The Project Gutenberg eBook of The feather symbol in ancient Hopi
designs, by J. Walter Fewkes
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at
www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you
will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before
using this eBook.
Title: The feather symbol in ancient Hopi designs
Author: J. Walter Fewkes
Release Date: April 15, 2023 [eBook #70555]
Language: English
Produced by: Robert Tonsing and The Online Distributed Proofreading Team
at https://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images
generously made available by The Internet Archive)
*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE FEATHER SYMBOL IN ANCIENT
HOPI DESIGNS ***
THE FEATHER SYMBOL IN ANCIENT HOPI DESIGNS
J. WALTER FEWKES
Although the prehistoric Indians of Tusayan have left no written
records in the forms of books, documents, or codices, there survives
from their time a most elaborate paleography which has been preserved
on imperishable material in the dry soil of Arizona for several
centuries. This paleography is a picture writing, often highly symbolic
and complicated, but from it the student can obtain an idea of Hopi
thought and its expression at that remote time. It reveals phases
of ancient life which have been modified or lost in the subsequent
development of the race.
The most abundant of all objects found in the ruins scattered over the
Southwest are fragments of pottery, and if the cemeteries of these
ancient habitations are excavated large collections of decorated
bowls, vases, and jars may be had from any ruin of considerable size.
The majority of these fragments of pottery from Tusayan are richly
decorated with designs, some of which are very complicated. The figures
represented in this ornamentation are often realistic, but many are
highly symbolic and conventionalized. It is an object of the present
article to discuss one symbol of the latter group, and for this purpose
I have chosen the feather, which, through its metamorphosis in form, is
one of the more difficult to recognize.
Before passing to a consideration of the feather in ancient Hopi
symbolism, it may be interesting to note that very few of the
figures with which pottery from pueblo ruins is decorated have been
interpreted, and we may say that the study is as yet in its infancy.
The ancient Tusayan ware bears several designs of a simple, geometric
shape, which are widely distributed over the whole Pueblo area of
the Southwest. So far, however, as my knowledge of ancient Pueblo
paleography goes, the symbols of the feather as here indicated are
confined to ruins of villages which are purely Hopi in origin, although
they may later be found elsewhere in Arizona or New Mexico.
I have shown in several previous publications on the ceremonials of
the Hopi ritual the significant part which the figure of the feather
plays in the decoration of altars and ceremonial paraphernalia, but I
am unaware that any one has yet called attention to the very important
use of the feather symbols in the decoration of ancient Hopi ceramics.
A pottery ornamentation has a religious intent, and, since from its
presence as a decorative element there is every reason to believe that
the feather in ancient times held much the same position in the ritual
as at present, it is instructive to trace its many variations as a
symbol.
While what is here written is drawn more especially from the
paleography of Sikyatki,[1] it is true, likewise, of that represented
in all the Tusayan ruins where yellow ware is abundant. I might
instance examples from old Cuñopavi, Kisakobi or Old Walpi, and
Old Micoñinovi. It does not, however, hold in all particulars when
we study the red ware characteristic of the ruins along the Little
Colorado river, where the feather takes another symbolic form not fully
discussed in the present article. It applies to representations of
the feather as depicted on altars now in use in Tusayan, symbols of
feathers on dolls and ceremonial paraphernalia used by people who are
lineal descendants of the inhabitants of the ruined pueblos mentioned
above. The ruins of Sikyatki lie about three miles east of Walpi, and
the pueblo of which they are the remains was destroyed previously to
the middle of the sixteenth century.
I have grouped all the striking modifications in bird and feather
symbols in close approximation in an installation of the more
instructive pieces of pottery from Sikyatki in the National Museum, at
Washington, and the reader may there find a larger series illustrating
ancient Hopi paleography than has ever before been displayed. A
forthcoming report[2] of the Bureau of American Ethnology, under
the auspices of which institution these objects were collected, will
describe these variations in detail, and as this report is elaborately
illustrated, the reader will soon have abundant published material from
which to study modifications of the feather symbol in ancient Tusayan.
We have no difficulty in recognizing among the many figures of animals
which the ancient Hopi potter depicted on her wares the great group
to which any one belongs. Four-legged animals of two kinds, frogs
and lizards, are readily separated from mammals; apodal reptiles or
snakes are easily distinguished from both, and there is no difficulty
in separating the moth or butterfly from the spider or dragon-fly.
The great group to which the animal depicted belongs is not difficult
to discover, and from a large series of related designs one may trace
quite readily the changes in form which have resulted in highly
conventionalized modifications.
The most constant group of animals chosen for realistic or symbolic
representation on ancient Tusayan ceramic ware is that of birds.
More than two-thirds of all the pictographs on ancient pottery where
animals are intended represent avian forms. The modifications which
these figures pass through as they become conventionalized likewise
exceed in number and variety those of any other animals, and a
comprehensive study of the different symbols representing birds would
be a most interesting and instructive one. This study is important as
a ground-work for the following conclusions, for in no other way can
we identify as feathers some of the highly modified symbols which are
here considered. An adequate discussion of different forms of birds in
ancient designs would necessitate more pages of text and illustrations
than could here be devoted to it. If my conclusions seem hasty, I
must ask the reader not to reject them without examining collateral
evidences which I have elsewhere presented.
The ancient Hopi decorator not only represented birds in many more
different shapes than she did other animals, but even decorated other
animals with feathers in accordance with ancient traditions. Nor did
she stop with animals; symbolic figures of the sun or the lightning
or the rainbow have symbols of feathers attached to them, and this,
to us incongruous, association is often essential to indicate the
symbol. This predominance in the number of pictures of feathered
gods is a faithful reproduction of denizens of their ancient
Pantheon. The majority of the gods were avian in character, even when
anthropomorphic.[3] Several animals, as mythic lizards, snakes, and
even mammalian forms, are represented in ancient pictography, furnished
with crests of feathers on their heads. These are drawn in this way
in conformance with ancient legends, and, with traditions to guide
us, we have little difficulty in determining some of the symbolic
forms which the feather takes in pictography. This method is used by
me as corroboratory evidence in determining the prescribed symbols
of feathers which have been previously identified by their relative
positions on the bodies of birds.
It is plain, I think, that having determined from an avian figure
the form of the organs and appendages of the bird in their different
modifications, due to conventionalism, we are able to recognize the
symbolic forms adopted by ancient artists to represent the feathers of
wing, tail, or body. If figures of feathers were so well drawn that we
could identify them as such, we would have no difficulty in recognizing
a feather when drawn on a fragment of pottery, where no other part
of a bird was represented. An accurately drawn feather in such cases
would be easily recognized; but the feathers made by the ancient
Hopi decorators of pottery were not accurate representations—they
were symbolic. The only way we can identify them is by association.
Having determined the head, body, legs, tail, and wings of an animal
which must be a bird, we examine the separate components which form
the tail and conclude what part represents a tail feather. We use, in
other words, the morphological method of determining the homologies of
organs and appendages which we borrow from naturalists and apply to
pictographs.
Having thus determined the symbol of a tail or wing feather from their
positions in representations of birds and fixing in the mind its form,
we are able to recognize it where it reappears, isolated, or in new
combinations. While this way of determining the feather symbol was the
method adopted, there was brought to its aid likewise the testimony of
living priests, among whom knowledge of some of the ancient symbols
still survives. This latter aid to a comprehension of the symbols of
ancient paleography is valuable, so far as it goes, but it does not
take one long to discover that it is limited in its application. Many
ancient designs are incomprehensible to living Hopi priests, and their
interpretations are in some cases simply conjectural. The decay in
knowledge of the meanings of old symbols is due to the fact that most
of the ancient symbolism has been replaced by the modern.
In their drawings of animals the ancient Hopi artists were often far
from realistic. They violated many fundamental rules in perspective.
This is well illustrated in profile figures. It often happens, for
instance, in delineating the head of an animal, as seen from one side,
that both eyes are represented. The feathers of a bird's tail, normally
on a horizontal plane, are brought into a vertical. Internal organs
which are hidden from sight are sometimes represented—a characteristic
of modern Pueblo art, where, as in pictures of antelopes, it is not
uncommon to find the heart and œsophagus, or even the intestinal tract,
drawn as if the animal were transparent. In a figure of a bird shown
on plate LIX in my preliminary account of Sikyatki, where the artist
apparently had no available space in which to represent the extremity
of the tail, it is bent upward, and the tips of three feathers
conventionalized into three triangles, one of the symbols of wing
feathers, as elsewhere shown.
In their simplest forms figures of birds are crudely represented,
consisting of a head with curved beak and elongated body, which is
continued backward into three or four parallel lines, representing tail
feathers.
It is an instructive fact that _three_[4] seems to be the predominating
number of tail feathers in pictures of birds, as seen in the clusters
of symbolic feathers, _f_, in the richly decorated vase a part of
which is depicted in figure 5. This number, however, is not universal,
for there are many well-drawn figures of birds with more than three
tail-feathers, and in some of the simpler forms there are but two.
Certain jars in the form of birds have the wing and tail feathers
represented by parallel lines, and the same bands are often employed
on the bodies of dolls to represent a feathered garment which some
mythological personages are reputed to have worn.
One of the common forms of the feather symbol is shown in figure 1,
which represents the tail of a bird as pictured on a beautiful food
basin from Sikyatki. In this figure five feathers are represented,
and the characteristic marking of each feather is a division into a
black and red zone by a diagonal line. The upper part of the figure
represents the body and the two lateral appendages the wings, which in
the original figure are well represented. A figure of feathers with the
same outline, but destitute of the characteristic markings of figure 1,
may be seen in figure 2, where three feather symbols are represented.
[Illustration: 1 2]
Figure 2[5] represents a crest composed of three feathers copied from
a design on the head of a reptilian figure depicted on the interior of
a food basin from Sikyatki. There are other figures of animals which
bear this symbolic form of feather on the head, and its occurrence as
a decorative design on the exterior of food basins, where there is no
other suggestion of a bird, is common.
The same form of the feather symbol appears in figure 3, where we
have the triangular tips differently marked from any of the previous
symbols. There are in the Sikyatki collection designs representing
birds where the feathers of the tail are identical in shape and
markings with these, and it is reasonable to suppose that in this
figure they represent the same parts as when attached to a picture of a
bird.
The fragment shown in figure 3 represents a portion of the upper
surface of a vase, of which the dotted line is the border of the
orifice.
Having determined from its position on a bird that the main design
in figure 3 is a conventionalized feather, let us see if there is
corroborative evidence from other sources telling the same story.
In modern Hopi ceremonials the priests use a small gourd receptacle for
sacred water, specimens of which have been figured elsewhere.[6] It
sometimes happens that an earthen vase is used for the same purpose.
This water gourd is covered by a cotton net, and feathers are tied to
that part of the net which surrounds the orifice. When an earthen vase
is used a cotton string is tied around the neck of the vase, and to
this string feathers are attached. Apparently we have a deep-seated
and significant connection between the ancient vase and the modern
ceremonial counterpart with appended feathers. The ancient form had
symbols of feathers painted on the upper surface about the orifice, the
modern has the feather itself tied in the same position.
In the design represented in figure 3 we have, therefore, symbols of
feathers represented as tied around the neck of an ancient Sikyatki
vase. The figure represents only a portion of the top of this vessel,
but gives enough to show the general character of this form of feather
symbol. If we compare this symbol with those on the head of the picture
of Tuñwup[7] on the upright slats of the Katcina altars of modern times
we will find an exact correspondence. They are also the same in shape
and markings as the painted wooden sticks representing feathers on the
heads of several dolls.[8]
The symbolic picture of the feather has still other modifications in
its markings from the preceding, although preserving the same shape.
One of the most highly conventionalized symbolic figures of the feather
is a triangle in which there are two parallel lines on one side. This
form of the feather symbol is said to be the feather of the wild
turkey, and the double marking recalls that of a tail feather.
We find this symbol on the angles of the lightning snakes of the
sand-picture of the Antelope altar at Cuñopavi,[9] on wooden slats of
the Flute altars,[10] and elsewhere. I have ceramic objects from the
ruins of Homolobi and Chevlon which bear this form of feather symbol,
and it appears to have been used as far south as Pinedale, on the
northern edge of the Apache reservation.
[Illustration: 3 4 5]
One of the most beautiful vessels from the cemetery of Sikyatki is
the "butterfly vase," the complicated design on which I have figured
in plate LX of the Smithsonian Report for 1895. I have represented a
sector of this design in figure 5 in order to point out the feather
decorations which form an important element in the ornamentation. The
other sectors closely resemble that figured, with the exception that
the butterflies in alternating sections have different markings on
their heads, indicative of the sex. The butterfly here represented is
female, and it is interesting to note the fact that the symbol of the
female was the same when this vase was made as that now used in Hopi
ceremonials.[11] There are three clusters of feathers (_f_) in this
section, and each cluster is composed of three members. One of these
clusters corresponds with those from the head of the reptile, figure 2.
The three feathers shown in the cut below the butterfly, and
peripherally placed on the surface of the vase, are likewise feather
symbols, but as they have different markings from the others are
probably from a different genera of birds. This form of feather symbol
is a common one on ancient Sikyatki ware. One of the best illustrations
may be seen in the wing of the bird which is figured on plate LX of
my preliminary report on Sikyatki (_op. cit._). That portion of the
wing which reproduces the wing feathers is shown in figure 4, and its
resemblance to the feathers on figure 5 will, I think, be evident at a
glance.[12]
On several of the food basins from Sikyatki we find two or more
feathers of this kind represented as hanging from a ring-shape or
crescentic figure. One of the former is represented in plate LXI of
the Smithsonian Report for 1895. The latter symbol has come down to
modern times, and the figure painted on a shield of the Soyaluña
ceremony, represented in color on plate CIV of my article on Tusayan
Katcinas,[13] is almost an exact reproduction of the design on
a Sikyatki food basin. This is one of several symbols on modern
ceremonial paraphernalia which we can trace back over three hundred
years by the aid of archaeology.
[Illustration: 6 7]
The feather may lose all semblance to the preceding forms and become a
simple triangle. This is the case in figures 6 and 7 from a vase and
food basin from Sikyatki. If the whole design, of which figure 6 is one
wing, were represented we should have no hesitancy in regarding it a
figure of a bird. From their position on this figure, then, we conclude
that their triangular designs are wing feathers. If we seek to apply
the conclusion that the triangular figure represents a feather to the
jar, a portion of which is shown in figure 7, we find that the seven
triangular designs in this figure bear the same relation to the orifice
of the jar as the symbols of feathers in figure 3. This relationship,
as will readily be seen, is confirmatory of the conclusion that the
feather symbol is sometimes reduced to a simple triangle, or, looking
for corroborative evidence, we approach the subject in another way.
The conception of a serpent with a plumed head is common in modern
Tusayan, and we find several serpents represented on ancient food
basins from Sikyatki. Two of these figures have triangular appendages
on top of the head, and, as there are no other designs on that organ
that can be referred to feathers, we conclude that the triangular
symbols represent the feathered crest of the Great Plumed Serpent.
Evidently not all triangular figures represent feathers, for some may
be simply ornamental geometric designs; but that many figures of this
shape are symbols of feathers there can hardly be a reasonable doubt,
from the evidence adduced above.
From our studies of the triangle as a wing feather we are able to
interpret many designs, where all semblance to the feather or wing is
lost. Thus in the upper part of figure 7 we have one of the most common
designs on ancient Hopi ceramics. There is nothing in it to suggest a
bird's wing, but if we compare it with the wing on the undoubted figure
of a bird (figure 6) we find a perfect homology.
The presence of eagle feathers on ancient Hopi disks, symbolic of the
sun, is frequent, and feathers are still inserted in a cornhusk border
on the margin of hoops covered with painted buckskin representing
the sun in modern Tusayan ceremonies.[14] In the old forms of sun
pictographs the disk is represented by a circle, and the symbolic
feathers are arranged in four clusters on the margin. In some instances
each of these clusters of feathers is accompanied by a curved horn
similar to that near the right-hand cluster of feathers in figure 5.
The significance of this curved addition is unknown to me, but there
are a large number of specimens in which a similar design is associated
with two or more feathers.
In figure 9 we have a symbolic form of feather which is very common in
ancient Hopi decorations. The whole design from which this was taken
represents a bird in which the part lettered w is the wing and _b_ the
body. It will be noticed that this feather is attached to the body
directly under the wing, and as feathers found on the breast of birds
are at present given an especial signification in ceremonials, it is
supposed that the symbol in this design has a similar meaning. This
symbol is therefore identified as the breast feather.
[Illustration: 8]
In looking over the variety of designs in which this form of the
feather symbol occurs, one of the most instructive is shown in figure
8, from a food basin obtained at Sikyatki by Dr Miller, of Prescott,
Arizona, after my excavations at that ruin were abandoned. The complete
design on this bowl represents a figure with five triangular peripheral
extensions from a circular band, and alternating with these are five
bundles[15] of feathers of the symbolic form shown in figure 9. This
design is probably a sun emblem, although in figures of the sun
tail-feathers in four clusters are more common.
The symbol of the feather shown in figure 9 likewise occurs on the
head of a snake and that of a bird which is figured on the inside of a
ladle found at Sikyatki. It is also represented on the upper surface
of several vases in the same relative position to the orifice as those
already described and illustrated (figure 3).
The symbol of a feather with the markings shown in figure 10 is
likewise a common one in the decoration of ancient Hopi ceramics. The
design here reproduced (figure 10) is a section of a small, beautiful
vase, with the decoration confined to the equatorial region. From this
zone hang symbols of feathers, one of which is plainly indicated. These
zones are repeated at intervals around the vase. They may be comparable
with the feathers tied about modern ceremonial vessels to which I have
elsewhere referred.[16]
[Illustration: 9]
I have attempted in the preceding pages to show the symbolic forms
assumed by one letter, the feather, in the alphabet of design on
ancient Hopi ceramics. These designs, or some simple modifications
of them, occur in almost three-fourths of all the decorated ancient
vessels of Tusayan. With a little practice the student can readily
recognize them, thus rendering comprehensible a most important
element in ancient Hopi symbolism. There are two or three other known
letters in this alphabet, representing two or three other types which
can be identified with the same ease, but limited space prevents a
consideration of them in this article.
[Illustration: 10]
As would naturally be the case with an element of decoration so
constantly duplicated as the feather, there are numerous instances
where it has become so changed that while a figure was probably
intended for a feather symbol, it is difficult to prove that it was
such. These doubtful cases are not, therefore, discussed from the
uncertainty which hangs about their identification.
I believe enough has been written above to show that the feather was
regarded by ancient Hopi potters as an important decorative motive,
and that its symbolism had significant differentiations, so that even
different kinds of feathers were indicated by different markings on
those symbols.
Considering also how strong a hold the feather has on the modern Hopi
mind in ceremonial usages, I am led to the belief that its influence
on the ancient mind was of the same general character. Thus we come
back to a belief, taught by other reasoning, that ornamentation of
ancient pottery was something higher than simple effort to beautify
ceramic wares. The ruling motive in decorating these ancient vessels
was a religious one, for in their system everything was under the
same sway. Esthetic and religious feelings were not differentiated,
the one implied the other, and to elaborately decorate a vessel
without introducing a religious symbol was to the ancient potter an
impossibility. This union is weaker in the mind of the modern Hopi,
yet still potent; but as the new conception of beauty has crowded out
the religious element, the character of the pottery and its decoration
have deteriorated. Many patterns which once had a religious symbolism
are mechanically followed, through conservatism, and pottery of fair
character is still made, but every Pueblo shows a marked decadence in
the potter's art. As time goes by and the Hopi are more modified by
their new environment—contact with civilization—the white crockery of
the traders will replace the aboriginal wares. This will lead to a
still greater degeneracy of native ceramics, and, if they survive at
all, it will be more as a commercial product than a medium of religious
expression. It can readily be seen that the decorations on pottery
made "for the trade" will no longer be a spontaneous expression of
aboriginal art, but imitative of types of beauty which please the
purchaser. Into that condition much of the pottery made in pueblos
along the railroad has already drifted, and Hopi potters are not behind
their neighbors in recognizing those decorative designs which please
the buyer and those which are most often rejected. Quite in line with
what is said above is the feeling which leads some of the best potters
of the East Mesa to imitate ancient forms of decorations. These copies
are adorned with old patterns because ethnologists ask for ancient ware
and purchase vessels with imitations of ancient symbols more eagerly
than modern. Trade cannot revive the old religious feeling which
expressed itself on ancient Hopi ceramics or resuscitate the defunct
intimate union of esthetic and religious inspiration.
Finally, and this is embraced in the primary reason why I am interested
in the archeology of the Southwest or any other region, a study of the
religious decorative symbols of ancient pottery is an investigation
not alone of the peculiarities of one cluster of men and women in
ancient Arizona, but of religion in a characteristic environment.[17]
A psychologist devises experiments in which he places individual men
or animals under conditions to observe how they are thereby affected.
Nature has performed a psychological experiment on a grand scale
for the ethnologist in the semi-deserts of Arizona, and has set
tribes of men in a special environment for our study. The problem of
the ethnologist is to consider the effect on religion as shown in
the products or expression of the same. The most important ethnic
characteristic of man is his religion. It distinguishes him from other
animals and embraces all other mental characteristics, sociology,
language, and arts.
Man can transmit his religious feelings to posterity by legends and by
paleographic records. The former, if not recorded, may suffer changes
in transmission, may be colored by successive generations, which have
heard them from their elders and passed them along to their children.
Paleography does not change. The ancient pictures are the same as when
buried in the ancient graves. We may not be able to fully interpret
them, but we are sure they have not been materially changed in the
years which separate our time from that in which they were drawn.
Imperfect as this picture-writing is as a means of transmitting to
us the religion of prehistoric Tusayan when compared with written
documents, it will in connection with legends yield a rich harvest to
the student of the history of the Pueblo beliefs. The investigator who
neglects this element in them misses the soul of the study.
FOOTNOTES:
[1] For a discussion of the antiquity of Sikyatki, see "Prehistoric
Culture of Tusayan," _American Anthropologist_, 1896, and _Report of
the Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution_, 1895.
[2] A preliminary report will be found in the Smithsonian Report for
1895.
[3] The reason for this relatively large number of avian over other
zoomorphic deities in the Hopi system is not apparent.
[4] Compare the combination of _three_ feathers in Aztec and Maya
symbolism.
[5] This figure shows the head below, with the eye well drawn. The
continuation to the left is the neck, that to the right a beginning of
an elaborate snout.
[6] A number of these gourds are figured in my accounts of Tusayan
ceremony. A vase with attached feathers, called _patne_, is represented
on page 43, _Journ. Amer. Eth. and Arch._, vol. IV.
[7] _Journ. Amer. Eth. and Arch._, vol. II, pp. 86, 107; _American
Anthropologist_, May, 1897, pp. 133, 134.
[8] It will be seen on consultation of my article on "Dolls of the
Tusayan Indians" that there are several in which the crests of feathers
on the heads are represented by sticks with symbolic markings. In some
instances we have real feathers instead of symbols. An example of this
kind is figured on page 136, _American Anthropologist_, May, 1897.
[9] Tusayan Snake Ceremonies, plate LXXII.
[10] _Journ. Amer. Eth. and Arch._, vol. II, p. 120.
[11] See male and female lightning snakes on Walpi Antelope altar.
[12] The three arrowpoints, figure 4, represent the flint arrowpoints
which the mythic bird is reputed to have worn in its feathers.
[13] Fifteenth Annual Report of the Bureau of American Ethnology.
[14] Tusayan Katcinas, Fifteenth Annual Report of the Bureau of
American Ethnology. A figure of the symbolic sun disk from which the
feathers have been removed is given on plate CIV of that memoir.
[15] The bundle here figured represents eight feathers.
[16] The symbol of the feather was painted on the vase in ancient
times, whereas in modern vessels stringed feathers are tied in the same
positions. Probably the latter custom was also common in ancient times.
[17] It is believed that the religious sentiment permeated and
dominated all ancient Hopi art as well as sociology, and that a study
of the symbolism of the decorations on ancient pottery is practically a
study of religion.
Transcriber’s Notes:
- Text enclosed by underscores is in italics (_italics_).
*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE FEATHER SYMBOL IN ANCIENT
HOPI DESIGNS ***
Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will
be renamed.
Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright
law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works,
so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the
United States without permission and without paying copyright
royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part
of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG™
concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark,
and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following
the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use
of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for
copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very
easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation
of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project
Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away--you may
do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected
by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark
license, especially commercial redistribution.
START: FULL LICENSE
THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
To protect the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting the free
distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg”), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
Project Gutenberg™ License available with this file or online at
www.gutenberg.org/license.
Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works
1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg™
electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in your
possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
Project Gutenberg™ electronic work and you do not agree to be bound
by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the
person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph
1.E.8.
1.B. “Project Gutenberg” is a registered trademark. It may only be
used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
Gutenberg™ electronic works if you follow the terms of this
agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg™
electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (“the
Foundation” or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection
of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works. Nearly all the individual
works in the collection are in the public domain in the United
States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the
United States and you are located in the United States, we do not
claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing,
displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as
all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope
that you will support the Project Gutenberg™ mission of promoting
free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg™
works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the
Project Gutenberg™ name associated with the work. You can easily
comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg™ License when
you share it without charge with others.
1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are
in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States,
check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this
agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing,
distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any
other Project Gutenberg™ work. The Foundation makes no
representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any
country other than the United States.
1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other
immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg™ License must appear
prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg™ work (any work
on which the phrase “Project Gutenberg” appears, or with which the
phrase “Project Gutenberg” is associated) is accessed, displayed,
performed, viewed, copied or distributed:
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no
restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it
under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this
eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the
United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where
you are located before using this eBook.
1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is
derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in
the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase “Project
Gutenberg” associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply
either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or
obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg™
trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg™ electronic work is posted
with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
will be linked to the Project Gutenberg™ License for all works
posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the
beginning of this work.
1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg™
License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg™.
1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
Gutenberg™ License.
1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including
any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access
to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg™ work in a format
other than “Plain Vanilla ASCII” or other format used in the official
version posted on the official Project Gutenberg™ website
(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original “Plain
Vanilla ASCII” or other form. Any alternate format must include the
full Project Gutenberg™ License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg™ works
unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
access to or distributing Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
provided that:
• You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
the use of Project Gutenberg™ works calculated using the method
you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed
to the owner of the Project Gutenberg™ trademark, but he has
agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid
within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are
legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty
payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in
Section 4, “Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation.”
• You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg™
License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue
all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg™
works.
• You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of
any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
receipt of the work.
• You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ works.
1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project
Gutenberg™ electronic work or group of works on different terms than
are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing
from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of
the Project Gutenberg™ trademark. Contact the Foundation as set
forth in Section 3 below.
1.F.
1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project
Gutenberg™ collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg™
electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may
contain “Defects,” such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate
or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or
other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
cannot be read by your equipment.
1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the “Right
of Replacement or Refund” described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
Gutenberg™ trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
Gutenberg™ electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
DAMAGE.
1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium
with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you
with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in
lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person
or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If
the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing
without further opportunities to fix the problem.
1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you “AS-IS”, WITH NO
OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT
LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement
violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the
agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or
limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or
unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the
remaining provisions.
1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
providing copies of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works in
accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the
production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses,
including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of
the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this
or any Project Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or
additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any
Defect you cause.
Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg™
Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It
exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations
from people in all walks of life.
Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg™'s
goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™ collection will
remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
and permanent future for Project Gutenberg™ and future
generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see
Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at
www.gutenberg.org
Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit
501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by
U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
The Foundation's business office is located at 809 North 1500 West,
Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up
to date contact information can be found at the Foundation's website
and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact
Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without
widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest
array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
status with the IRS.
The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND
DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular
state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate
While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
approach us with offers to donate.
International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation
methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To
donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate
Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg™ electronic works
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could be
freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose network of
volunteer support.
Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several printed
editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
edition.
Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org
This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,
including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
