|
Chapter V
ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE INTELLECTUAL AND MORAL FACULTIES DURING PRIMEVAL
AND CIVILISED TIMES.
Advancement of the intellectual powers through natural selection--
Importance of imitation--Social and moral faculties--Their development
within the limits of the same tribe--Natural selection as affecting
civilised nations--Evidence that civilised nations were once barbarous.
The subjects to be discussed in this chapter are of the highest interest,
but are treated by me in an imperfect and fragmentary manner. Mr. Wallace,
in an admirable paper before referred to (1. Anthropological Review, May
1864, p. clviii.), argues that man, after he had partially acquired those
intellectual and moral faculties which distinguish him from the lower
animals, would have been but little liable to bodily modifications through
natural selection or any other means. For man is enabled through his
mental faculties "to keep with an unchanged body in harmony with the
changing universe." He has great power of adapting his habits to new
conditions of life. He invents weapons, tools, and various stratagems to
procure food and to defend himself. When he migrates into a colder climate
he uses clothes, builds sheds, and makes fires; and by the aid of fire
cooks food otherwise indigestible. He aids his fellow-men in many ways,
and anticipates future events. Even at a remote period he practised some
division of labour.
The lower animals, on the other hand, must have their bodily structure
modified in order to survive under greatly changed conditions. They must
be rendered stronger, or acquire more effective teeth or claws, for defence
against new enemies; or they must be reduced in size, so as to escape
detection and danger. When they migrate into a colder climate, they must
become clothed with thicker fur, or have their constitutions altered. If
they fail to be thus modified, they will cease to exist.
The case, however, is widely different, as Mr. Wallace has with justice
insisted, in relation to the intellectual and moral faculties of man.
These faculties are variable; and we have every reason to believe that the
variations tend to be inherited. Therefore, if they were formerly of high
importance to primeval man and to his ape-like progenitors, they would have
been perfected or advanced through natural selection. Of the high
importance of the intellectual faculties there can be no doubt, for man
mainly owes to them his predominant position in the world. We can see,
that in the rudest state of society, the individuals who were the most
sagacious, who invented and used the best weapons or traps, and who were
best able to defend themselves, would rear the greatest number of
offspring. The tribes, which included the largest number of men thus
endowed, would increase in number and supplant other tribes. Numbers
depend primarily on the means of subsistence, and this depends partly on
the physical nature of the country, but in a much higher degree on the arts
which are there practised. As a tribe increases and is victorious, it is
often still further increased by the absorption of other tribes. (2.
After a time the members or tribes which are absorbed into another tribe
assume, as Sir Henry Maine remarks ('Ancient Law,' 1861, p. 131), that they
are the co-descendants of the same ancestors.) The stature and strength of
the men of a tribe are likewise of some importance for its success, and
these depend in part on the nature and amount of the food which can be
obtained. In Europe the men of the Bronze period were supplanted by a race
more powerful, and, judging from their sword-handles, with larger hands (3.
Morlot, 'Soc. Vaud. Sc. Nat.' 1860, p. 294.); but their success was
probably still more due to their superiority in the arts.
All that we know about savages, or may infer from their traditions and from
old monuments, the history of which is quite forgotten by the present
inhabitants, shew that from the remotest times successful tribes have
supplanted other tribes. Relics of extinct or forgotten tribes have been
discovered throughout the civilised regions of the earth, on the wild
plains of America, and on the isolated islands in the Pacific Ocean. At
the present day civilised nations are everywhere supplanting barbarous
nations, excepting where the climate opposes a deadly barrier; and they
succeed mainly, though not exclusively, through their arts, which are the
products of the intellect. It is, therefore, highly probable that with
mankind the intellectual faculties have been mainly and gradually perfected
through natural selection; and this conclusion is sufficient for our
purpose. Undoubtedly it would be interesting to trace the development of
each separate faculty from the state in which it exists in the lower
animals to that in which it exists in man; but neither my ability nor
knowledge permits the attempt.
It deserves notice that, as soon as the progenitors of man became social
(and this probably occurred at a very early period), the principle of
imitation, and reason, and experience would have increased, and much
modified the intellectual powers in a way, of which we see only traces in
the lower animals. Apes are much given to imitation, as are the lowest
savages; and the simple fact previously referred to, that after a time no
animal can be caught in the same place by the same sort of trap, shews that
animals learn by experience, and imitate the caution of others. Now, if
some one man in a tribe, more sagacious than the others, invented a new
snare or weapon, or other means of attack or defence, the plainest self-
interest, without the assistance of much reasoning power, would prompt the
other members to imitate him; and all would thus profit. The habitual
practice of each new art must likewise in some slight degree strengthen the
intellect. If the new invention were an important one, the tribe would
increase in number, spread, and supplant other tribes. In a tribe thus
rendered more numerous there would always be a rather greater chance of the
birth of other superior and inventive members. If such men left children
to inherit their mental superiority, the chance of the birth of still more
ingenious members would be somewhat better, and in a very small tribe
decidedly better. Even if they left no children, the tribe would still
include their blood-relations; and it has been ascertained by
agriculturists (4. I have given instances in my Variation of Animals under
Domestication, vol. ii. p. 196.) that by preserving and breeding from the
family of an animal, which when slaughtered was found to be valuable, the
desired character has been obtained.
Turning now to the social and moral faculties. In order that primeval men,
or the ape-like progenitors of man, should become social, they must have
acquired the same instinctive feelings, which impel other animals to live
in a body; and they no doubt exhibited the same general disposition. They
would have felt uneasy when separated from their comrades, for whom they
would have felt some degree of love; they would have warned each other of
danger, and have given mutual aid in attack or defence. All this implies
some degree of sympathy, fidelity, and courage. Such social qualities, the
paramount importance of which to the lower animals is disputed by no one,
were no doubt acquired by the progenitors of man in a similar manner,
namely, through natural selection, aided by inherited habit. When two
tribes of primeval man, living in the same country, came into competition,
if (other circumstances being equal) the one tribe included a great number
of courageous, sympathetic and faithful members, who were always ready to
warn each other of danger, to aid and defend each other, this tribe would
succeed better and conquer the other. Let it be borne in mind how all-
important in the never-ceasing wars of savages, fidelity and courage must
be. The advantage which disciplined soldiers have over undisciplined
hordes follows chiefly from the confidence which each man feels in his
comrades. Obedience, as Mr. Bagehot has well shewn (5. See a remarkable
series of articles on 'Physics and Politics,' in the 'Fortnightly Review,'
Nov. 1867; April 1, 1868; July 1, 1869, since separately published.), is of
the highest value, for any form of government is better than none. Selfish
and contentious people will not cohere, and without coherence nothing can
be effected. A tribe rich in the above qualities would spread and be
victorious over other tribes: but in the course of time it would, judging
from all past history, be in its turn overcome by some other tribe still
more highly endowed. Thus the social and moral qualities would tend slowly
to advance and be diffused throughout the world.
But it may be asked, how within the limits of the same tribe did a large
number of members first become endowed with these social and moral
qualities, and how was the standard of excellence raised? It is extremely
doubtful whether the offspring of the more sympathetic and benevolent
parents, or of those who were the most faithful to their comrades, would be
reared in greater numbers than the children of selfish and treacherous
parents belonging to the same tribe. He who was ready to sacrifice his
life, as many a savage has been, rather than betray his comrades, would
often leave no offspring to inherit his noble nature. The bravest men, who
were always willing to come to the front in war, and who freely risked
their lives for others, would on an average perish in larger numbers than
other men. Therefore, it hardly seems probable, that the number of men
gifted with such virtues, or that the standard of their excellence, could
be increased through natural selection, that is, by the survival of the
fittest; for we are not here speaking of one tribe being victorious over
another.
Although the circumstances, leading to an increase in the number of those
thus endowed within the same tribe, are too complex to be clearly followed
out, we can trace some of the probable steps. In the first place, as the
reasoning powers and foresight of the members became improved, each man
would soon learn that if he aided his fellow-men, he would commonly receive
aid in return. From this low motive he might acquire the habit of aiding
his fellows; and the habit of performing benevolent actions certainly
strengthens the feeling of sympathy which gives the first impulse to
benevolent actions. Habits, moreover, followed during many generations
probably tend to be inherited.
But another and much more powerful stimulus to the development of the
social virtues, is afforded by the praise and the blame of our fellow-men.
To the instinct of sympathy, as we have already seen, it is primarily due,
that we habitually bestow both praise and blame on others, whilst we love
the former and dread the latter when applied to ourselves; and this
instinct no doubt was originally acquired, like all the other social
instincts, through natural selection. At how early a period the
progenitors of man in the course of their development, became capable of
feeling and being impelled by, the praise or blame of their fellow-
creatures, we cannot of course say. But it appears that even dogs
appreciate encouragement, praise, and blame. The rudest savages feel the
sentiment of glory, as they clearly shew by preserving the trophies of
their prowess, by their habit of excessive boasting, and even by the
extreme care which they take of their personal appearance and decorations;
for unless they regarded the opinion of their comrades, such habits would
be senseless.
They certainly feel shame at the breach of some of their lesser rules, and
apparently remorse, as shewn by the case of the Australian who grew thin
and could not rest from having delayed to murder some other woman, so as to
propitiate his dead wife's spirit. Though I have not met with any other
recorded case, it is scarcely credible that a savage, who will sacrifice
his life rather than betray his tribe, or one who will deliver himself up
as a prisoner rather than break his parole (6. Mr. Wallace gives cases in
his 'Contributions to the Theory of Natural Selection,' 1870, p. 354.),
would not feel remorse in his inmost soul, if he had failed in a duty,
which he held sacred.
We may therefore conclude that primeval man, at a very remote period, was
influenced by the praise and blame of his fellows. It is obvious, that the
members of the same tribe would approve of conduct which appeared to them
to be for the general good, and would reprobate that which appeared evil.
To do good unto others--to do unto others as ye would they should do unto
you--is the foundation-stone of morality. It is, therefore, hardly
possible to exaggerate the importance during rude times of the love of
praise and the dread of blame. A man who was not impelled by any deep,
instinctive feeling, to sacrifice his life for the good of others, yet was
roused to such actions by a sense of glory, would by his example excite the
same wish for glory in other men, and would strengthen by exercise the
noble feeling of admiration. He might thus do far more good to his tribe
than by begetting offspring with a tendency to inherit his own high
character.
With increased experience and reason, man perceives the more remote
consequences of his actions, and the self-regarding virtues, such as
temperance, chastity, etc., which during early times are, as we have before
seen, utterly disregarded, come to be highly esteemed or even held sacred.
I need not, however, repeat what I have said on this head in the fourth
chapter. Ultimately our moral sense or conscience becomes a highly complex
sentiment--originating in the social instincts, largely guided by the
approbation of our fellow-men, ruled by reason, self-interest, and in later
times by deep religious feelings, and confirmed by instruction and habit.
It must not be forgotten that although a high standard of morality gives
but a slight or no advantage to each individual man and his children over
the other men of the same tribe, yet that an increase in the number of
well-endowed men and an advancement in the standard of morality will
certainly give an immense advantage to one tribe over another. A tribe
including many members who, from possessing in a high degree the spirit of
patriotism, fidelity, obedience, courage, and sympathy, were always ready
to aid one another, and to sacrifice themselves for the common good, would
be victorious over most other tribes; and this would be natural selection.
At all times throughout the world tribes have supplanted other tribes; and
as morality is one important element in their success, the standard of
morality and the number of well-endowed men will thus everywhere tend to
rise and increase.
It is, however, very difficult to form any judgment why one particular
tribe and not another has been successful and has risen in the scale of
civilisation. Many savages are in the same condition as when first
discovered several centuries ago. As Mr. Bagehot has remarked, we are apt
to look at progress as normal in human society; but history refutes this.
The ancients did not even entertain the idea, nor do the Oriental nations
at the present day. According to another high authority, Sir Henry Maine
(7. 'Ancient Law,' 1861, p. 22. For Mr. Bagehot's remarks, 'Fortnightly
Review,' April 1, 1868, p. 452.), "the greatest part of mankind has never
shewn a particle of desire that its civil institutions should be improved."
Progress seems to depend on many concurrent favourable conditions, far too
complex to be followed out. But it has often been remarked, that a cool
climate, from leading to industry and to the various arts, has been highly
favourable thereto. The Esquimaux, pressed by hard necessity, have
succeeded in many ingenious inventions, but their climate has been too
severe for continued progress. Nomadic habits, whether over wide plains,
or through the dense forests of the tropics, or along the shores of the
sea, have in every case been highly detrimental. Whilst observing the
barbarous inhabitants of Tierra del Fuego, it struck me that the possession
of some property, a fixed abode, and the union of many families under a
chief, were the indispensable requisites for civilisation. Such habits
almost necessitate the cultivation of the ground; and the first steps in
cultivation would probably result, as I have elsewhere shewn (8. 'The
Variation of Animals and Plants under Domestication,' vol. i. p. 309.),
from some such accident as the seeds of a fruit-tree falling on a heap of
refuse, and producing an unusually fine variety. The problem, however, of
the first advance of savages towards civilisation is at present much too
difficult to be solved.
NATURAL SELECTION AS AFFECTING CIVILISED NATIONS.
I have hitherto only considered the advancement of man from a semi-human
condition to that of the modern savage. But some remarks on the action of
natural selection on civilised nations may be worth adding. This subject
has been ably discussed by Mr. W.R. Greg (9. 'Fraser's Magazine,' Sept.
1868, p. 353. This article seems to have struck many persons, and has
given rise to two remarkable essays and a rejoinder in the 'Spectator,'
Oct. 3rd and 17th, 1868. It has also been discussed in the 'Quarterly
Journal of Science,' 1869, p. 152, and by Mr. Lawson Tait in the 'Dublin
Quarterly Journal of Medical Science,' Feb. 1869, and by Mr. E. Ray
Lankester in his 'Comparative Longevity,' 1870, p. 128. Similar views
appeared previously in the 'Australasian,' July 13, 1867. I have borrowed
ideas from several of these writers.), and previously by Mr. Wallace and
Mr. Galton. (10. For Mr. Wallace, see 'Anthropological Review,' as before
cited. Mr. Galton in 'Macmillan's Magazine,' Aug. 1865, p. 318; also his
great work, 'Hereditary Genius,' 1870.) Most of my remarks are taken from
these three authors. With savages, the weak in body or mind are soon
eliminated; and those that survive commonly exhibit a vigorous state of
health. We civilised men, on the other hand, do our utmost to check the
process of elimination; we build asylums for the imbecile, the maimed, and
the sick; we institute poor-laws; and our medical men exert their utmost
skill to save the life of every one to the last moment. There is reason to
believe that vaccination has preserved thousands, who from a weak
constitution would formerly have succumbed to small-pox. Thus the weak
members of civilised societies propagate their kind. No one who has
attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be
highly injurious to the race of man. It is surprising how soon a want of
care, or care wrongly directed, leads to the degeneration of a domestic
race; but excepting in the case of man himself, hardly any one is so
ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed.
The aid which we feel impelled to give to the helpless is mainly an
incidental result of the instinct of sympathy, which was originally
acquired as part of the social instincts, but subsequently rendered, in the
manner previously indicated, more tender and more widely diffused. Nor
could we check our sympathy, even at the urging of hard reason, without
deterioration in the noblest part of our nature. The surgeon may harden
himself whilst performing an operation, for he knows that he is acting for
the good of his patient; but if we were intentionally to neglect the weak
and helpless, it could only be for a contingent benefit, with an
overwhelming present evil. We must therefore bear the undoubtedly bad
effects of the weak surviving and propagating their kind; but there appears
to be at least one check in steady action, namely that the weaker and
inferior members of society do not marry so freely as the sound; and this
check might be indefinitely increased by the weak in body or mind
refraining from marriage, though this is more to be hoped for than
expected.
In every country in which a large standing army is kept up, the finest
young men are taken by the conscription or are enlisted. They are thus
exposed to early death during war, are often tempted into vice, and are
prevented from marrying during the prime of life. On the other hand the
shorter and feebler men, with poor constitutions, are left at home, and
consequently have a much better chance of marrying and propagating their
kind. (11. Prof. H. Fick ('Einfluss der Naturwissenschaft auf das Recht,'
June 1872) has some good remarks on this head, and on other such points.)
Man accumulates property and bequeaths it to his children, so that the
children of the rich have an advantage over the poor in the race for
success, independently of bodily or mental superiority. On the other hand,
the children of parents who are short-lived, and are therefore on an
average deficient in health and vigour, come into their property sooner
than other children, and will be likely to marry earlier, and leave a
larger number of offspring to inherit their inferior constitutions. But
the inheritance of property by itself is very far from an evil; for without
the accumulation of capital the arts could not progress; and it is chiefly
through their power that the civilised races have extended, and are now
everywhere extending their range, so as to take the place of the lower
races. Nor does the moderate accumulation of wealth interfere with the
process of selection. When a poor man becomes moderately rich, his
children enter trades or professions in which there is struggle enough, so
that the able in body and mind succeed best. The presence of a body of
well-instructed men, who have not to labour for their daily bread, is
important to a degree which cannot be over-estimated; as all high
intellectual work is carried on by them, and on such work, material
progress of all kinds mainly depends, not to mention other and higher
advantages. No doubt wealth when very great tends to convert men into
useless drones, but their number is never large; and some degree of
elimination here occurs, for we daily see rich men, who happen to be fools
or profligate, squandering away their wealth.
Primogeniture with entailed estates is a more direct evil, though it may
formerly have been a great advantage by the creation of a dominant class,
and any government is better than none. Most eldest sons, though they may
be weak in body or mind, marry, whilst the younger sons, however superior
in these respects, do not so generally marry. Nor can worthless eldest
sons with entailed estates squander their wealth. But here, as elsewhere,
the relations of civilised life are so complex that some compensatory
checks intervene. The men who are rich through primogeniture are able to
select generation after generation the more beautiful and charming women;
and these must generally be healthy in body and active in mind. The evil
consequences, such as they may be, of the continued preservation of the
same line of descent, without any selection, are checked by men of rank
always wishing to increase their wealth and power; and this they effect by
marrying heiresses. But the daughters of parents who have produced single
children, are themselves, as Mr. Galton (12. 'Hereditary Genius,' 1870, pp.
132-140.) has shewn, apt to be sterile; and thus noble families are
continually cut off in the direct line, and their wealth flows into some
side channel; but unfortunately this channel is not determined by
superiority of any kind.
Although civilisation thus checks in many ways the action of natural
selection, it apparently favours the better development of the body, by
means of good food and the freedom from occasional hardships. This may be
inferred from civilised men having been found, wherever compared, to be
physically stronger than savages. (13. Quatrefages, 'Revue des Cours
Scientifiques,' 1867-68, p. 659.) They appear also to have equal powers of
endurance, as has been proved in many adventurous expeditions. Even the
great luxury of the rich can be but little detrimental; for the expectation
of life of our aristocracy, at all ages and of both sexes, is very little
inferior to that of healthy English lives in the lower classes. (14.
See the fifth and sixth columns, compiled from good authorities, in the
table given in Mr. E.R. Lankester's 'Comparative Longevity,' 1870, p. 115.)
We will now look to the intellectual faculties. If in each grade of
society the members were divided into two equal bodies, the one including
the intellectually superior and the other the inferior, there can be little
doubt that the former would succeed best in all occupations, and rear a
greater number of children. Even in the lowest walks of life, skill and
ability must be of some advantage; though in many occupations, owing to the
great division of labour, a very small one. Hence in civilised nations
there will be some tendency to an increase both in the number and in the
standard of the intellectually able. But I do not wish to assert that this
tendency may not be more than counterbalanced in other ways, as by the
multiplication of the reckless and improvident; but even to such as these,
ability must be some advantage.
It has often been objected to views like the foregoing, that the most
eminent men who have ever lived have left no offspring to inherit their
great intellect. Mr. Galton says, "I regret I am unable to solve the
simple question whether, and how far, men and women who are prodigies of
genius are infertile. I have, however, shewn that men of eminence are by
no means so." (15. 'Hereditary Genius,' 1870, p. 330.) Great lawgivers,
the founders of beneficent religions, great philosophers and discoverers in
science, aid the progress of mankind in a far higher degree by their works
than by leaving a numerous progeny. In the case of corporeal structures,
it is the selection of the slightly better-endowed and the elimination of
the slightly less well-endowed individuals, and not the preservation of
strongly-marked and rare anomalies, that leads to the advancement of a
species. (16. 'Origin of Species' (fifth edition, 1869), p. 104.) So it
will be with the intellectual faculties, since the somewhat abler men in
each grade of society succeed rather better than the less able, and
consequently increase in number, if not otherwise prevented. When in any
nation the standard of intellect and the number of intellectual men have
increased, we may expect from the law of the deviation from an average,
that prodigies of genius will, as shewn by Mr. Galton, appear somewhat more
frequently than before.
In regard to the moral qualities, some elimination of the worst
dispositions is always in progress even in the most civilised nations.
Malefactors are executed, or imprisoned for long periods, so that they
cannot freely transmit their bad qualities. Melancholic and insane persons
are confined, or commit suicide. Violent and quarrelsome men often come to
a bloody end. The restless who will not follow any steady occupation--and
this relic of barbarism is a great check to civilisation (17. 'Hereditary
Genius,' 1870, p. 347.)--emigrate to newly-settled countries; where they
prove useful pioneers. Intemperance is so highly destructive, that the
expectation of life of the intemperate, at the age of thirty for instance,
is only 13.8 years; whilst for the rural labourers of England at the same
age it is 40.59 years. (18. E. Ray Lankester, 'Comparative Longevity,'
1870, p. 115. The table of the intemperate is from Neison's 'Vital
Statistics.' In regard to profligacy, see Dr. Farr, 'Influence of Marriage
on Mortality,' 'Nat. Assoc. for the Promotion of Social Science,' 1858.)
Profligate women bear few children, and profligate men rarely marry; both
suffer from disease. In the breeding of domestic animals, the elimination
of those individuals, though few in number, which are in any marked manner
inferior, is by no means an unimportant element towards success. This
especially holds good with injurious characters which tend to reappear
through reversion, such as blackness in sheep; and with mankind some of the
worst dispositions, which occasionally without any assignable cause make
their appearance in families, may perhaps be reversions to a savage state,
from which we are not removed by very many generations. This view seems
indeed recognised in the common expression that such men are the black
sheep of the family.
With civilised nations, as far as an advanced standard of morality, and an
increased number of fairly good men are concerned, natural selection
apparently effects but little; though the fundamental social instincts were
originally thus gained. But I have already said enough, whilst treating of
the lower races, on the causes which lead to the advance of morality,
namely, the approbation of our fellow-men--the strengthening of our
sympathies by habit--example and imitation--reason--experience, and even
self-interest--instruction during youth, and religious feelings.
A most important obstacle in civilised countries to an increase in the
number of men of a superior class has been strongly insisted on by Mr. Greg
and Mr. Galton (19. 'Fraser's Magazine,' Sept. 1868, p. 353. 'Macmillan's
Magazine,' Aug. 1865, p. 318. The Rev. F.W. Farrar ('Fraser's Magazine,'
Aug. 1870, p. 264) takes a different view.), namely, the fact that the very
poor and reckless, who are often degraded by vice, almost invariably marry
early, whilst the careful and frugal, who are generally otherwise virtuous,
marry late in life, so that they may be able to support themselves and
their children in comfort. Those who marry early produce within a given
period not only a greater number of generations, but, as shewn by Dr.
Duncan (20. 'On the Laws of the Fertility of Women,' in 'Transactions of
the Royal Society,' Edinburgh, vol. xxiv. p. 287; now published separately
under the title of 'Fecundity, Fertility, and Sterility,' 1871. See, also,
Mr. Galton, 'Hereditary Genius,' pp. 352-357, for observations to the above
effect.), they produce many more children. The children, moreover, that
are borne by mothers during the prime of life are heavier and larger, and
therefore probably more vigorous, than those born at other periods. Thus
the reckless, degraded, and often vicious members of society, tend to
increase at a quicker rate than the provident and generally virtuous
members. Or as Mr. Greg puts the case: "The careless, squalid, unaspiring
Irishman multiplies like rabbits: the frugal, foreseeing, self-respecting,
ambitious Scot, stern in his morality, spiritual in his faith, sagacious
and disciplined in his intelligence, passes his best years in struggle and
in celibacy, marries late, and leaves few behind him. Given a land
originally peopled by a thousand Saxons and a thousand Celts--and in a
dozen generations five-sixths of the population would be Celts, but five-
sixths of the property, of the power, of the intellect, would belong to the
one-sixth of Saxons that remained. In the eternal 'struggle for
existence,' it would be the inferior and LESS favoured race that had
prevailed--and prevailed by virtue not of its good qualities but of its
faults."
There are, however, some checks to this downward tendency. We have seen
that the intemperate suffer from a high rate of mortality, and the
extremely profligate leave few offspring. The poorest classes crowd into
towns, and it has been proved by Dr. Stark from the statistics of ten years
in Scotland (21. 'Tenth Annual Report of Births, Deaths, etc., in
Scotland,' 1867, p. xxix.), that at all ages the death-rate is higher in
towns than in rural districts, "and during the first five years of life the
town death-rate is almost exactly double that of the rural districts." As
these returns include both the rich and the poor, no doubt more than twice
the number of births would be requisite to keep up the number of the very
poor inhabitants in the towns, relatively to those in the country. With
women, marriage at too early an age is highly injurious; for it has been
found in France that, "Twice as many wives under twenty die in the year, as
died out of the same number of the unmarried." The mortality, also, of
husbands under twenty is "excessively high" (22. These quotations are
taken from our highest authority on such questions, namely, Dr. Farr, in
his paper 'On the Influence of Marriage on the Mortality of the French
People,' read before the Nat. Assoc. for the Promotion of Social Science,
1858.), but what the cause of this may be, seems doubtful. Lastly, if the
men who prudently delay marrying until they can bring up their families in
comfort, were to select, as they often do, women in the prime of life, the
rate of increase in the better class would be only slightly lessened.
It was established from an enormous body of statistics, taken during 1853,
that the unmarried men throughout France, between the ages of twenty and
eighty, die in a much larger proportion than the married: for instance,
out of every 1000 unmarried men, between the ages of twenty and thirty,
11.3 annually died, whilst of the married, only 6.5 died. (23. Dr. Farr,
ibid. The quotations given below are extracted from the same striking
paper.) A similar law was proved to hold good, during the years 1863 and
1864, with the entire population above the age of twenty in Scotland: for
instance, out of every 1000 unmarried men, between the ages of twenty and
thirty, 14.97 annually died, whilst of the married only 7.24 died, that is
less than half. (24. I have taken the mean of the quinquennial means,
given in 'The Tenth Annual Report of Births, Deaths, etc., in Scotland,'
1867. The quotation from Dr. Stark is copied from an article in the 'Daily
News,' Oct. 17, 1868, which Dr. Farr considers very carefully written.)
Dr. Stark remarks on this, "Bachelorhood is more destructive to life than
the most unwholesome trades, or than residence in an unwholesome house or
district where there has never been the most distant attempt at sanitary
improvement." He considers that the lessened mortality is the direct
result of "marriage, and the more regular domestic habits which attend that
state." He admits, however, that the intemperate, profligate, and criminal
classes, whose duration of life is low, do not commonly marry; and it must
likewise be admitted that men with a weak constitution, ill health, or any
great infirmity in body or mind, will often not wish to marry, or will be
rejected. Dr. Stark seems to have come to the conclusion that marriage in
itself is a main cause of prolonged life, from finding that aged married
men still have a considerable advantage in this respect over the unmarried
of the same advanced age; but every one must have known instances of men,
who with weak health during youth did not marry, and yet have survived to
old age, though remaining weak, and therefore always with a lessened chance
of life or of marrying. There is another remarkable circumstance which
seems to support Dr. Stark's conclusion, namely, that widows and widowers
in France suffer in comparison with the married a very heavy rate of
mortality; but Dr. Farr attributes this to the poverty and evil habits
consequent on the disruption of the family, and to grief. On the whole we
may conclude with Dr. Farr that the lesser mortality of married than of
unmarried men, which seems to be a general law, "is mainly due to the
constant elimination of imperfect types, and to the skilful selection of
the finest individuals out of each successive generation;" the selection
relating only to the marriage state, and acting on all corporeal,
intellectual, and moral qualities. (25. Dr. Duncan remarks ('Fecundity,
Fertility, etc.' 1871, p. 334) on this subject: "At every age the healthy
and beautiful go over from the unmarried side to the married, leaving the
unmarried columns crowded with the sickly and unfortunate.") We may,
therefore, infer that sound and good men who out of prudence remain for a
time unmarried, do not suffer a high rate of mortality.
If the various checks specified in the two last paragraphs, and perhaps
others as yet unknown, do not prevent the reckless, the vicious and
otherwise inferior members of society from increasing at a quicker rate
than the better class of men, the nation will retrograde, as has too often
occurred in the history of the world. We must remember that progress is no
invariable rule. It is very difficult to say why one civilised nation
rises, becomes more powerful, and spreads more widely, than another; or why
the same nation progresses more quickly at one time than at another. We
can only say that it depends on an increase in the actual number of the
population, on the number of men endowed with high intellectual and moral
faculties, as well as on their standard of excellence. Corporeal structure
appears to have little influence, except so far as vigour of body leads to
vigour of mind.
It has been urged by several writers that as high intellectual powers are
advantageous to a nation, the old Greeks, who stood some grades higher in
intellect than any race that has ever existed (26. See the ingenious and
original argument on this subject by Mr. Galton, 'Hereditary Genius,' pp.
340-342.), ought, if the power of natural selection were real, to have
risen still higher in the scale, increased in number, and stocked the whole
of Europe. Here we have the tacit assumption, so often made with respect
to corporeal structures, that there is some innate tendency towards
continued development in mind and body. But development of all kinds
depends on many concurrent favourable circumstances. Natural selection
acts only tentatively. Individuals and races may have acquired certain
indisputable advantages, and yet have perished from failing in other
characters. The Greeks may have retrograded from a want of coherence
between the many small states, from the small size of their whole country,
from the practice of slavery, or from extreme sensuality; for they did not
succumb until "they were enervated and corrupt to the very core." (27.
Mr. Greg, 'Fraser's Magazine,' Sept. 1868, p. 357.) The western nations of
Europe, who now so immeasurably surpass their former savage progenitors,
and stand at the summit of civilisation, owe little or none of their
superiority to direct inheritance from the old Greeks, though they owe much
to the written works of that wonderful people.
Who can positively say why the Spanish nation, so dominant at one time, has
been distanced in the race. The awakening of the nations of Europe from
the dark ages is a still more perplexing problem. At that early period, as
Mr. Galton has remarked, almost all the men of a gentle nature, those given
to meditation or culture of the mind, had no refuge except in the bosom of
a Church which demanded celibacy (28. 'Hereditary Genius,' 1870, pp. 357-
359. The Rev. F.W. Farrar ('Fraser's Magazine,' Aug. 1870, p. 257)
advances arguments on the other side. Sir C. Lyell had already
('Principles of Geology,' vol. ii. 1868, p. 489), in a striking passage
called attention to the evil influence of the Holy Inquisition in having,
through selection, lowered the general standard of intelligence in
Europe.); and this could hardly fail to have had a deteriorating influence
on each successive generation. During this same period the Holy
Inquisition selected with extreme care the freest and boldest men in order
to burn or imprison them. In Spain alone some of the best men--those who
doubted and questioned, and without doubting there can be no progress--were
eliminated during three centuries at the rate of a thousand a year. The
evil which the Catholic Church has thus effected is incalculable, though no
doubt counterbalanced to a certain, perhaps to a large, extent in other
ways; nevertheless, Europe has progressed at an unparalleled rate.
The remarkable success of the English as colonists, compared to other
European nations, has been ascribed to their "daring and persistent
energy"; a result which is well illustrated by comparing the progress of
the Canadians of English and French extraction; but who can say how the
English gained their energy? There is apparently much truth in the belief
that the wonderful progress of the United States, as well as the character
of the people, are the results of natural selection; for the more
energetic, restless, and courageous men from all parts of Europe have
emigrated during the last ten or twelve generations to that great country,
and have there succeeded best. (29. Mr. Galton, 'Macmillan's Magazine,'
August 1865, p. 325. See also, 'Nature,' 'On Darwinism and National Life,'
Dec. 1869, p. 184.) Looking to the distant future, I do not think that the
Rev. Mr. Zincke takes an exaggerated view when he says (30. 'Last Winter
in the United States,' 1868, p. 29.): "All other series of events--as that
which resulted in the culture of mind in Greece, and that which resulted in
the empire of Rome--only appear to have purpose and value when viewed in
connection with, or rather as subsidiary to...the great stream of Anglo-
Saxon emigration to the west." Obscure as is the problem of the advance of
civilisation, we can at least see that a nation which produced during a
lengthened period the greatest number of highly intellectual, energetic,
brave, patriotic, and benevolent men, would generally prevail over less
favoured nations.
Natural selection follows from the struggle for existence; and this from a
rapid rate of increase. It is impossible not to regret bitterly, but
whether wisely is another question, the rate at which man tends to
increase; for this leads in barbarous tribes to infanticide and many other
evils, and in civilised nations to abject poverty, celibacy, and to the
late marriages of the prudent. But as man suffers from the same physical
evils as the lower animals, he has no right to expect an immunity from the
evils consequent on the struggle for existence. Had he not been subjected
during primeval times to natural selection, assuredly he would never have
attained to his present rank. Since we see in many parts of the world
enormous areas of the most fertile land capable of supporting numerous
happy homes, but peopled only by a few wandering savages, it might be
argued that the struggle for existence had not been sufficiently severe to
force man upwards to his highest standard. Judging from all that we know
of man and the lower animals, there has always been sufficient variability
in their intellectual and moral faculties, for a steady advance through
natural selection. No doubt such advance demands many favourable
concurrent circumstances; but it may well be doubted whether the most
favourable would have sufficed, had not the rate of increase been rapid,
and the consequent struggle for existence extremely severe. It even
appears from what we see, for instance, in parts of S. America, that a
people which may be called civilised, such as the Spanish settlers, is
liable to become indolent and to retrograde, when the conditions of life
are very easy. With highly civilised nations continued progress depends in
a subordinate degree on natural selection; for such nations do not supplant
and exterminate one another as do savage tribes. Nevertheless the more
intelligent members within the same community will succeed better in the
long run than the inferior, and leave a more numerous progeny, and this is
a form of natural selection. The more efficient causes of progress seem to
consist of a good education during youth whilst the brain is impressible,
and of a high standard of excellence, inculcated by the ablest and best
men, embodied in the laws, customs and traditions of the nation, and
enforced by public opinion. It should, however, be borne in mind, that the
enforcement of public opinion depends on our appreciation of the
approbation and disapprobation of others; and this appreciation is founded
on our sympathy, which it can hardly be doubted was originally developed
through natural selection as one of the most important elements of the
social instincts. (31. I am much indebted to Mr. John Morley for some
good criticisms on this subject: see, also Broca, 'Les Selections,' 'Revue
d'Anthropologie,' 1872.)
ON THE EVIDENCE THAT ALL CIVILISED NATIONS WERE ONCE BARBAROUS.
The present subject has been treated in so full and admirable a manner by
Sir J. Lubbock (32. 'On the Origin of Civilisation,' 'Proceedings of the
Ethnological Society,' Nov. 26, 1867.), Mr. Tylor, Mr. M'Lennan, and
others, that I need here give only the briefest summary of their results.
The arguments recently advanced by the Duke of Argyll (33. 'Primeval Man,'
1869.) and formerly by Archbishop Whately, in favour of the belief that man
came into the world as a civilised being, and that all savages have since
undergone degradation, seem to me weak in comparison with those advanced on
the other side. Many nations, no doubt, have fallen away in civilisation,
and some may have lapsed into utter barbarism, though on this latter head I
have met with no evidence. The Fuegians were probably compelled by other
conquering hordes to settle in their inhospitable country, and they may
have become in consequence somewhat more degraded; but it would be
difficult to prove that they have fallen much below the Botocudos, who
inhabit the finest parts of Brazil.
The evidence that all civilised nations are the descendants of barbarians,
consists, on the one side, of clear traces of their former low condition in
still-existing customs, beliefs, language, etc.; and on the other side, of
proofs that savages are independently able to raise themselves a few steps
in the scale of civilisation, and have actually thus risen. The evidence
on the first head is extremely curious, but cannot be here given: I refer
to such cases as that of the art of enumeration, which, as Mr. Tylor
clearly shews by reference to the words still used in some places,
originated in counting the fingers, first of one hand and then of the
other, and lastly of the toes. We have traces of this in our own decimal
system, and in the Roman numerals, where, after the V, which is supposed to
be an abbreviated picture of a human hand, we pass on to VI, etc., when the
other hand no doubt was used. So again, "when we speak of three-score and
ten, we are counting by the vigesimal system, each score thus ideally made,
standing for 20--for 'one man' as a Mexican or Carib would put it." (34.
'Royal Institution of Great Britain,' March 15, 1867. Also, 'Researches
into the Early History of Mankind,' 1865.) According to a large and
increasing school of philologists, every language bears the marks of its
slow and gradual evolution. So it is with the art of writing, for letters
are rudiments of pictorial representations. It is hardly possible to read
Mr. M'Lennan's work (35. 'Primitive Marriage,' 1865. See, likewise, an
excellent article, evidently by the same author, in the 'North British
Review,' July 1869. Also, Mr. L.H. Morgan, 'A Conjectural Solution of the
Origin of the Class, System of Relationship,' in 'Proc. American Acad. of
Sciences,' vol. vii. Feb. 1868. Prof. Schaaffhausen ('Anthropolog.
Review,' Oct. 1869, p. 373) remarks on "the vestiges of human sacrifices
found both in Homer and the Old Testament.") and not admit that almost all
civilised nations still retain traces of such rude habits as the forcible
capture of wives. What ancient nation, as the same author asks, can be
named that was originally monogamous? The primitive idea of justice, as
shewn by the law of battle and other customs of which vestiges still
remain, was likewise most rude. Many existing superstitions are the
remnants of former false religious beliefs. The highest form of religion--
the grand idea of God hating sin and loving righteousness--was unknown
during primeval times.
Turning to the other kind of evidence: Sir J. Lubbock has shewn that some
savages have recently improved a little in some of their simpler arts.
From the extremely curious account which he gives of the weapons, tools,
and arts, in use amongst savages in various parts of the world, it cannot
be doubted that these have nearly all been independent discoveries,
excepting perhaps the art of making fire. (36. Sir J. Lubbock,
'Prehistoric Times,' 2nd edit. 1869, chaps. xv. and xvi. et passim. See
also the excellent 9th Chapter in Tylor's 'Early History of Mankind,' 2nd
edit., 1870.) The Australian boomerang is a good instance of one such
independent discovery. The Tahitians when first visited had advanced in
many respects beyond the inhabitants of most of the other Polynesian
islands. There are no just grounds for the belief that the high culture of
the native Peruvians and Mexicans was derived from abroad (37. Dr. F.
Muller has made some good remarks to this effect in the 'Reise der Novara:
Anthropolog. Theil,' Abtheil. iii. 1868, s. 127.); many native plants were
there cultivated, and a few native animals domesticated. We should bear in
mind that, judging from the small influence of most missionaries, a
wandering crew from some semi-civilised land, if washed to the shores of
America, would not have produced any marked effect on the natives, unless
they had already become somewhat advanced. Looking to a very remote period
in the history of the world, we find, to use Sir J. Lubbock's well-known
terms, a paleolithic and neolithic period; and no one will pretend that the
art of grinding rough flint tools was a borrowed one. In all parts of
Europe, as far east as Greece, in Palestine, India, Japan, New Zealand, and
Africa, including Egypt, flint tools have been discovered in abundance; and
of their use the existing inhabitants retain no tradition. There is also
indirect evidence of their former use by the Chinese and ancient Jews.
Hence there can hardly be a doubt that the inhabitants of these countries,
which include nearly the whole civilised world, were once in a barbarous
condition. To believe that man was aboriginally civilised and then
suffered utter degradation in so many regions, is to take a pitiably low
view of human nature. It is apparently a truer and more cheerful view that
progress has been much more general than retrogression; that man has risen,
though by slow and interrupted steps, from a lowly condition to the highest
standard as yet attained by him in knowledge, morals and religion.
< BackForward >
|
