In another class of ware--the alligator group--the treatment is quite different, being decidedly more clumsy and realized by distinct processes; but prominence is given to a number of corresponding features. The strong curve of the back, the dentals and dots, and the muzzle and mouth refer apparently to the same creature. The curiously marked panel in the body of the last example is a unique feature, which appears, however, in a few other cases. These drawings occur upon the sides of vases, alternating with the plastic features, and are perhaps generally associated with such features in the expression of some mythical idea. The modeled creature is often represented with two heads instead of with a head and a tail, and the painted forms, in many cases, exhibit the same peculiarity as shown in Fig. 262. I surmise that the employment of two heads arises from the need of securing perfect balance of parts rather than as an original product of the imagination. [Illustration: Fig. 262. Two headed form of the alligator.] It will be interesting, as additional examples are presented, to note the effect of modification upon particular features of the animal, to observe how some come into prominence, representing the creature and the idea, while others fall into disuse and disappear. In nature the line of the body is perhaps the most strongly characteristic feature, and it is in art the most persistent. It survives in the stems of many conventional devices from which all other suggestions of the animal have vanished. [Illustration: Fig. 263. Figure of the alligator much simplified.] The following examples depart still further from nature, approaching the border line between the distinctly imitative and the purely conventional or geometric phases. In the first (Fig. 263) all the leading features are recognizable, but are very much simplified. The jaws are without teeth, the head is without eyes, and the body without indication of scales. The other example (Fig. 264) is of a somewhat different type and may possibly refer to some other reptilian form, but many links connecting the two are found. The shape is more angular and is a step further removed from nature. From shapes as conventional as this we drop readily into purely geometric forms, as will be seen further on. These and the preceding drawings are all executed on broad surfaces, where fancy could have free play. The modifying or conventionalizing forces are, therefore, quite vague. Variation from natural forms is due partly to a lack of skill on the part of the painter, partly to the peculiar demands of ceramic embellishment, and partly to the traditional style of treatment acquired in still more primitive stages of culture and in other and unidentified branches of art. [Illustration: Fig. 264. The alligator much modified by ceramic influences.]