Fig. 131.
This point having been gained we are encouraged in believing that the radical

* Traditions of the Algonquins (pamphlet), E. G. Sqnier.

+Kings. Coll. (Dupaix.)

iIbid. (Dresden Codex.) Many others similar to this could be given from North American design. See
particularly Dresden Codex, and a rock near the Susquehanna river, Pennsylvania.

 

LIFE-FORM IN ART. 327

may be significant of the cardinal points, and to have a history something like the

cnsuinor :

 

Figs. 132.
x
a 0'0 0
.M,
(*) (1) (§) Aberrant. (ll)

 

Composites suggesting the cardinal points, from Aztec design.
These are by no means rare signs in the Dresden Codex.
The use of the full-face radical as the head of the human figure, as seen in a
column of the Codex (see Fig. 133) is almost conclusive as to its real significance.

Fig. 133. (1D

 

 

,VVe thus see that the full-faced Aztec radical may be either a Greek cross with-
out eye and mouth dots; the latter, without the former, or both, or with the presence
of the cross with dots placed in radii from its re-entering angles.

In illustration of the architectural radical being the result of a process different
from one leading to a hieratic character, we present two representations of what we

have interpreted to be full-face human head from the Aztec temples:
Fig. 134. (H) Fig. 135. (ii)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Full—faced human countenance in stone, from Aztec design.

* From squatting figure of a man in Kings. Coll. (Dresden Codex.) + Kings. 0011. (Dupaix.)
1: Ibid (Dresden Codex.) § Ibid. ll Schoolcraft, l. 0. VI, 576.
'1! Kings. Coll. (Dresden Codex.) ** Catherwood, Z. c. H Ibid. l. c.

328 AN ANALYSIS on THE

We give here an example (Fig. 136) of a series of variants in pottery. The speci-
mens were obtained at San Domingo, by Mr. William M. Gabb, late geologist to
the San Domingo Government. The originals are in the National Museum at
Washington. Our drawings were kindly made by Mr. Gabb. The first we accept

as the radical of a full-faced human head, and proceed as follows:
' Fig, 136.

f:

 

Ceramic variants from San Domingo design.

(6.) THE PROFILE.

(6.) The Profile. The profile human head has an entirely distinct history from
the full-faced. We see some races very fond of reproducing it, as for example the
Egyptians with whom the front view in drawings was phenomenally rare. The Assyr-
ians also repeated the countenance in profile. With the North American Indians the
profile is looked upon with contempt. Father Garnier of the Huron Mission, in writing
home for supplies, says of certain pictures he needed, “they must be full face, and
they must look directly at the beholder.”* Mr. Catlin informs us that the Indians
consider a profile as representing but “half a man.” The Aztecs evidently enter-
tained very different notions concerning the profile, and we find a fair sprinkling of
its variants throughout their art. In marked contrast to the Aztec full-faced radical
the profile is rarely or never inverted or otherwise changed in position. As in the case
of the full-face we find the richest sequence of profiles in the Dresden Codex.

The radical (X) is here presented, and the probable sequence constructed thus :

* Parkman, Jesuits in North America.

LIFE-FORM IN ART. 329

Fig. 137.
*®; at L? a} fig
(*) (l) (1) (§) (l)

 

Human Profiles from Aztec design.

Fig. 138.

   

The above is a short series selected from the Troano manuscript.
As an instance of the difficulty of the study of variants we select the following (Fig.
139) from the Dresden Codex, Where the profile-face passes into a semblance of the

full—face.

Fig. 139.
@fifififi

(**)

Or as is occasionally seen in the Troano manuscript, the oblique line of the
profile % passes into horizontally one ‘ These are examples we take it of
simple ‘ carelessness in drawing. .g. Yet we nowhere find so violent a

9 ‘
a change as The outlines @ and ® never merge.
Q

In reviewing the human face and its variants we can readily see why the full
face should be represented by the Greek cross and figures growing out of it, and the
profile by the cross of St. Andrew’s, viz, by the repetition of the essential lines of
both full—face and profile.

In the first place it is not the crossing of lines which is as essential as their posi-
tions. A vertical and a horizontal line are equally distinctive of a face whether crossed

* Kings. Coll. (Dresden Codex.)
Jr Ibid.

1; Ibid.

§ From Dresden Codex.

11 Kings. Coll. (Dresden Codex.)
1T Ibid. (Borgian Codex.)

** Kings. Coll. (Dresden Codex.)

330 AN ANALYSIS or THE

or not, as we have represented. So the oblique line is suggestive of the profile,
although it may be isolated. But the vertical line of the nose needs but to be pro—
duced to cross the horizontal line of the teeth to give a radical notion of the most
conspicuous facial lines; and thus serving as a model to the profile, which probably
came later, and produced from the single natural line of the profile an artificial com-
plement crossing it at the centre. .
That the line drawn from the top of the occiput to the mouth is a true line of the
profile can readily be seen by producing the corner of the mouth. -The natural direc-
tion of the angle, as we have already seen, is upward and backward. Archaic types
tend to emphasize this elevation, and primitive art to notably exaggerate it. Witness,

for example, such variants as the following from the Troano Manuscript : (Fig. 140.)
Fig. 140.

-@

c) <+>
Let us suppose that in the first outline of this group the line had been extended
to the crown we would have had the g of the Landa Alphabet and the Dresden
Codex.
The architectural profile head, composed for the most part of peripheral exag—

gerations, is given with the following figures :
Fig.141. (3;) Fig. 142. (g) Fig.143. (n) Fig- 144- (1T)

 

Human profiles from Aztec (glyptic) design.

* Troano Manuscript.

Jr Ibid.

i Troano Manuscript, pl. 2-3

§ From Casa del Cober Nador, Catherwood, l. 6.
|| Ibid.

1T Stephens, Yucatan, 1849, II, 292.

**—++ Kingsborough Coll. (Dupaix.)

 

LIFE-FORM IN ART. 331

(.13.) THE RADICAL OF MAN.

As a cosmopolitan form the human figure presents features which are every-
where recognizable. One of its most ancient expressions is a linear vertical ending
superiorly, either simply or by a rounded knob, and joined below the knob and at
the lower end of the vertical, by two transverse bars completes the outline.

Let us compare a few of these from Widely remote localities :

Fig. 147.

(ll)

<*) c) . (1) p (s)

HO

 

Are not these sufficiently alike to lead the observer to conclude'that a kind of
sequence in time might be traced from the Asiatic forms to the American? It is
certainly curious that the figure from Pallas is a constant. invariable shape, which is
often repeated on the rocks of Siberia, while that of the South American figure is
equally distinctive of those found on the rocks of the valley of the Amazonfll

Among other anthropoid radicals figured by SpiX, is the following (Fig. 148),
marked by the curved extremities of the vertical line as in Fig. 147.

4" Lesley, l. 6., see also Sylvester’s Paleographie, pl. 1, showing characters of ancient Chinese dialect of similar
construction.

f Reise ans Siberien zuriiek an die Wolga in 1873. Pallas, Th. III, Zw. Erich, pl. 6.
i Whipple, l. 6., from- rock at Arch Spring, near Zuni, New Mexico.

g Bartlett, J. R, Personal Narrative of Exp]. and Incidents in Texas, New Mexico, California, Sonora, etc., New
York, 1854. Fcqutured rocks on the Gila, pl. 1, Vol. II, p. 196.

[] Reise in Brasilien. Spix und von MartiuswAtlas. Sculpturen auf Felsen am Rio Lapura.

‘1 See also Ioumal of the Anthmpological Institute, London, III, 114, pl. 10, I Whitefield. In this paper a
numbei of lineal signs ale given f1 om Ceaia, Brazil.

332 AN ANALYSIS OF THE

Fig. 148.

m
@
@-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

@@@

'Without the aid of the one it would have been very difficult if not impossible
to have determined the significance of the other. But with it and that of the
variant of the human face, the determination becomes easy. ‘

Of radicals in which the inferior extremities are marked by oblique lines, we
have a large number of illustrations. The vertical may or may not be produced

below the lower pair of divergent lines.

The apparent likeness announced in the above, forces us to ask ourselves the fol-
lowing question : Is the resemblance between outlines, selected‘from rocks scattered
from Norway to South America, merely accidental? There is a drawing in Morillet
from a rock in Norway* (Fig. 149); another group in Siberia‘l' (Fig. 150) 3 a third,

 

 

 

Fig. 149. (9%) Fig. 150. (Jr)
\ ~ \ x \
’3
59/

   

Sculpture on rock in Norway.

belonging to rocks of our Western plains: (Fig. 15]) ; a fourth series is seen in the

* Morillet, l. 6., V, 535.
+ Pallas, Reise, l. c.

xSee also Journal of the AnthrOpolOgical institute, London, Hi, 114, pl. 10, J. Whitefield. In this paper a
number of linear signs are given from Cearé, Brazil.

 

LIFE-FORM IN ART. 333

 

Fig. 151. Fig. 152. Fig. 153.
FR i n
. $ b?
(*) <+> , (1) (§) (In ' (1r)

Aztec manuscript (Fig. 152); and a fifth, upon the rocks of Nicaragua and South
America (Fig. 153).

It is decided at first' sight that these resemblances are nothing but the natural
results of simplifying the easily-copied human form—and that rude artists could
with difficulty avoid producing figures which would closely resemble one another.
Thus the Asiatic, European and American tribes must have produced results such
as those represented above. The lamentable instance of the Abbe Domenick, who
mistook a German school-boy’s copy-book for a collection of pictures by North
American Indians, to say nothing of the more magnificent follies of Brasseur de Bour-
bourg, are calculated to warn the student against any attempt at generalizatiOn even
from genuine material. We, however, doubt whether any other than a South American
aborigine could have told what Fig. 148, was intended to represent, much less could we
expect an Indian, or a school-boy to draw such a form for man. The very shape of
such an outline is proof of its being an ultimate modification from a pre—existing form.
Its presence at once suggests experience as a necessity to its existence. N 0 child
could possibly conceive of itmand no adult trace it unless he had become acquainted
with the traditions and conventionalities of which it is the result.

Again, such a radical as 1' is seen on a photograph of a rock in the Western
United States to represent . man, as can be shown in the following sequence
(Fig. 154): ‘

* Report of the Indian Tribes of New Mexico, Lt. A. W. Whipple. From rock at Ojo Pescado. Lt. Whipple
in speaking of this says, “ the figure might be pronounced to be centuries old.” .

JrSimpson’s Report, l. 0.. pl. 25, fig. 2. See also in this connection a photograph of a rock opposite Farawan,
Utah, in series published by U. S. Government (Wheeler’s Expedition, 1872). The sign _ from Painter Creek,
New Mexico, figured by Whipple, loc. 621., has the lower part, recalling the figure from 3% Brazil (see Spix
and von Martins). It is described as being very old and much effaced. May not the transverse lines have been obliter-
ated in time ?

1 Kingsborough Coll. (Dresden Codex.)

§ Troano Manuscript, Paris, 1869, pl. 35. This sign is represented in the manuscript as inverted.

1| Squier, Nicaragua and her People, II, pl. 1, 24.

‘.[ From original drawings by A. Fendlcr, in library of Acad. of Natural Sciences of Phila. The rocks are near
San Esteban, S. A. (See Smithsonian Rep, 1857, 218.) i

A. P. s.—v0L. XV. 3v.

334 AN ANALYSIS OF THE

Fig. 154.

ii i

N 0w if the last of the series be man, it is highly probable that the preceding
three have been derived from it, and that the first is its radical. If it be so, the following
Figure 155, will be composed of two anthropoid outlines on either side of a central

object.
Fig. 155. (+)

Sqnier.
Let us take this object of Fig. 155 and endeavor to fix its value.

Fig. 156. Fig. 157. (1) Fig. 158. (g)

   

Figures 157 and 158 are probably representations of man, and we are. lead to
believe that Fig. 156 and the central portion of Fig. 155 have the same value. \Ve
have already seen the probable bearing of the cross marking within these two figures.

Assuming the correctness of the conclusion that the figure is anthropoid, we have
to explain the connection between it and the two inclined figures on either side.

* Simpson, l. c.

i Squier, Nicaragua, l. c.

1 Ibid. l. 0.
§ Spix, 11nd v. Martins, l. c.

LIFE FORM IN ART. 335

This may be done, we think, by fixing the concrete symbols representing, it is thought,
the cardinal points. We would place the figure in the same category with the
symbols there figured, and present in the same connection such forms as Figure
159, interpreting the side pieces as human faces with chins directed to the side of the
full-faced countenance: *

Fig. 159.
,/ /v
”a." ’
{473a '
/,
// jwhu/
/:////////ffl;/

Anthropoid outline with symmetrical face-radicals, of Aztec design.

Could any of the above lines be accidental? Could any of them have been
forgot by the dishonest, or imitated by novices? Or, could any school-bred
scrawler, boy or man, have made them ? May we not place in the same connection
this piece (Fig. 160) of Haidah (Babine) carving ?'f' In speaking of this, Mr. Wilson

Fig. 160. .

    

Full-face human countenance with complex lateral face radicals, of Haidah design.
aptly remarks: “I was struck with a certain resemblance to the ‘peculiar style of

ancient Mexican and still more of Central American art.”
Fig. 161. (1)

Symmetrical composite of Aztec design, showing an arrangement of full-face and profile radicals.

* Squier, l. 6., I, 406. l{Prehistoric Man, Daniel Wilson, Lond., 1862, II, 21. 2: Humboldt, Vue de Cordilleras.

336 AN ANALYSIS on THE

Fig. 162.

   

Algonquin sign of man.

The above outlines (Fig. 162) are copied from an authentic Algonquin song,
.figured in the pamphlet already noticed, by Mr. Squier, by whom they are termed
“ mnemonic symbols.” Mr. Squier, who is an eminent authority, believes the figures
trustworthy. He states (page 7), “that with a View of leaving no means
unemployed to ascertain its ‘(the manuscript’s) true value, I submitted it Without
explanation to an educated Indian Chief (Kah-ge—ga-gah—bowh), George Copway, who
unhesitatingly pronounced it authentic, in respect not only to the original signs and
accompanying explanations in the Delaware dialect, but also in the general ideas
and conceptions which it embodies. * * * I feel I am not obtruding the coinage
of a curious idler, nor an apocryphal record, but presenting matter deserving of
attention, and of important bearings upon many interesting questions (connected

with the history of our aboriginal nations.”

There can be no doubt, therefore, that these figures represent the Algonquin
method of representing man. In no one of them do we recognize the linear radical
already considered, nor any outline which would be liable by abridgment to run
into it. When we remember the fact that the song is entitled The Creation, the
figures employed in illustrating it were probably of fixed value and of considerable
antiquity. Mr. Schoolcraft' informs us that the Indian picture-characters were,
among the Ojibways, “taught to the young as carefully as our alphabet.” We have
no reason to suppose but that they have preserved their present appearance for a long
time. Is it assuming too much from our premises to suggest that the outline a (Fig. 163)
is an Algonquin sign of man, and that c is an imperfect form of the same? If this be
conceded and internal evidence given that the drawings were made at about the
same time, may we not call the inscription Algonquin, and that the signs have

some relation to Fig. 162?

LIFE-FORM IN ART. 337

 

 

 

 

L

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

\\

 

An Algonquin R00k-carving.*
a—Algonquin Sign of man.
b—Anthropoid (‘9).
c—Anthropoid of the type-figured. ‘
d—An unfinished, or an effaced figure.

e—Turtle.
g—Hand.
h—Unknown.
Fig. 164.
(l )

If such be granted the above sign (Fig. 164) from a rock in Kansas will be placed
in the same group. The entire absence of Aztec-like signs in such a series of
pictographs and inscriptions is suggestive.

The same cannot be said of some other inscriptions, as for example the Parowan
inscription in Utah. Here amid signs suggestive of influence which the Aztec people,
or the unknown South American tribes had in common, appear others such as Fig.

Fig. 165.

I'm.

    

165, which so intimately resembles the genuine Algonquin, that we can have no
doubt of their identity. Here we have, we may say, a modern savage making
* Squier’s Ancient Monuments, Smithson. Cont, vol. I, 298.

‘rIndian Inscription Rock at Indian Cave, on Mulberry Creek, Kansas. (From photograph, by A. Gordon,
Washington, D. C.)

338 Air ANALYSIS OF THE

his mark among the ancient signs that attracted his attention, as a modern tourist
might scratch his name upon a slab of Egyptian hieroglyphics.

This marking of new signs over and among older ones must always remain a
confusing element to the student of inscriptions. Man is inherently a scrawler and
something among his attempts at artistic outlines must be attributed to that
same desire which marks certain uncultured persons who cannot resist the tendency
to carve rude figures, or write their name at noted localities.

In the Dresden Codex we have a sequence of the squatting human figure (Fig.
166) unlike anything yet seen.

 

Squatting Anthropoids, of Aztec design. _

The difficulties attending the study of the human figure are very great. We
will present two of the more prominent of these. What is to prevent, for example,
some of the outlines marked by the produced vertical axis representing a tailed
quadruped? (Fig. 167.)

' Fig. 167.

iii

(i)

 

This is not a little puzzling, particularly since we are informed of the value
attached to the reptilian batrachian forms in Anahuac chronology. While acknowl-
edging the suggestiveness of the produced vertical, we nevertheless find the figures
of quadrupeds to be such as of Pallas. Thus proving the absence of quadru-
pedal type comparable to an H ~ anthropoid type, and also that although it is not
impossible that the produced vertical line may at times mean “tail,” it is not probable
that it meant anything of the kind.

* Kiugsborourgh Coll. (Codex Vaticensis.)

+Bollaert, l. c.
tPallas, l. c.

LIFE-FORM IN ART. 339

Fig. 168. (*)

W
l 2

This figure-(Fig. 168) from Bartlett is here given to show the radical of man,
as we have determined it, in the act of driving an animal.

In some outlines from the Gila region, by the same authority we have a man-like
figure with produced vertical associated with one in which it is absent. If, as may be
suggested, that the line has a sexual significance, its absence would indicate the com-
panion figures to represent female forms.

Another great difficulty, determining the man-radical is that in countries, where
the inhabitants have been under Christian influence, the vertical and transverse lines
have originated in crude imitations of the Latin cross. Such influence undoubtedly
exists in the design of our Indians, especially among those who have been brought in
association with Jesuits. The following signs from J onathan’s Cave, near Fife,
Scotland, are certainly very suggestive of the series on p. 333, and we are only
deterred from so placing them from the other evidences in the same locality of

modern influences.
Fig. 169. (+)

131:

As has already been observed, the position of accessory signs more than their

shape determine their significance.

Of the sign
(1)

it would be difficult to prove that it was not a face, and the symmetrical dots eyes,
except by comparison with the following from a rock in the same country (Fig. 170) :
*Bartlett, 1. 6., I, 206.

1- Simpson, J . Y., Archaic sculpturing of cups, circles, etc, Edinburgh, 1867.
iNear Colonia Touar, A. Fendler, l. c.

340 AN ANALYSIS OF THE
Fig. 170. (*)

 

when it is at once shown that the entire figure is 1'epresented, and the symmetrical
markings are not eyes but mammee.

Fig. 171.

  

2—H).

A curious figure in the Borgian Codex, showing the produced vertical and transverse lines of the ancient radical of man.

SECTION V. Other variants from the Dresden Codex and other sources, of North
American design.

Fig. 172.
\éo a
.0
1:12;":

 

The Breastplate.

The Lizard.

4" From Rock on Rio Lapuna, Spix and v. Martins, Z. c.

. LIFE-FORM IN ART. ' 341

Fig. 174.

® W :0 ....... -

 

An unknown animal.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fig. 175.
9 l l l l LL
E 3%“? 3
© “LS:
I l l l l l
0., (+)
The Ear-ring. (I)
Fig. 176.
figs, / < > \
(l) (in \

 

“The Three Balls.”

SECTION VI. Difiiculties met with in analyzing the Life-form. We have now
given a number of examples of the plan proposed for the study of variants, suffi-
cient we hope for the demonstration of the object in View. The reader has
doubtless observed that the fields from which the figures in the different series have
been gleaned have varying degrees of probability. In some, as in those from
the Dresden Codex, we find all the outlines secured from a single manuscript. In
others the radical may be found in the manuscript, but the intermediate-forms are
scattered in the sculpture and rock-pictures of Central America. In another group
again these shapes are sought for on the rocks of Utah—the carvings of the Frazer

* Ribeiarao (Bolivia), Harp. Mag, Vol. XLIV, 502.

+ Kings. Coll. (Dupaix).

i Stephens, l. 0.

§ From U. S. photograph, rock opposite Parowan, Utah. Wheeler’s Expedition.
[1 Jones, Southern Antiquities, 378.

1i Squier, Traditions of Algonquins and Song of Creation.

A. r. s.—-—v0L. xv. 3Z.

342 AN ANALYSIS OF THE

River natives—or even, as in the first mentioned human-Iigure-series, from Asia and
Europe. We have in every instance simply placed the objects in the order they
appear to make for themselves, indifferent to the localities in which the objects have
been found. In many instances, as with Central American design, the sequence of
the outlines are promptly confirmed by our knowledge of chronology. In others this
chronology has not been made out. With such we leave the forms to speak for
themselves. We certainly are not anxious to establish any theory, and have pur-
posely placed all material which would appear to point to any definite lines of migra-
tion in the form of queries.

As may be readily seen the entire study is fraught with difiiculty. Particularly
is this the case in the field of Central American design. Fancy is here continually
dulling the ear ' of judgment; and the student, as he turns the pages of the Kings-
bOrough volumes, is more often tempted to weave little fictions about the gaudy
“grotesques” before him, than remain content to be guided by the truth that so
evidently underlies them. We have endeavored to keep free from all weakness of
this kind, and to leave to others the interpretation of the grinning skeletons, the
priestly sacrifices, the murderous assaults, the mysterious pot-boilings, that so plenti—
fully bestrew the Codices.

A difficulty of another kind is met with in the variants of art—forms of older and
more cultured races than the American. The higher the art‘and more concrete the
style the less satisfactory becomes the interpretation of variants. Cardinal Wiseman*
has justly said: “Great caution should be used in judging characteristic. form from
works belonging to the, higher department of art. _No nation long possesses the art
of representation, without forming to itself an ideal, abstractive type; and the
caution to be used should necessarily be doubled, where the art and their types are
borrowed.” The fact that scarcely a single' art-form in the entire range of Indo-
Germanic art—nay even within that larger area of Mesopotamia and Egypt—can be
quoted, which does not exhibit in its history the traces of mutual influence, is some-
times sufficient to cast a doubt upon the arrangement of form in a supposed succes-
sion, even when the chronicles of the nations yielding them have been fixed.

Let us, for example, suppose that a cylinder has been found at Babylon, which
is determined to belong to the late Babylonian empire. Now the Assyrian influence
upon the art of this empire is conceded, and we should seek for the source of the
conventionalisms upon the cylinder to their associated variants among the
alabasters of Khorsabad or Nimroud. Could we stop here the search would be easy.
But we are informed by Rawlinson that Assyria itself is a northern branch of the

* Science and Revealed Religion, I. 251.

LIFE-FORM IN ART. 343

Chaldean stock, and although its art is in a great measure indigenous, its germs were
imported from the ancient Babylon, and in some instances have simply returned to
that source after undergoing changes due to their prolonged expatriation. If in addi-
tion to this the influence exerted by Egyptian form upon the later Assyrian figures
be acknowledged, it makes the task of arranging in a chronOlogical sequence a series
of Mesopotamian variants an exceedingly difficult one. We think that the internal
evidence furnished by the objects themselves is a much easier and in the-end as
satisfactory a guide.

That archaeologists have not studied primitive art-form by this internal evidence,
or, as a naturalist would express it, by seeking for a standard of grouping by com-
parisons of the actual forms, can be at once seen by quoting a few examples.

The first we propose mentioning is the attempted interpretation of the Landa
Alphabet. Dr. D. G. Brinton, in an interesting pamphlet entitled “ The Ancient
Phonetic Alphabet of Yucatan,W has printed this alphabet which, as we are informed
by Dr. Brinton, “was unearthed in a library in Madrid—that of the Royal Academy
of History,” by the Abbé Brasseur de Bourbourg. It was contained in an unpub-
lished description of Yucatan, composed by Diego de Landa, the first bishop of the
country. This alphabet is given below (Fig. 177) with indications of the objects
by ourselvesj‘

Fig. 177.
1 a 2 a 3 a 4 a 5 b 6‘
‘ . :3: w 00
. ' \ ' 00
Parrot . Parrot . Profile. Parrot. Unknown. Full-face .
'7 c 8 ea 9 10 t 11 e 12 11
Full-face. Brow. Profile Face. Comprehensive sign. Full-face. Plant.
13 11 14 11a 15 i 16 k 17 ka 18 l
. W -. , ‘n 0
° /
3 . 0 ‘4'
Plant. Face profile. Full-face. Profile. Animal. Profile.

* New York, 1870, J. Sabin & Son.

1r It is necessary to mention that we had not seen the Landa alphabet until this essay had been nearly completed.

344 AN ANALYSIS OF THE

Fig. 17 7—- Continued.

19 20 m 21 n 22 0 23 0 24 1)
fl 6] 3 45 g a"
‘ {9's
Profile. Profile. Serpent. Invt’d human fig. Rattle of serpent. Profile.
25 pp 27 x 28 u 29 u 30 2
£1) 2 Q 2 " 2
Profile. Hand. P1 ofile. Crotalian cui ve inverted. Unknown. Vase.

According to this interpretation, out of the thirty figures composing the alphabet,
18 are from portions or combinations of portions of the human frame, viz., Nos. 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14, 15, 16,
18, 19, 20, 22, 24, 25, 26, 27.
3 are from birds, viz., Nos. 1, 2, 4.
2 from serpents, viz., N 0s. 21, 23.
1 is from unknown animal, 17.
2 are from plants, viz., 12, 13.
1 is a vase, 80.
3 are from unknown objects, viz., ’2, 5, 29.

30
According to Dr. Brinton, l. 0., the meaning of the objects of this alphabet should
be something as follows :

. Nos. ], 2, and 4 are representatives of the heads of some animals; N0. 2 being
evidently the head of a bird, with a long curved beak, probably a species of parrot.
N o. 3 has been supposed to represent a leg or a boat of some kind, but is probably
also a rude figure of a head.

5. Both these letters are supposed to represent a path or way bearing the marks
of foot prints indicated by the small figures inside the circle.

0. This letter * * * 5* is imagined to represent a mouth displaying sharp teeth.

ca. Is explained as the jaw of an animal thickly set with teeth; but a careful
examination of its variations leads to the belief that it is a representation of an eye-
lash.

cu. This has never been identified.

25. Signifies space, the four marks leading toward the centre, representing the
four cardinal points.

6. Probably a front View of the human face, surmounted by the hair, the dots
marking the eyes, nose and mouth.

71. Nos. 12 and 13, variations of the same, represents a joint of bamboo. N0. 14
represents a flowing stream around some objects. ‘

LIFE°FORM IN ART. 345

i. No satisfactory analysis has yet been offered of this letter. It seems formed
after the analogy of c.

16,1015. The In is beyond doubt derived from a head seen in profile. The upper
figure within the circle is the closed eye with its lashes (compare No. 8) 3 that below
on the right is the ear (compare No. 28) ; that on the left is the mouth. The ku is
supposed to be a drawing of the sacred “medicine bag.”

l. Neither of these have been resolved.

m. This also is the figure of a head. It is distinguished from the 70 from the eye
being open, from the p by the absence of dots around the mouth.

77.. Possibly the figure of a serpent.

0. Variations of the same, of uncertain origin. .

1), pp. Again the face in profile.

:10. The figure is easily recognized as the human hand, the second as a face in
profile emitting breath from the mouth.

u. The first sign represents the ear, the second is of uncertain derivation.

z. This seems to be a vase of some kind.

We think we can fairly claim to have improved. upon the above identifications ;
how much, we must leave to others to decide.

For another example we will take that of the Palenque cross. We have already
indicated that the ornament on the ends of the horizontal bar of the cross are profile
rattlesnake heads. The object (Fig. 178) (evidently of animal origin) upon which
rests the vertical bar, has been called by Dr. Brinton* a rattlesnake head. Our com-
parisons lead us, however, to conclude that the object is not a rattlesnake head but a
full-faced human skull. With this opinion, Dr. Brinton informs us he now concurs.

 

"lll l llll

llr-» iE Tfllfijfi

“ Full-face ” rattlesnake head, from Aztec design.

* Myth of the New World, l. c.

346 AN ANALYSIS OF THE

In Mr. Grabb’s collection of fragments of San Domingo pottery already mentioned,

occurs the following :
Fig. 179.

   

Front. Profile.

This has been denominated by Mr. G. and others, a “bird head.” We, however,
conclude from associated fragments that it was not a bird head but a variant of a

monkey head, thus :*
Fig. 180.

 

* For rather free identification of Polynesian forms, see the hieroglyphics of Easter Island, Journal Anthro—
pological Institute of London, 111, 370, pl. 20.

LIFE-FORM IN ART. 347

the conclusion we have attempted to educe that before naming anobject of primitive
art, it is necessary to prove its identity by intelligent comparison, rather than to
guess at it. we submit a few specimens of rock carvings, and propose to name their
several outlines.

 

Inscription at Zipatero, Nicaragnaf

a. Is composed of a pair of circles, one enclosed in the other. We have
mentioned on p. 280 our reasons for doubting the exact indentification of this and
analogous signs as the one at 6. They may be representations of the innumerable
roundish natural objects.

b. However, is much more definite. Referring to the variants, these are obServed
to be like a- pair of brows; the enclosed objects probably ansWering to eyes.

0. Is probably serpentine.

d. Unknown.

f. The modified crotalian curve.

It. Forehead ornament.

2'. Unknown, probably an ornamentation about an eye.

j. A variant of the crotalian curve.

0 0 (I ' “c “Q Q . W

Inscription in New Mexico. (Gila Region. )‘r

”K6550

a. Ancient sign of man. (Turanian distribution?)
1). More modern sign of man.

* Squ’er, Nicaragua, II, 63.
fBartlett, l. c., U, 216.

348 AN ANALYSIS OF THE

0. Probably derived by imitation by some nomad Who has seen the sign of
human profile on an Aztec monument.

(1. Modern sign of quadruped, mounted by man.

6: Quadruped sign.

f. Unknown.

 

An inscription showing examples of the ancient anthropoid Sign. *
A knowledge of Central American design has rendered the task easy of proving
that the markings (Fig. 184) had been-made by some one under the influence of the

art of the region in which they were discovered, and we have no hesitation in
naming it Aztec.
Fig. 184.

 

Aztec Inscription. (Jr)
a. Profile crotalian jaw curve.

3). Upper member of a variant of same.
0. Closed variant of the same.

d. Probably a bifid tongue protruding from a Crotalus head.
6. Unknown.

f. Same as b.
g. Simplified crotalian curves.

* Emory’s Report. 1848, p. 90. (Near Gila River.) + Stephens, I. 0., 18-19.

LIFE-FORM IN ART. 349

h. Rattles of rattlesnakes. The letter is placed between two figures of the same

value.
i. Unknown.
j. Unknown.
1. Mouth with teeth. .
m. Human foot with rattlesnake—rattle ornament as anklet.
n. Serpentine curve.
0. Unknown symmetrical design.

Such are some of the conclusions to be derived from the study of the life-form
in art! \Ve pause in the midst of an endless theme, with the mind thronged with
strange shapes that arrange themselves into groups of imperfectly-defined limits.

As we acquaint ourselves with these attempts of man to record his thoughts in
carvings and painted images, we are partakers of the pleasures of the naturalist.
Man in establishing fashions of love—making and house-building is an object of the
same sort of interest as the bird'or the bee. The method of study adopted in each
case should be the same, however we may be influenced by importance of the results

thereby obtained.

Fig. 185.

 
  
  

    

mi?)
lygiaama

Specimen of the characters of the Dresden Codex.

 

 

ERRATA.

Fig. 2, p. 285, is most probably the Odontophorus of Tschudi.
For Mephistopholes on p. 298, read Mephistopheles.

For Thackeray, p. 300, read Thackeray.

For Fig. 25, p. 300, read 25a.

For figures on twelfth line, p. 802, read fingers.

For Palencque, p. 315, read Palenque.

For to on fifth line, p. 315, read and.

For impossible, ninth line, p. 315, read possible.

The illustrations of this Memoir have been executed by the photo-electrotype process, by Messrs. F‘. A. Wen-

'deroth & 00., of Philadelphia, from drawings by Mr. Hermann Faber. .

A. P. s.—V0L. XV. 4A.

SECTION I.

“ II.

“ III.

“ IV.

“ v.

SECTION I.
“ II.
“ III.
“ IV.

(350)

CONTENTS-

PART I.

GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS.

PAGE.
The Imitative ............... y. ................. ‘ ........................................ 279
The Inventive ....................................................................... 280
The Ethnic Value of Design .............................................................. 282
The Realistic ........................... , ................................................ 2 84
The Conventional ....................................................................... 285

((1.) General Remarks; (b.) Conditions favoring the Conventional; (0.) The “Fantas—
tic ;” ((1.) Ethnic value of the Conventional; (e.) “The Grotesque ;” ( f.) The
tendencies of thc Conventional; (9.) The Symbol; (b.) The Zoo-Myth; (5.)
Errors of Naturalists in depicting Animals.
The Dragon ......................... v ................................................ 299

PART II.

/ THE STUDY OF VARIANTS.

General Remarks, including the Lion Head ............................................. 301
The Palm-Tree ....................................................................... 308
The Serpent ............................................. ' ......... , .................... 314
The Man ............ 318

A. The Head. ((1.) The Full—Face. 1. The Gorgoneion . 2. The Transverse Facial

\ Line. 3. The Radical of the Human Face. (b.) The Profile.

B . The Radical of Man ........................................................... 33]
Other Variants from American Design .................................................... 340
Difl’icul‘ties met with in analyzing the Life- Form ........................................... 341
The Study of Inscriptions and Piciographs ................................................ 346

In Article IV, Volume XV, Part I.

Page

£6

66,

87, 16th line from top,

6‘

88, last line (note),

7th line

1st
8th

8th
10th

' 12th

middle of page,

6th

‘4

(t

‘5

‘t

‘K

4‘

2 par.

ERRATA

011 the Topography and Geology of Santo Domingo, by William M. Gabb.

Saraneta
third

from bottom Pulgarisi

“

It

fit

fit

G uaraguano
“ channel or the ’
top, probably like
“ brownish limestone

has been cemented
gasteropodons
bottom, commissioner

tile—shaped

112, 15th line from bottom, erystallie

114,
116,
116,
117,
120,
133,
135,
137,
138,
139,
144,
145,
149,
151,

10th
15th
14th
4th
7th
1 7th
15th
5th
1 2th
2d
14th
1 5th
1 6th
6th

‘4

154, last line,

163, 2d line from top,
166, note,
177, 15th line from top,

183,
185,
186,
186,
190,
191,
201,
204,
it
219,
221,

1 4th
1 2th
1 2th
2d
9th
3d
9th
1 st
301
1 7th

H

H

H

6‘

t‘

“ outside of the trail V
top, caps
bottom, cassara
hard

bottom, Loma de los Minas

top,

top, cross grained
“ whose conifers
“ Yamoso
“ hojo
“ brought on
“ Miocene sandstone
“ towns

bottom, little outline
calcareous limestone
of Dajabon
beach-mark

top,

Mount Murass

little outline
“ ewploration

bottom,- J irana

top, every place
bottom, las Platanas
top, dips

“ brakes

bottom, being a similarly shaped

top, number or whorls
“ great variety

bottom, among 7 shells

Strombina grada te

226, _11th line from bottom, Plochela

227,

1 7th

‘6

(c

“ last fine whorls

should read Savaneta.

blind.
Pulgarin.
Guaraguano’.
channel on the.
properly like.
brownish hornstone.
has been converted.
gasteropod.
commission.
lily-shaped. ‘ ‘
crystalline.
aside of the, &c._
caps.

cassava.

hand

de las ,

coarse grained.
where conifers.
Yamasa.

hoja.

brought me.
limestone.
homes.

outlier.
sandstone.

to.
bench-mark.
Muraso.
outlier.
eaploitation.

J ivana.

one place.

los Platanos.
dip.

bushes.

having.

0f-

rarity.

among these.
gradata.
Ploehelcea.

five.

246, 6th & 7th, I inadvertently say, “I have never seen it from other localities.” This is incorrect.
I have collected it 011 the Savana 1a Mar Pass, as will be seen in the text.

249, 8th line from bottom, 0. papyia should read papkia.

 

 

14 Dfi‘

RETURN TO DESK FRO‘M

EARTH SCIENCES LIBRARY

 

.C EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

el/IINIH/llHillfill/II!!!IIIIIIIIIIIMIIIIIIIIll/lNIH!!!  

    

 

'NGMCE;

. Preceding Vol'ufies. of the New Series can be obtained from the Librarian at the Hall of

utheSocie 37. Price, five doliars each. A Volume consists of three parts; but separate ‘Pai‘tsk

2; J. P. LESLEY, Librarian.

Without breaking a Vulume.