cially by female attire, as may be seen in the accompanying drawing, where the dots for buttons on each oval seem to show that the body is signified (Fig. 16, c; cf. Fig. 7, c).[1] This, along with the triangular cape-shape of the trunk, is one of the few illustrations of the effect of dress on the first childish treatment of the figure. As a rule, this primitive art is a study of Nature in so far as the artificial adjuncts of dress are ignored, and the rounded forms of the body are, though crudely enough, no doubt, hinted at.
Coming now to the arms, we find that their introduction is very uncertain. To the child, as also to the savage, the arms are what the Germans call a Nebensache—side matter (i. e., figuratively as well as literally)—and are omitted in rather more than
 | |
| Fig. 16. | Fig. 17. |
one case out of two. After all, the divine portion, the head, can be supported very well without their help.
The arms, as well as the legs, being the thin, lanky members, are commonly represented by lines. The same thing is noticeable in the drawings of savages.[2] The arms appear in the front view of the figure as stretched out horizontally, or at least reaching out from the sides; and their appearance always gives a certain liveliness to the figure, an air of joyous self-proclamation, as if they said in their gesture language, "Here I am!" (see Fig. 5, a, and the accompanying drawing of a boy of six. Fig. 17).
In respect of shape and structure a process of evolution may be observed. In certain cases the abstract linear representation gives place to contour, the arm being drawn of a certain thickness. But I find that the linear represenation of the arm often
