diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'old/61363-h/61363-h.htm')
| -rw-r--r-- | old/61363-h/61363-h.htm | 8833 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 8833 deletions
diff --git a/old/61363-h/61363-h.htm b/old/61363-h/61363-h.htm deleted file mode 100644 index e481920..0000000 --- a/old/61363-h/61363-h.htm +++ /dev/null @@ -1,8833 +0,0 @@ -<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" - "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> -<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> -<head> -<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content= -"text/html; charset=utf-8" /> -<meta http-equiv="Content-Style-Type" content="text/css" /> -<meta name="viewport" content= -"width=device-width, initial-scale=1.0" /> -<title>The Universal Kinship, by J. Howard Moore</title> - -<style type="text/css"> - body { - color: #000; - background-color: #fff; - margin: 0 15%; - text-align: justify; - font-family: Georgia, 'Times New Roman', Times, serif; - } - - h1, - h2 { - text-align: center; - text-transform: uppercase; - letter-spacing: 0.05em; - } - - h3 { - text-transform: uppercase; - letter-spacing: 0.05em; - } - - hr { - margin-top: 25px; - margin-bottom: 25px; - } - - img { - width: 100%; - max-width: 500px; - display: block; - margin: 0 auto; - } - - ol { - display: inline-block; - text-align: left; - text-transform: uppercase; - list-style-type: lower-roman; - line-height: 2em; - max-width: 350px; - } - - p { - line-height: 1.5em; - } - - blockquote { - text-align: center; - margin: 0 10%; - } - - blockquote p { - display: inline-block; - text-align: left; - } - - .center { - text-align: center; - } - - .right { - text-align: right; - } - - .uppercase { - text-transform: uppercase; - } - - .small { - font-size: small; - } - - .large { - font-size: large; - } - - .small-caps { - font-variant: small-caps; - } - - .no-padding-no-margin { - margin: 0; - padding: 0; - } - - .margin-vertical { - margin-top: 50px; - margin-bottom: 50px; - } -</style> -</head> -<body> - - -<pre> - -The Project Gutenberg EBook of The Universal Kinship, by J. Howard Moore - -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'll have -to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this ebook. - -Title: The Universal Kinship - -Author: J. Howard Moore - -Release Date: February 10, 2020 [EBook #61363] - -Language: English - -Character set encoding: UTF-8 - -*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE UNIVERSAL KINSHIP *** - - - - -Produced by L. Reeves from scans generously made available -by the Internet Archive. - - - - - - -</pre> - -<div class="bookcover margin-vertical"><img src= -"./images/cover.jpg" alt="The Universal Kinship book cover" id= -"coverpage" /></div> -<div class="titlepage margin-vertical"> -<h1>The Universal Kinship</h1> -<div class="center uppercase large"> -<p><strong>By</strong></p> -<p><strong>J. Howard Moore</strong></p> -</div> -<p class="center uppercase small"><strong>Instructor in zoology, -Crane Manual Training High School, Chicago</strong></p> -<div class="margin-vertical"> -<blockquote> -<p>‘A Sacred Kinship I would not forego<br /> -Binds me to all that breathes.’</p> -</blockquote> -<p class="center small-caps no-padding-no-margin">— Boyesen.</p> -</div> -<div class="publisher center uppercase margin-vertical"> -<p>Chicago<br /> -Charles H. Kerr & Company<br /> -56 Fifth Avenue<br /> -1906</p> -<p><br /></p> -</div> -</div> -<div class="dedication center uppercase margin-vertical"> -<p><br /> -To</p> -<p class="large">my dear mother and father</p> -<p>who have done so much for me in the long years</p> -<p>that are past and gone</p> -</div> -<div class="preface margin-vertical"> -<h2>Preface</h2> -<p><em>The Universal Kinship</em> means the kinship of all the -inhabitants of the planet Earth. Whether they came into existence -among the waters or among desert sands, in a hole in the earth, in -the hollow of a tree, or in a palace; whether they build nests or -empires; whether they swim, fly, crawl, or ambulate; and whether -they realise it or not, they are all related, physically, mentally, -morally—this is the thesis of this book. But since man is the most -gifted and influential of animals, and since his relationship with -other animals is more important and more reluctantly recognised -than any other, the chief purpose of these pages is to prove and -interpret the kinship, of the human species with the other species -of animals.</p> -<p>The thesis of this book comes pretty squarely in conflict with -widely-practised and highly-prized sins. It will therefore be -generally criticised where it is not passed by in silence. Men as a -rule do not care to improve. Although they have but one life to -live, they are satisfied to live the thing out as they have started -on it.</p> -<p>Enthusiasm, which in an enlightened or ideal race would be -devoted to self-improvement, is used by men in weaving excuses for -their own inertia or in singing of the infirmities of others.</p> -<p><em>But there is a Future</em>. And the creeds and ideals, men -bow down to to-day will in time to come pass away, and new creeds -and ideals will claim their allegiance. Shrines change as the -generations come and go, and out of the decomposition of the old -comes the new. The time will come when the sentiments of these -pages will not be hailed by two or three, and ridiculed or ignored -by the rest; <em>they will represent Public Opinion and -Law</em>.</p> -<p class="right">M.<br /> -<span class="uppercase">Chicago</span>, 1905</p> -</div> -<div class="contents margin-vertical"> -<h2>Contents</h2> -<p class="uppercase center large"><strong><a href="#part1">The -Physical Kinship</a></strong></p> -<div class="center"> -<ol> -<li><a href="#part1-chapter1">Man an Animal</a></li> -<li><a href="#part1-chapter2">Man a Vertebrate</a></li> -<li><a href="#part1-chapter3">Man a Mammal</a></li> -<li><a href="#part1-chapter4">Man a Primate</a></li> -<li><a href="#part1-chapter5">Recapitulation</a></li> -<li><a href="#part1-chapter6">The Meaning of Homology</a></li> -<li><a href="#part1-chapter7">The Earth an Evolution</a></li> -<li><a href="#part1-chapter8">The Factors of Organic -Evolution</a></li> -<li><a href="#part1-chapter9">The Evidences of Organic -Evolution</a></li> -<li><a href="#part1-chapter10">The Genealogy of Animals</a></li> -<li><a href="#part1-chapter11">Conclusion</a></li> -</ol> -</div> -<p class="uppercase center large"><strong class= -"uppercase"><a href="#part2">The Psychical Kinship</a></strong></p> -<div class="center"> -<ol> -<li><a href="#part2-chapter1">The Conflict of Science and -Tradition</a></li> -<li><a href="#part2-chapter2">Evidences of Psychical -Evolution</a></li> -<li><a href="#part2-chapter3">The Common-sense View</a></li> -<li><a href="#part2-chapter4">The Elements of Human and Non-human -Mind Compared</a></li> -<li><a href="#part2-chapter5">Conclusion</a></li> -</ol> -</div> -<p class="uppercase center large"><strong><a href="#part3">The -Ethical Kinship</a></strong></p> -<div class="center"> -<ol> -<li><a href="#part3-chapter1">Human Nature a Product of the -Jungle</a></li> -<li><a href="#part3-chapter2">Egoism and Altruism</a></li> -<li><a href="#part3-chapter3">The Ethics of the Savage</a></li> -<li><a href="#part3-chapter4">The Ethics of the Ancient</a></li> -<li><a href="#part3-chapter5">Modern Ethics</a></li> -<li><a href="#part3-chapter6">The Ethics of Human Beings Toward -Non-human Beings</a></li> -<li><a href="#part3-chapter7">The Origin of Provincialism</a></li> -<li><a href="#part3-chapter8">Universal Ethics</a></li> -<li><a href="#part3-chapter9">The Psychology of Altruism</a></li> -<li><a href="#part3-chapter10">Anthropocentric Ethics</a></li> -<li><a href="#part3-chapter11">Ethical Implications of -Evolution</a></li> -<li><a href="#part3-chapter12">Conclusion</a></li> -</ol> -</div> -</div> -<div id="part1" class="margin-vertical"> -<h2>The Physical Kinship</h2> -<div class="center"> -<ol> -<li><a href="#part1-chapter1">Man an Animal</a></li> -<li><a href="#part1-chapter2">Man a Vertebrate</a></li> -<li><a href="#part1-chapter3">Man a Mammal</a></li> -<li><a href="#part1-chapter4">Man a Primate</a></li> -<li><a href="#part1-chapter5">Recapitulation</a></li> -<li><a href="#part1-chapter6">The Meaning of Homology</a></li> -<li><a href="#part1-chapter7">The Earth an Evolution</a></li> -<li><a href="#part1-chapter8">The Factors of Organic -Evolution</a></li> -<li><a href="#part1-chapter9">The Evidences of Organic -Evolution</a></li> -<li><a href="#part1-chapter10">The Genealogy of Animals</a></li> -<li><a href="#part1-chapter11">Conclusion</a></li> -</ol> -</div> -<blockquote class="margin-vertical"> -<p>‘Like the Roman emperors, who, intoxicated by their power, at -length regarded themselves as demigods, so the ruler of the earth -believes that the animals subjected to his will have nothing in -common with his own nature. Man is not content to be the king of -animals. He insists on having it that an impassable gulf separates -him from his subjects. The affinity of the ape disturbs and humbles -him. And, turning his back upon the earth, he flies, with his -threatened majesty, into the cloudy sphere of a special “human -kingdom.” But Anatomy, like those slaves who followed the -conqueror’s car crying, “Thou art a man,” disturbs him in his -self-admiration, and reminds him of those plain and tangible -realities which unite him with the animal world.’</p> -<p class="small-caps center no-padding-no-margin">— Broca.</p> -</blockquote> -<h2>The Universal Kinship</h2> -<h2>The Physical Kinship</h2> -<h3 id="part1-chapter1">I. Man an Animal.</h3> -<p>It was in the zoology class at college. We had made all the long -journey from amoeba to coral, from coral to worm, from worm to -mollusk, from mollusk to fish, from fish to reptile, and from -reptile to mammal—and there, in the closing pages of faithful old -Packard, we found it. ‘A mammal of the order of primates,’ the book -said, with that unconcern characteristic of the deliverances of -science. I was almost saddened. It was the first intimation I had -ever received of that trite but neglected truth that <em>man is an -animal</em>.</p> -<p>But the intimation was so weak, and I was at that time so -unconscious, that it was not till years later that I began, through -reflection, actually to realise the truth here first caught sight -of. During these years I knew that man was not a mineral nor a -plant—that, indeed, he belonged to the animal kingdom. But, like -most men still, I continued to think of him as being altogether -different from other animals. I thought of man <em>and the -animals</em>, <em>not</em> of man and the <em>other</em> animals. -Man was somehow <em>sui generis</em>. He had had, I believed, a -unique and miraculous origin; for I had not yet learned of organic -evolution. The pre-Darwinian belief that I had come down from the -skies, and that non-human creatures of all kinds had been brought -into existence as adjuncts of the distinguished species to which I -belonged, occupied prominent place in my thinking. Non-human races, -so I had been taught, had in themselves no reason for existence. -They were accessories. A chasm, too wide for any bridge ever to -span, yawned between the human and all other species. Man was -celestial, a blue-blood barely escaping divinity. All other beings -were little higher than clods. So faithfully and mechanically did I -reflect the bias in which I had grown up.
</p> -<p>But man <em>is</em> an <em>animal</em>. It was away out there on -the prairies, among the green corn rows, one beautiful June -morning—a long time ago it seems to me now—that this revelation -really came to me. And I repeat it here, as it has grown to seem to -me, for the sake of a world which is so wise in many things, but so -darkened and wayward regarding this one thing. However averse to -accepting it we may be on account of favourite traditions, man is -an animal in the most literal and materialistic meaning of the -word. Man has not a spark of so-called ‘divinity’ about him. In -important respects he is the most highly evolved of animals; but in -origin, disposition, and form he is no more ‘divine’ than the dog -who laps his sores, the terrapin who waddles over the earth in a -carapace, or the unfastidious worm who dines on the dust of his -feet. Man is not the pedestalled individual pictured by his -imagination—a being glittering with prerogatives, and towering -apart from and above all other beings. He is a pain-shunning, -pleasure-seeking, death-dreading organism, differing in -particulars, but not in kind, from the pain-shunning, -pleasure-seeking, death-dreading organisms below and around him. -Man is neither a rock, a vegetable, nor a deity. He belongs to the -same class of existences, and has been brought into existence by -the same evolutional processes, as the horse, the toad that hops in -his garden, the firefly that lights its twilight torch, and the -bivalve that reluctantly feeds him.</p> -<p>Man’s body is composed fundamentally of the same materials as -the bodies of all other animals. The bodies of all animals are -composed of clay. They are formed of the same elements as those -that murmur in the waters, gallop in the winds, and constitute the -substance of the insensate rocks and soils. More than two-thirds of -the weight of the human body is made up of oxygen alone, a gas -which forms one-fifth of the weight of the air, more than -eight-ninths of that of the sea, and forty-seven per cent, of the -superficial solids of the earth.</p> -<p>Man’s body is composed of cells. So are the bodies of all other -animals. And the cells in the body of a human being are not -essentially different in composition or structure from the cells in -the body of the sponge. All cells are composed primarily of -protoplasm, a compound of carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, and oxygen. -Like all other animals, man is incapable of producing a particle of -the essential substance of which his body is made. No animal can -produce protoplasm. This is a power of the plant, and the plant -only. All that any animal can do is to burn the compounds formed in -the sun-lit laboratories of the vegetable world. The human -skeleton, like the skeletons of nearly all other animals, is -composed chiefly of lime—lime being, in the sea, where life spent -so many of its earlier centuries, the most available material for -parts whose purpose it is to furnish shape and durability to the -organism. Man grows from an egg. So do all creatures of clay. Every -animal commences at the same place—in a single, lowly, almost -homogeneous cell. A dog, a frog, a philosopher, and a worm cannot -for a long time after their embryonic commencement be distinguished -from each other. Like the oyster, the ox, the insect, and the fish, -like all that live, move, and breathe, man is mortal. He increases -in size and complexity through an allotted period of time; then, -like all his kindred, wilts back into the indistinguishable flux -from which he came. Man inhales oxygen and exhales carbon dioxide. -So does every animal that breathes, whether it breathe by lungs, -gills, skin, or ectosarc, and whether it breathe the sunless ooze -of the sea floor or the ethereal blue of the sky. Animals inhale -oxygen because they eat carbon and hydrogen. The energy of all -animals is produced mainly by the union of oxygen with the elements -of carbon and hydrogen in the tissues of animal bodies, the -plentiful and ardent oxygen being the most available supporter of -the combustion of these two elements.</p> -<p>Man is, then, an animal, more highly evolved than the most of -his fellow-beings, but positively of the same clay, and of the same -fundamental make-up, with the same eagerness to exceed and the same -destiny, as his less pompous kindred who float and frolic and pass -away in the seas and atmospheres, and creep over the land-patches -of a common clod.</p> -<h3 id="part1-chapter2">II. Man a Vertebrate.</h3> -<p>Man is a <em>vertebrate</em> animal.<sup><small><a href= -"#part1-chapter2-footnote1" id="part1-chapter2-ref1" name= -"part1-chapter2-ref1">[1]</a></small></sup> He has (anatomically at -least) a backbone. He belongs to that substantial class of -organisms possessing an articulating internal skeleton—the family -of the fishes, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals. Most -animals have some sort of skeleton, some sort of calcareous -contrivance, whose business it is to give form and protection to -the softer parts of the organism. Some animals, as the starfishes, -have plates of lime scattered throughout the surface parts of the -body; others, as the corals and sponges secrete plant-like frames, -upon and among the branches of which the organisms reside; and -still others, as the clams, crustaceans, and insects, have -skeletons consisting of a shell or sheath on the outside of, and -more or less surrounding, the softer substances of the body. The -limbs of insects are tiny tubes on the inside of which are the -miniature muscles with which they perform their marvels of -locomotion. The skeleton of vertebrates, consisting of levers, -beams, columns, and arches, all skilfully joined together and sunk -deep within the muscular tissue, forms a conspicuous contrast to -the rudimentary frames of other animals. The vertebrate skeleton -consists of a hollow axis, divided into segments and extending -along the dorsal region of the body, from the ventral side of which -articulate, by means of awkwardly-constructed girdles, an anterior -and a posterior pair of limbs. This dorsal axis ends in front in a -peculiar bulbous arrangement called the head, which contains, among -other valuables, the brain and buccal cavern. The thoracic segments -of the backbone send off pairs of flat bones, which, arching -ventrally, form the chest for the protection of the heart and other -vitals. The limbs (except in fishes) consist each of a single long -bone, succeeded by two long bones, followed by two transverse rows -of short, irregular wrist or ankle bones, ending normally in five -branching series of bones called digits. This is essentially the -skeleton of all fishes, amphibians, reptiles, birds, and mammals. -In short, it is the universal vertebrate type of frame. There are -minor modifications to suit the various kinds of environment, -adaptations to the necessities of aquatic, terrestrial, and aerial -locomotion and life, some parts being specialised, others -atrophied, and still others omitted, but there is never anywhere, -from fishes to philosophers, any fundamental departure from the -established vertebrate type of skeleton.<sup><small><a href= -"#part1-chapter2-footnote2" id="part1-chapter2-ref2" name= -"part1-chapter2-ref2">[2]</a></small></sup> The pectoral fins of -fishes correspond to the fore-limbs of frogs and reptiles, the -wings of birds, and the arms of men. The pelvic fins of fishes are -homologous with the hind-limbs of frogs, reptiles, and quadrupeds, -and the legs of birds, apes, and men. The foot of the dog and -crocodile, the hand of the orang, and the flipper of the dolphin -and seal, all have the same general structure as the hand of man; -and the wings of the bat and bird, the forelimbs of the lizard and -elephant, and the comical shovels of the mole and ornithorhynchus, -notwithstanding the great differences in their external appearance -and use, contain essentially the same bones and the same -arrangement of the bones as do the arms of men and women. The human -body has two primary cavities in it. So have the bodies of all -vertebrates: a neural cavity containing the brain and spinal cord, -and a visceral cavity containing the heart, liver, lungs, and -alimentary canal. Invertebrates have only one body cavity—the one -corresponding to the visceral cavity of vertebrates—and the main -nerve trunk, instead of extending along the back, as among -vertebrates, is in invertebrates located ventrally. Vertebrates are -the only animals on the earth that have a highly developed -circulatory system, a system entirely shut off from the other -systems, and containing a heart, arteries, veins, and capillaries. -In all invertebrates the digestive and circulatory systems remain -to a greater or less extent connected, the blood and food mingling -more or less in the general cavity of the body. Worms and insects -have pulsating tubes instead of heart and arteries. Crustaceans -have hearts with one chamber, and mollusks have two or three -chambered hearts, but the blood, instead of returning to the heart -after its journey through the arteries, passes into the body -cavity. In man and other vertebrates the circulating current is -confined strictly to the bloodvessels, no particle of it ever -escaping into the general body cavity. The heart of vertebrates is -distinguished from that of invertebrates by being located -ventrally. The heart of invertebrates is in the back. The blood of -vertebrates differs from that of invertebrates in containing both -red and white corpuscles. Invertebrates have white corpuscles only. -Worms have yellow, red, or bright green blood. The blood of -crustaceans is bluish, that of mollusks is white, and that of -insects dusky or brown. The blood of all vertebrates, excepting -amphioxus, is red. All backboned beings, whether they dwell in seas -or cities, and whether they build nests or empires, have two eyes, -two ears, nose and mouth, all located in the head, and always -occupying the same relative position to each other. Invertebrates -may have their brains in their abdomen, as do the mites; hear with -their legs or antennae, as many insects do; see with their tunics, -like the scallops; and breathe with their skin, as do the worms. -The crayfish hears with its ‘feelers,’ the cricket and katydid with -their fore-legs, the grasshopper with its abdomen, the clam with -its ‘foot,’ and mysis and other low crustaceans have their auditory -organs on their tails.
</p> -<p>Man is, then, like the fishes, frogs, reptiles, birds, and -quadrupeds, a vertebrate animal. Excepting in his infancy, when he -is a quadruped going on all fours, he uses his posterior limbs only -for locomotion, and his anterior for prehension and the like. His -spinal axis is erect instead of horizontal, and his tail is -atrophied. But he possesses all of the unmistakable qualities of -the vertebrate type of structure—a two-chambered body cavity, a -highly developed and dorsally located nerve trunk, vertebrate -vitals, a closed circulatory system, a ventral heart, red blood, a -head containing sense organs and brain, and a well-ordered internal -skeleton, consisting of a vertebral column with skull and ribs and -two pairs of limbs, the limbs consisting each of one long bone, two -long bones, two transverse rows of irregular bones, and five -branches at the end.</p> -<p><small id="part1-chapter2-footnote1"><a href= -"#part1-chapter2-ref1">1.</a> See ‘Classes of Animals,’ at the end -of the chapter.</small><br /> -<small id="part1-chapter2-footnote2"><a href= -"#part1-chapter2-ref2">2.</a> Snakes are limbless, and hind-limbs -are lacking in whales and other degenerates; but rudimentary limbs -are found in the embryonic stages of these animals. Frogs, it may -be said also, have no ribs.</small></p> -<img src="./images/classes-of-animals.jpg" alt= -"Classes of Animals" /> -<h3 id="part1-chapter3">III. Man a Mammal.</h3> -<p>Man is a <em>mammal</em>. He belongs to the most brilliant and -influential of the five classes of vertebrates—the class to which -belong so many of his associates and victims, the class to which -belong the horse, the dog, the deer, the ox, the sheep, the swine, -the squirrel, the camel, the unattenuated elephant, and the -timid-hearted hare. To this class belong also the lion, the tiger, -the kangaroo, the beaver, the bear, the bat, the monkey, the mole, -the wolf, the ornithorhynchus, and the whale—in short, <em>all -animals that have hair</em>. Fishes and reptiles have scales; birds -have feathers; all mammals are covered to a greater or less extent -with hair. The aquatic habits of whales render hair of no use to -them. Hence, while the unborn of these animals still cling to the -structural traditions of their ancestors and are covered with hair, -the adults are almost hairless. The sartorial habits of human -beings and the selective influences of the sexes have had a similar -effect on the hairy covering of the human body. Hair exists all -over the human body surface, excepting on the soles of the hands -and feet, but in a greatly dwarfed condition. It is only on the -scalp and on the faces of males, where it is scientifically -assisted for purposes of display, that it grows luxuriantly. It is -by no means certain that even the hair on the masculine scalp will -last forever. For if the hermetical derby and other deadly devices -worn by men continue their devastations as they have in the past, -we may expect to have, in the course of generations, men with -foreheads reaching regularly to the occiput. Most animals lay eggs. -Man does not. Like the dog, the horse, the squirrel, and the bat, -man is viviparous, the eggs hatching within the parental body. -Human young are born helpless, and are sustained during the period -of their infancy by the secretions of the milk glands. So are all -the sons and daughters of mammals. Whether they come into the world -among the waters or among the desert sands, in the hollow of a -tree, in a hole in the earth, or in a palace, the children of -mammals are frail and pitiful, and they survive to grow and -multiply only because they are the object of the loving and -incessant sacrifices of a mother.
</p> -<p>Mammals are distinguished from all other animals by the -possession of two kinds of skin glands—the sweat glands and the oil -glands—and by the development of certain of these glands in the -female into organs for the nourishing of the young. Among reptiles -and birds the lower jaw is suspended from the skull by a bone -called the quadrate bone. Among men and other mammals the lower jaw -is joined directly to the skull, the quadrate bone becoming, in the -vicissitudes of evolution, the hammer (malleus) of the mammalian -ear. Man has a four-chambered heart—two reservoirs which receive, -and two pumps which propel, the scarlet waters of the body. Fishes -have two-chambered hearts; frogs and most reptiles have -three-chambered hearts; all mammals and birds have four-chambered -hearts. The red corpuscles in the blood of fishes, frogs, reptiles, -and birds, are discs, double-convex, nucleated, and in shape oval -or triangular. In man and in all other mammals (except the archaic -camel) the red corpuscles are double-concave, non-nucleated, and -circular. ‘Man has a diaphragm dividing the body cavity into chest -and abdomen, and a shining white bridge of interlacing fibres, -called <em>corpus callosum</em>, uniting his cerebral hemispheres. -And man is a mammal because, like other mammals, he has, in -addition to the qualities already mentioned, these valuable and -distinct characteristics.</p> -<h3 id="part1-chapter4">IV. Man a Primate.</h3> -<p>Man is a <em>primate</em>. There are four divisions in the order -of primates—lemurs, monkeys, apes, and men. But the most -interesting and important of these, according to man, is man. Man -is a primate because, like other primates, he has arms and hands -instead of fore-legs. And these are important characteristics. It -was a splendid moment when the tendencies of evolution, pondering -the possibilities of structural improvement, decided to rear the -vertebrate upon its hind-limbs, and convert its anterior appendages -into instruments of manipulation. So long as living creatures were -able simply to move through the airs and waters of the earth and -over the surface of the solids, they were powerless to modify the -universe about them very much. But the moment beings were developed -with parts of their bodies fitted to take hold of and move and -fashion and compel the universe around them, that moment the life -process was endowed with the power of miracles. With the invention -of hands and arms commenced seriously that long campaign against -the tendencies of inanimate nature which finds its most marvellous -achievements in the sustained and triumphant operations of human -industry. None of the primates excepting man use their hind-limbs -as a sole means of changing their place in the universe, but in all -of them the fore-limbs are regularly used as organs of -manipulation. Man is a primate because his fingers and toes, like -those of other primates (except the tiny marmosets of Brazil), end -in nails. Man has neither claws to burrow into the earth, talons -with which to hold and rend his victims, nor hoofs to put thunder -into his movements. The human stomach, like that of all the other -primates, is a bagpipe. The stomach of the carnivora is usually a -simple sack, while rodents have, as a rule, two stomachs, and -ruminants four. Man is a primate because his milk glands are -located on the breast and are two in number. The mammary glands -vary in number in the different orders of mammals, from two in the -horse and whale to twenty-two in some insectivora. Most ruminating -animals have four, swine ten, and carnivora generally six or eight. -These glands may be located in the region of the groin, as in the -horse and whale; between the forelimbs, as in the elephant and bat; -or arranged in pairs extending from the fore to the hind limbs, as -in the carnivora and swine. In man and all other primates (except -lemurs) the mammary glands are pectoral and two in number. All -primates, including man, have also a disc-shaped placenta. The -placenta is the organ of nutrition in mammalian embryos. It is -found in all young-bearing animals above the marsupials, and -consists of a mass of glands between the embryo and the parental -body. In some animals it entirely surrounds and encloses the -embryo; in others it assumes the form of a girdle; and in still -others it is bell-shaped. The primates are the only animals in -which this peculiar organ is in the shape of a simple -disc.<sup><small><a href="#part1-chapter4-footnote1" id= -"part1-chapter4-ref1" name= -"part1-chapter4-ref1">[1]</a></small></sup></p> -<p>The nearest relatives by blood man has in this world are the -exceedingly man-like apes—the tailless anthropoids—the gorillas and -chimpanzees of Africa, and the orangs and gibbons of southern and -insular Asia. The fact that man is an actual relative and -descendant of the ape is one of the most disagreeable of the many -distasteful truths which the human mind in its evolution has come -upon. To a vanity puffed, as is that of human beings, to the -splitting, the consanguinity of gorilla and gentleman seems -horrible. Man prefers to have arrived on the earth by way of a -ladder let down by his imagination from the celestial concave. -Within his own memory man has been guilty of many foolish and -disgraceful things. But this attempt by him to repudiate his -ancestors by surreptitiously fabricating for himself an origin -different from, and more glorious than the rest is one of the most -absurd and scandalous in the whole list. It is a shallow logic—the -logic of those who, without worth of their own, try to shine with a -false and stolen lustre. No more masterly rebuke was ever -administered to those in the habit of sneering at the truth in this -matter than the caustic reply of Huxley to the taunt of the -fat-witted Bishop—that he would rather be the descendant of a -respectable ape than the descendant of one who not only closed his -eyes to the facts around him, but used his official position to -persuade others to do likewise. Man’s reluctance to take his -anatomical place beside his simian kinspeople has been exceeded -only by his selfish and high-handed determination to exclude all -other terrestrial beings from his heaven.
</p> -<p>Man is a talkative and religious ape. He is an ape, but with a -much greater amount of enterprise and with a greater likelihood of -being found in every variety of climate. Like the anthropoid, man -has a bald face and an obsolete tail. But he is distinguished from -his arboreal relative by his arrogant bearing, his skilled larynx, -and especially by the satisfaction he experiences in the -contemplation of the image which appears when he looks in a -mirror.</p> -<p>The man-like apes are from three to six feet tall, and are all -of them very strong, the gorilla, who sometimes weighs over three -hundred pounds, being about the bravest and most formidable unarmed -animal on the planet. They are erect or semi-erect, have loud -voices, plantigrade feet, and irritable dispositions—in all of -these particulars being strikingly like men. The gorilla, -chimpanzee, and gibbon are highlanders, preferring the uplands and -mountains. The orang is a lowlander, living phlegmatically among -the sylvan swamps of Sumatra and Borneo. The gorilla and chimpanzee -are terrestrial, seldom going among the trees except to get food or -to sleep. The orang and gibbon are arboreal, seldom coming to the -ground except to drink or bathe. They all walk on their hind-limbs, -generally in a stooping posture, with their knuckles or fingers -touching the ground. But they sometimes walk with their arms -hanging down by their sides, and sometimes with their hands clasped -back of their heads to give them balance. None of them ever place -their palms on the ground when they walk—that is, none of them walk -on four feet. The anthropoid races, in the shape of their heads and -faces and in the general form and structure of their bodies, and -even in their habits of life, resemble in a remarkable manner the -lowest races of human beings. This resemblance is recognised by the -negro races, who call the gorilla and chimpanzee ‘hairy men,’ and -believe them to be descendants of outcast members of their own -species.</p> -<p>There are differences in structure between man and the apes, -just as there are differences in structure between the Caucasian -and the Caffre, or even between individual Caucasians or individual -Caffres. There are differences in structure and topography, often -very noticeable differences, even among members of the same family. -But in all of its essential characters, and extending often to -astonishing particulars, the structure of man is identical with -that of the anthropoid.<sup><small><a href= -"#part1-chapter4-footnote2" id="part1-chapter4-ref2" name= -"part1-chapter4-ref2">[2]</a></small></sup></p> -<p>In external appearances the man-like races differ from men in -having a luxuriant covering of natural hair. But anthropoids differ -very much among themselves in this particular. The orang, usually -covered with long hair, is sometimes almost hairless. There are, -too, races of human beings whose bodies are covered with a -considerable growth of hair. The Todas (Australians) and Ainus -(aborigines of Japan) are noted for the hairiness of their bodies, -certain individuals among them being covered with a real fur, -especially on the lower limbs.<sup><small><a href= -"#part1-chapter4-footnote3" id="part1-chapter4-ref3" name= -"part1-chapter4-ref3">[3]</a></small></sup></p> -<p>Individuals also often appear in every race with a remarkable -development of the hair. Adrian and his son Fedor, exhibited years -ago over Europe as ‘dog-men,’ are examples. The father was -completely covered with a thick growth of fine dirty-yellow hair -two or three inches long. Long tufts grew out of his nostrils and -ears, giving him a striking resemblance to a Skye terrier. Fedor, -and also his sister, were covered with hair like the father, but -another son was like ordinary men. The man-like races have also -longer arms in proportion to the height of the body than man -generally has. But this is also true of human infants and negroes. -The gibbon has relatively much longer arms than the other -anthropoids. It differs from the chimpanzee in this respect more -than the chimpanzee differs from man. When standing upright and -reaching down with the middle finger, the gibbon can touch its -foot, while the chimpanzee can reach only to the knee. Man -ordinarily reaches part way down the thigh, but negroes have been -known to have arms reaching to the knee-pan.<sup><small><a href= -"#part1-chapter4-footnote4" id="part1-chapter4-ref4" name= -"part1-chapter4-ref4">[4]</a></small></sup></p> -<p>The skeleton of the African races contains many characters -recognised by osteologists as ‘pithecoid,’ or ape-like. It is -massive, the flat bones are thick, and the pelvis narrow. In the -manlike apes the large toe is opposable to the other four, and is -used by them much as the thumb is used. But this difference between -the two races of beings is just what might be expected from the -differences in their modes of life. Man has little need of this -opposability on account of his exclusively terrestrial life, while -to the ape it is indispensable on account of his arboreal -environment and life. ‘But there are,’ says Haeckel, ‘wild tribes -of men who can oppose the large toe to the other four just as if it -were a thumb, and even new-born infants of the most -highly-developed races of men can grasp as easily with their -hind-hands as with their forehands. Chinese boatmen row with their -feet, and Bengal workmen weave with them. The negro, in whom the -big toe is freely movable, seizes hold of the branches of trees -with it when climbing, just like the four-handed -apes’.<sup><small><a href="#part1-chapter4-footnote5" id= -"part1-chapter4-ref5" name= -"part1-chapter4-ref5">[5]</a></small></sup></p> -<p>Many men have lost their arms by accident and have learned to -use their feet as hands with wonderful skill. Not many years ago -there died in Europe an armless violinist who had during his -lifetime played to cultured audiences in most of the capitals of -the world. Some of the most accomplished of penmen hold their pen -between their toes. The man-like apes live to about the same age as -man, and all of them, like man, have beards. The anthropoid beard, -too, like the human, appears at the age of sexual maturity. The -human beard often differs in colour from the hair of the scalp, and -whenever it does it has been observed to be invariably -lighter—never darker—than the hair on the scalp. This is true among -all races of men. The same rule and the same uniformity exists -among anthropoids. The races of mankind are divided into two -primary groups depending upon the shape of the head and the -character of the hair: the short-headed races (Brachycephali), such -as the Malays, Mongols, and Aryans, with round or oval faces, -straight hair, and vertical profiles; and the long-headed races -(Dolichocephali), with woolly hair and prognathous faces, such as -the Papuans and Africa races. The skin of the short-headed races is -orange or white, while the skin and hair of the long-headed races -are glossy black.</p> -<p>It is, at least, interesting that the orang and gibbon, who live -in Asia and its islands, where the brachycephalic races of men -supposedly arose, are themselves brachycephalic; and that the -gorilla and chimpanzee, who live in Africa, where the -dolichocephalic races chiefly live, are dolichocephalic. The -gorilla and chimpanzee also have, like the men and women of Africa, -black skin and hair; while the hair of the orang is a -reddish-brown, and its skin sometimes yellowish-white. The -dentition of the anthropoids and men is in all essentials -identical. They all have two sets of teeth: a set of milk-teeth, -twenty in number, and thirty-two permanent teeth, the permanents -consisting of two incisors, one canine, two premolars, and three -molars, in each half-jaw. Man has ordinarily twelve pairs of ribs -and thirty-two vertebrae. So has the orang. The other anthropoids -have thirteen pairs of ribs. But the number of ribs in both human -and anthropoid beings is not uniform, man occasionally having -thirteen pairs, and the gorilla fourteen. Man has also the same -number of caudal vertebrae in his rudimentary tail as the -anthropoid has. The hands and feet of anthropoids, bone for bone -and muscle for muscle, correspond with those of men, no greater -structural differences existing than among different species of -men. The human foot has three muscles not found in the human hand—a -short flexor muscle, a short extensor muscle, and a long muscle -extending from the fibula to the foot. All of these muscles are -found in the anthropoid foot just as in the foot of man. There are -also the same differences between the arrangement of the bones of -the anthropoid wrist and ankle as between the wrist and ankle bones -of man. Whatever set of anatomical particulars may be selected, -whether it be hands, arms, feet, muscles, skull, viscera, ribs, or -dentition, it is found that the anthropoid races and men are in all -essentials the same. The differences are such as have arisen as a -result of different modes of life, and such as exist between -different tribes of either group of animals.
</p> -<p>‘The structural differences which separate man from the gorilla -and chimpanzee,’ says Huxley, in summing up the conclusion of his -brilliant inquiry into ‘Man’s Place in Nature,’ ‘are not so great -as those which separate the gorilla from the lower apes.’</p> -<p>‘The body of man and that of the anthropoid are not only -peculiarly similar,’ says Haeckel, ‘but they are practically one -and the same in every important respect. The same two hundred -bones, in the same order and structure, make up our inner skeleton; -the same three hundred muscles effect our movements; the same hair -clothes our skin; the same four-chambered heart is the central -pulsometer in our circulation; the same thirty-two teeth are set in -the same order in our jaws; the same salivary, hepatic, and gastric -glands compass our digestion; the same reproductive organs insure -the maintenance of our race’.<sup><small><a href= -"#part1-chapter4-footnote6" id="part1-chapter4-ref6" name= -"part1-chapter4-ref6">[6]</a></small></sup></p> -<p>‘Not being able,’ says Owen in his paper on ‘The Characters of -Mammalia,’ ‘to appreciate or conceive of the distinction between -the psychical phenomena of a chimpanzee and of a Boschisman or of -an Aztec with arrested brain-growth, as being of a nature so -essential as to preclude a comparison between them, or as being -other than a difference in degree, I cannot shut my eyes to the -significance of that all-pervading similitude of structure—every -tooth, every bone, strictly homologous—which makes the -determination of the difference between <em>Homo</em> and -<em>Pithecus</em> the anatomist’s difficulty.’</p> -<p>‘If before the appearance of man on the earth,’ says Ward in his -‘Dynamic Sociology,’ ‘an imaginary painter had visited it, and -drawn a portrait embodying the thorax of the gibbon, the hands and -feet of the gorilla, the form and skull of the chimpanzee, the -brain development of the orang, and the countenance of -<em>Semnopithecus</em>, giving to the whole the average stature of -all of these apes, the result would have been a being not far -removed from our conception of the primitive man, and not widely -different from the actual condition of certain low tribes of -savages. The brain development would perhaps be too low for the -average of any existing tribe, and would correspond better with -that of certain microcephalous idiots and cretins, of which the -human race furnishes many examples.’</p> -<p>And it is not true, as is commonly supposed, that, after all -other resemblances between the human and anthropoid structures have -been made out, there still exists somewhere some undistinguishable -difference in the organic structure of their brains. All -differences in structure from time to time suspected or asserted to -exist between the brain of man and that of the man-like apes have -been one after another completely swept away. And it is now known -to all neurologists that the human and anthropoid brains differ -structurally in no particulars whatever, both of them containing -the same lobes, the same ventricles and cornua, and the same -convolutional outline. Even the posterior lobe, the posterior -cornu, and the hippocampus minor, so long triumphantly asserted to -be characteristic features of the human brain, have been pitilessly -identified in all anthropoids by the profound and terrible Huxley. -There is not an important fold or fissure in the brain of man that -is not found in the brain of the anthropoid. ‘The surface of the -brain of a monkey,’ says Huxley, ‘exhibits a sort of skeleton map -of man’s, and in the man-like apes the details become more and more -filled in, until it is only in minor characters that the -chimpanzee’s or the orang’s brain can be structurally distinguished -from man’s’.<sup><small><a href="#part1-chapter4-footnote7" id= -"part1-chapter4-ref7" name= -"part1-chapter4-ref7">[7]</a></small></sup></p> -<p>The great difference physically between man and the anthropoids, -aside from man’s talented larynx and erect posture, lies in man’s -abnormal cranial capacity. The normal human cranium never contains -less than 55 cubic inches of space, while the largest gorilla -cranium contains only 34½ cubic inches. This is a difference of 20½ -cubic inches. And 20½ cubic inches of thinking matter is an -alarming amount to be lacking in a single individual. But this -cranial gap between gorilla and man is deprived of some of its -significance by the fact that human crania sometimes measure 114 -cubic inches, making a difference between the smallest and largest -human brains of 59 cubic inches. The difference between the gorilla -and the savage in cranial capacity is, therefore, <em>only about -one-third as great as the cranial chasm between the savage and the -sage</em>.</p> -<p><small id="part1-chapter4-footnote1"><a href= -"#part1-chapter4-ref1">1.</a> The bat and a few other animals have -a disc-like placenta, but it develops into the disc shape by a -different route from what it does in the primates.</small><br /> -<small id="part1-chapter4-footnote2"><a href= -"#part1-chapter4-ref2">2.</a> Hartmann: <em>Anthropoid Apes</em>; -New York, 1901.</small><br /> -<small id="part1-chapter4-footnote3"><a href= -"#part1-chapter4-ref3">3.</a> Quatrefages: <em>The Human -Species</em>; New York, 1898.</small><br /> -<small id="part1-chapter4-footnote4"><a href= -"#part1-chapter4-ref4">4.</a> Tyler: <em>Anthropology</em>; New -York; 1899.</small><br /> -<small id="part1-chapter4-footnote5"><a href= -"#part1-chapter4-ref5">5.</a> Haeckel: <em>History of -Creation</em>, 2 vols.; New York, 1896.</small><br /> -<small id="part1-chapter4-footnote6"><a href= -"#part1-chapter4-ref6">6.</a> Haeckel: <em>The Riddle of the -Universe</em>; New York, 1901.</small><br /> -<small id="part1-chapter4-footnote7"><a href= -"#part1-chapter4-ref7">7.</a> Huxley: <em>Man’s Place in -Nature</em>; New York, 1883.</small></p> -<h3 id="part1-chapter5">V. Recapitulation.</h3> -<p>The anatomical gulf between men and apes does not exist. There -are, in fact, no gulfs anywhere, only gradations. All chasms are -completely covered by unmistakable affinities, in spite of the fact -that the remains of so many millions of deceased races lie hidden -beneath seas or everlastingly locked in the limy bosoms of the -continents. There are closer kinships and remoter kinships, but -there are kinships everywhere. The more intimate kinships are -indicated by more definite and detailed similarities, and the more -general relationships by more fundamental resemblances. All -creatures are bound to all other creatures by the ties of a varying -but undeniable consanguinity.
</p> -<p>Man stands unquestionably in the primate order of animals, -because he has certain qualities of structure which all primates -have, and which all other animals have not: hands and arms and -nails, a bagpipe stomach, great subordination of the cerebellum, a -disc-like placenta, teeth differentiated into incisors, canines, -and molars, and pectoral milk glands.</p> -<p>Man is more closely akin to the anthropoid apes than to the -other primates on account of his immense brain, his ape-like face, -his vertical spine, and in being a true two-handed biped. The -manlike apes and men have the same number and kinds of teeth, the -same limb bones and muscles, like ribs and vertebrae, an atrophied -tail, the same brain structure, and a suspicious similarity in -looks and disposition. Men and anthropoids live about the same -number of years, both being toothless and wrinkled in old age. The -beard, too, in both classes of animals appears at the same period -of life and obeys the same law of variation in colour. Even the -hairs on different parts of the bodies of men and anthropoids, as -on the arms, incline at a like angle to the body surface. The hair -on the upper arm and that on the forearm, in both anthropoids and -men, point in opposite directions—toward the elbow. This -peculiarity is found nowhere in the animal kingdom excepting in a -few American monkeys.</p> -<p>Man’s mammalian affinities are shown in his diaphragm, his hair, -his four-chambered heart, his <em>corpus callosum</em>, his -non-nucleated blood-corpuscles, and his awkward incubation.</p> -<p>The fishes, frogs, reptiles, birds, and non-human mammals are -human in having two body cavities, segmented internal skeletons, -two pairs of limbs, skulls and spinal columns, red blood, brains, -and dorsal cords; and in possessing two eyes, two ears, nostrils, -and mouth opening out of the head. And finally all animals, -including man, are related to all other animal forms by the great -underlying facts of their origin, structure, composition, and -destiny. All creatures, whether they live in the sea, in the -heavens, or in subterranean glooms; whether they swim, fly, crawl, -or walk; whether their world is a planet or a water-drop; and -whether they realise it or not, commence existence in the same way, -are composed of the same substances, are nourished by the same -matters, follow fundamentally the same occupations, all do under -the circumstances the best they can, and all arrive ultimately at -the same pitiful end.</p> -<h3 id="part1-chapter6">VI. The Meaning of Homology.</h3> -<p>The similarities and homologies of structure existing between -man and other animals, and between other animals and still others, -are not accidental and causeless. They are not resemblances -scattered arbitrarily among the multitudinous forms of life by the -capricious levities of chance. That all animals commence existence -as an egg and are all made up of cells composed of the same -protoplasmic substance, and all inhale oxygen and exhale carbon -dioxide, and are all seeking pleasure and seeking to avoid pain, -are more than ordinary facts. They are filled with inferences. That -vertebrate animals, differing in externals as widely as herring and -Englishmen, are all built according to the same fundamental plan, -with marrow-filled backbones and exactly two pairs of limbs -branching in the same way, is an astonishing coincidence. That the -wing of the bird, the foreleg of the dog, the flipper of the whale, -and the fore-limb of the toad and crocodile, have essentially the -same bones as the human arm has is a fact which may be without -significance to blind men, but to no one else. The metamorphosis of -the frog from a fish, of the insect from a worm, and of a poet from -a senseless cell, are transformations simply marvellous in meaning. -And it is not easy, since Darwin, to understand how such lessons -could remain long unintelligible, even to stones and simpletons. -Not many generations have passed, however, since these revelations, -now so distinct and wonderful, fell on the listless minds of men as -ineffectually as the glories of the flower fall on the sightless -sockets of the blind.</p> -<p>It is hardly two generations since the highest intelligences on -the earth conceived that not only the different varieties of -men—the black, the white, and the orange—but all the orders and -genera of the animal world, and not only animals, but plants, had -all been somehow simultaneously and arbitrarily brought into -existence in some indistinct antiquity, and that they had from the -beginning all existed with practically the same features and in -approximately the same conditions as those with which and in which -they are found to-day. The universe was conceived to be a fixed and -stupid something, born as we see it, incapable of growth, and -indulging in nothing but repetitions. There were no necessary -coherencies and consanguinities, no cosmical tendencies operating -eternally and universally. All was whimsical and arbitrary. It was -not known that anything had grown or evolved. All things were -believed to have been given beginning and assigned to their -respective places in the universe by a potential and all-clever -creator. The serpent was limbless because it had officiously -allowed Eve to include in her dietary that which had been expressly -forbidden. The quadruped walked with its face towards the earth as -a structural reminder of its subjection to the biped, who was -supposed to be especially skilled in keeping his eyes rolled -heavenward. The flowers flung out their colours, not for the -benefit of the bugs and bees, and the stars paraded, not because -they were moved to do so by their own eternal urgings, but because -man had eyes capable of being affected by them. Man was an erect -and featherless vertebrate because his hypothetical maker was erect -and featherless. (I wonder whether, if a clam should conceive a -creator, it would have the magnanimity to make him an insect or a -vertebrate, or anything other than a great big clam.)</p> -<h3 id="part1-chapter7">VII. The Earth an Evolution.</h3> -<p>The world now knows—at least, the scientific part of it -knows—that these things are not true, that they are but the solemn -fancies of honest but simple-minded ancients who did the best they -could in that twilight age to explain to their inquiring instincts -the wilderness of phenomena in which they found themselves. The -universe is a process. It is not petrified, but flowing. It is -going somewhere. Everything is changing and evolving, and will -always continue to do so. The forms of life, of continents and -oceans, and of streams and systems, which we perceive as we open -our senses upon the world to-day, are not the forms that have -always existed, and they are not the forms of the eternal future. -There was a time, away in the inconceivable, when there was no life -upon the earth, no solids, and no seas. The world was an -incandescent lump, lifeless and alone, in the cold solitudes of the -spaces. There was a time—there must have been a time—when life -appeared for the first time upon the earth, simple cellules without -bones or blood, and without a suspicion of their immense and -quarrelsome posterity. There was a time when North America was an -island, and the Alleghany Mountains were the only mountains of the -continent. The time was—in the coal-forming age—when the -Mississippi Valley, from the Colorado Islands to the Alleghanies, -was a vast marsh or sea, choked with forests of equisetum and fern, -and swarming with gigantic reptiles now extinct. There was a time -when palms grew in Dakota, and magnolias waved in the semi-tropical -climate of Greenland and Spitzbergen. There was a time when there -were no Rocky Mountains in existence, no Andes, no Alps, no -Pyrenees, and no Himalayas. And that time, compared with the vast -stretches of geological duration, was not so very long ago, for -these mountains are all young mountains. The time was when Jurassic -saurians—those repulsive ruffians of that rude old time—represented -the highest intelligence and civilisation of the known universe. -There were no men and women in the world, not even savages, when -our ape-like forefathers wandered and wondered through the awesome -silences of primeval wilds; there were no railroads, steamboats, -telegraphs, telephones, typewriters, harvesters, electric lights, -nor sewing machines; no billionaires nor bicycles, no socialists -nor steam-heat, no ‘watered stock’ nor ‘government by injunction,’ -no women’s clubs, captains of industry, labour unions, nor ‘yellow -perils’—there was none of these things on the earth a hundred years -ago. All things have evolved to be what they are—the continents, -oceans, and atmospheres, and the plants and populations that live -in and upon them.</p> -<p>There will come a time, too, looking forward into the future, -when what we see now will be seen no more. As we go backward into -the past, the earth in all of its aspects rapidly changes; the -continents dwindle, the mountains melt, and existing races and -species disappear one after another. The farther we penetrate into -the past, the stranger and the more different from the present does -everything become, until finally we come to a world of molten rocks -and vapourised seas without a creeping thing upon it. As it has -been in the past so will it be in time to come. The present is not -everlasting. The minds that perceive upon this planet a thousand -centuries in the future will perceive a very different world from -that which the minds of this day perceive—different arts, animals, -events, ideals, geographies, sciences, and civilisations. The earth -seems fixed and changeless because we are so fleeting. We see it -but a moment, and are gone. The tossing forest in the wrath of the -storm is motionless when looked at by a flash of lightning. The -same tendencies that have worked past changes are at work to-day as -tirelessly as in the past. By invisible chisels the mountains are -being sculptured, ocean floors are lifting, and continents are -sinking into the seas. Species, systems, and civilisations are -changing, some crumbling and passing away, others rising out of the -ruins of the departed. Mighty astronomical tendencies are secretly -but relentlessly at work, and immense vicissitudes are in store for -this clod of our nativity. The earth is doomed to be frozen to -death. In a few million years, according to astronomers, the sun -will have shrunken to a fraction of his present size, and will have -become correspondingly reduced in heat-giving powers. It is -estimated that in twelve or fifteen million years the sun, upon -whose mighty dispensations all life and activity on the earth are -absolutely dependent, will become so enfeebled that no form of life -on the earth will be possible. The partially-cooled earth itself is -giving up its internal warmth, and will continue to give it up -until it is the same temperature as the surrounding abysms, which -is the frightful negative of something like 270 centigrade degrees. -These are not very cheerful facts for those who inhabit the earth -to contemplate. But they that seek the things that cheer must seek -another sphere. No power can stay the emaciation of suns or the -thievery of enveloping immensities. Old age is inevitable. It is -far off, but it is as certain as human decay, and as mournful. In -that dreadful but inevitable time no living being will be left in -this world; there will be no cities nor states nor vanities nor -creeping things, no flowers, no twilights, no love, only a frozen -sphere. The oceans that now rave against the rocky flanks of the -continents will be locked in eternal immobility; the atmospheres, -which to-day drive their fleecy flocks over the azure meads of -heaven and float sweet sounds and feathered forms, will be, in that -terrible time, turned to stone; the radiant woods and fields, the -home of the myriads and the green play-places of the shadows, will, -like all that live, move, and breathe, have rotted into the -everlasting lumber of the elements. There will be no Europe then, -no pompous philosophies, no hellish rich, and no gods. All will -have suffered indescribable refrigeration. The earth will be a -fluidless, lifeless, sunless cinder, unimaginably dead and -desolate, a decrepit and pitiful old ruin falling endlessly among -heartless immensities, the universal tomb of the activities.</p> -<p>The universe is an evolution. Change is as extensive as time and -space. The present has come out of that which has been, and will -enter into and determine that which is to be. Everything has a -biography. Everything has evolved—<em>everything</em>—from the -murmur on the lips of the speechless babe to the soul of the poet, -and from the molecule to Jehovah.</p> -<h3 id="part1-chapter8">VIII. The Factors of Organic -Evolution.</h3> -<p>The animal kingdom represents one of the two grand branches of -the organic universe. It has been evolved—evolved in a manner as -simple and straightforward as it is revolting. It has all been -brought about by <em>partiality</em> or <em>selection</em>. -Generations of beings have come into existence. The individual -members of each generation have differed from each other—differed -in size, strength, speed, colour, shape, sagacity, luck, and -likelihood of life. No two beings, not even those born from the -same womb, are in all respects identical. Hardships have come. They -have come from the inanimate universe in the form of floods, fires, -frosts, accidents, diseases, droughts, storms, and the like; from -other species, who were competitors or enemies; and from -unbrotherly members of the same species. Some have survived, but -the great majority have perished. Only a fraction, and generally an -appallingly small fraction, of each generation of a species have -lived to maturity. The lobster lays 10,000 eggs in a season, yet -the mortality is such that the number of lobsters do not increase -from one year to another. The elephant is the slowest breeder of -all animals, yet, if they should all live, the offspring of a -single pair in 750 years would, according to Darwin, number nearly -19,000,000. It has been shown that at the normal rate of increase -of English sparrows, if none were to die save of old age, it would -take but twenty years for a single pair to give one sparrow to -every square inch in the State of Indiana.<sup><small><a href= -"#part1-chapter8-footnote1" id="part1-chapter8-ref1" name= -"part1-chapter8-ref1">[1]</a></small></sup> A single cyclops (one -of the humbler crustaceans) may have 5,000,000 descendants in a -season. One aphis will produce 100 young, and these young will -reproduce in like manner for ten generations in a season, when, if -they should all live, there would be a quintillion of young. A -female white ant, when adult, does nothing but lie in a cell and -lay eggs. She lays 80,000 eggs a day regularly for several months. -An oyster lays 2,000,000 eggs in a season, and if all these eggs -came to maturity a few dozen oysters might supply the markets of -the world. The tapeworm is said to produce the incredible number of -1,000,000,000 ova, and some of the humbler plants three times this -number of spores. If each egg of the codfish should produce an -adult, a single pair in twenty-five years would produce a mass of -fish larger than the earth. Lower forms of life are even more -prolific than the higher. Maupas said that certain microscopic -infusorians which he studied multiplied so rapidly that, if they -should continue to multiply for thirty-eight days, and all of them -should live, any one of them would produce a mass of protoplasm as -big as the sun.</p> -<p>Those of each generation that have died have been inferior, or -unfitted to the environment in which they found themselves. Those -that have survived have been superior, superior in -something—bigness, cunning, courage, virtue, vitality, strength, -speed, littleness, or ferocity—something that has related them -advantageously to surrounding conditions. The surviving remnant of -each generation have become the progenitors of the next generation, -and have transmitted, or tended to transmit, to their offspring the -qualities of their superiority. This winnowing has gone on in each -generation of living beings during many millions of years—almost -ever since life commenced to be on the earth. Some have continued -themselves, and others have died childless. The environment of each -species has been an immense sieve, and only the superior have gone -through it. Different environments have emphasised different -qualities of structure and disposition, and have thus given rise to -permanent varieties in survival. These varieties, through the -accumulated effects of many generations of selection, have diverged -into species; species, after a still longer series of selections, -have evolved into genera; genera have evolved into families; -families into orders; and so on. In this simple, terrible manner -have all the branches of organic beings (thanks to the horrors of a -million ages) been brought into existence.</p> -<p><em>Variation</em>, therefore, which furnishes variety in -offspring; <em>Heredity</em>, which tends to perpetuate -peculiarities by causing offspring to resemble more or less the -characters of their parents; and <em>Environment</em>, which -determines the character of the selections, are the three factors, -and the only three factors, in organic evolution.</p> -<p><small id="part1-chapter8-footnote1"><a href= -"#part1-chapter8-ref1">1.</a> Jordan: <em>Footnotes of -Evolution</em>; New York, 1898.</small></p> -<h3 id="part1-chapter9">IX. The Evidences of Organic -Evolution.</h3> -<p>That the forms of life to-day found on the earth have come into -existence by the evolution of the more complex forms from the -simpler, and of these simpler forms from still simpler, through the -ever-operating law of Selection, is a necessary conclusion from the -following facts:</p> -<p>1. The existence in the animal world of all grades of -structures, from the humblest possible protozoan, whose body -consists of a single simple speck, to the most powerful and complex -of mammals. There are estimated to be something like a million -species of animals living on the earth to-day. There may be several -times this number. These species are linked together by millions of -varieties, and are so related to each other that they may be all -gathered together into various genera; these genera may be grouped -into families, the families into orders, and the orders into seven -or eight great primary phyla. By taking existing species and adding -to them the extinct species of the rocks, and placing them all -according to their structural affinities, it is possible to arrange -them in the form of a tree with the various phyla, orders, -families, genera, and species, branching and rebranching from the -main trunk. The existence of structures, so graduated as to render -such an arrangement possible, is in itself suggestive of a common -relationship and origin.</p> -<p>2. Evolution is suggested by the similarities and homologies of -structure found throughout the animal kingdom. Some of these -similarities and homologies have already been mentioned. They are -everywhere—remoter and more fundamental, some of them, others -closer and more detailed. To the untrained mind, which sees -surfaces only, and not even surfaces well, the animal world is an -interminable miscellany of forms. But to the biologist, who looks -deeper and with immense acumen over the whole field of animal life, -there are only seven or eight different types of structure in the -entire animal world. These seven or eight types correspond with the -primary classes, or phyla, into which animals are divided, viz., -protozoa, sponges, celenterates, echinoderms, worms, mollusks, -arthropods, and vertebrates. However widely the members of each of -these great groups may differ among themselves in colour, size, -habits of life, and the like, the members of each group all -resemble each other fundamentally. Moles differ from monkeys, bats -from men, and birds from crocodiles and toads. They differ -enormously. But they are all vertebrates with red blood, double -body cavities, backbones, two pairs of limbs, and five fingers on -each limb. When they are looked at superficially, there is not much -similarity between a water-strider and a butterfly or between a -stag-beetle and a gnat. But they are all, in reality, built -according to the same plan. Like all other insects, they have six -legs, a sheath-like skeleton, and bodies characteristically divided -into head, thorax, and abdomen. It is the same with all other great -classes of beings. All worms resemble each other; and so do all -mollusks, although they may differ in particulars as widely as -nautiluses and clams. Echinoderms have a radiate structure, -celenterates and sponges are vase-like in shape, and protozoa are -one-celled. The differences in structure among the members of a -group consist in different modifications of a fundamental type. -Among the vertebrates the fore-limb may be an arm, a leg, a wing, a -shovel, a flipper, or a fin. But in all cases it is the same -organ—that is, the same implement modified to serve different ends. -Take the mouth-parts of insects. In the grasshopper and cricket -these parts are fitted for grinding; in the moths and butterflies -they are fashioned into long tubes for sucking the sweets of -flowers; in the mosquito they form an elaborate apparatus for -drilling and drinking; and in the mayfly the mouth-parts, though -present, are not used at all. In all of these animals these parts -are essentially the same, although differing so much in their forms -and purposes that the unscientific can scarcely be made to believe -they are fundamentally alike. There is no fact more familiar to the -biologist or more frequently met with in the fields of animal -morphology than the fact that the same general type may be hammered -into dozens, or hundreds, or even thousands, of different patterns -by the incessant industry of its surroundings, and that the same -organic part may be moulded into various implements serving totally -different ends by the environmental vicissitudes of time and space. -On the hypothesis that the members of each group of animals -possessing common characteristics, whether the group be large or -small, have sprung from a common ancestry, and that the differences -in structure have arisen as a result of differences in environment, -the similarities and homologies of structure existing among animals -are perfectly intelligible. But on any other supposition they are -inexplicable.</p> -<p>3. Evolution is suggested by the remarkable series of phenomena -presented by embryology. There are at least four facts in the -developmental history of every creature which can hardly be -accounted for on any other supposition than that of organic -evolution.</p> -<p><em>First</em>, the fact that every animal, above the lowest, -individually passes through an evolution between the beginning of -its existence and its maturity. Terrestrial beings are not born, -like Minerva, full-grown. They grow. They evolve. They commence -close down to the very atoms. And from this lowly genesis they -rise, through a series of marvellous changes, to that high state of -perfection and greatness from which they descend to -dissolution.</p> -<p>If we knew by actual observation as little concerning the -evolution of individuals as we do of the evolution of species—if we -had always been used to seeing animals, including ourselves, in -full bloom—had never watched the tadpole, the pupa, and the babe -pass through their wonderful metamorphoses on their way to -maturity, it would probably be just as hard for many minds to -believe that animals evolve individually to be what they are as it -is for them to believe that species have grown to be what they are. -In the case of individuals, however, the evolution takes place -right before our eyes largely, while the evolution of species goes -on so slowly and stretches back so far into the past that it can -only be inferred.</p> -<p><em>Second</em>, the fact that animals, no matter how much they -may differ from each other at maturity, all begin existence at the -same place. Every animal commences its organic existence as an -egg—as a one-celled animal—as an organism identical in structure -with the simplest protozoan. The ova of whales ‘are no larger than -fern seeds.’ The eggs of the coral, the crab, the ape, and the man -are so precisely alike that the highest powers of the microscope -cannot distinguish between them.</p> -<p><em>Third</em>, the fact that the members of the same great -group of animals in their individual development pass through -similar stages of evolution. The ‘worm’ stage in the development of -most insects and the ‘fish’ stage of frogs are well known.</p> -<p>There are no more remarkable instances of individual evolution -in the whole range of animal life. The fish, the reptile, the bird, -the dog, and the human being—all vertebrates, in short—cannot for -some time after their embryonic commencement be distinguished from -each other. ‘The feet of lizards and mammals, the wings and feet of -birds, and the hands and feet of men,’ says the illustrious Von -Baer, as quoted by Darwin, ‘all arise from the same fundamental -form’.<sup><small><a href="#part1-chapter9-footnote1" id= -"part1-chapter9-ref1a" name= -"part1-chapter9-ref1a">[1a]</a></small></sup></p> -<p>‘It is quite in the later stages of development,’ says Huxley, -‘that the human being presents marked differences from the ape, -while the latter departs as much from the dog in its development as -the man does’.<sup><small><a href="#part1-chapter9-footnote2" id= -"part1-chapter9-ref2" name= -"part1-chapter9-ref2">[2]</a></small></sup></p> -<p>Not only frogs, but reptiles, birds, and mammals, including man, -all have gills at a certain stage in their embryonic development. -Nearly all the lower invertebrate animals are hermaphroditic—that -is, in the body of each animal is found the two kinds of sex organs -which in the higher animals exist in distinct animals. And frogs, -birds, and other higher animals, which as adults are unisexual, -have, as an inheritance from these primitive forms, hermaphroditic -embryos.<sup><small><a href="#part1-chapter9-footnote3" id= -"part1-chapter9-ref3a" name= -"part1-chapter9-ref3a">[3a]</a></small></sup></p> -<p><em>Fourth</em>, the fact that the structural stages through -which animals in embryo pass correspond in a wonderful manner with -the permanent structures of those lower forms which extend serially -back to the beginnings of life. It is the proudest boast of the -embryologist that he is able to know the route through which any -species has come to be what it is by a simple study of the -individual evolution of its members. Each animal repeats in its -individual evolution the evolution of its species. This -recapitulation is not always complete—is, in fact, frequently -vague, sometimes circuitous, and often broken or abbreviated. -Processes requiring originally centuries or thousands of years to -accomplish are here telescoped into a few months, or even days. It -is not strange that the process is imperfect. But so firmly is the -belief in the correspondence of ontogeny and phylogeny fixed in the -minds of modern biologists that, in determining the classification -and affinities of any particular animal, more reliance is placed on -the facts of embryology than on those of adult structure.</p> -<p>The first thing that an animal becomes after it is an egg—unless -it is a one-celled animal, in which case it remains always an -egg—is two cells; these two cells become four; these four become -eight; and so on, until the embryo becomes a many-celled ball, -consisting of a single layer of cells surrounding a fluid interior. -A dimple forms in the cell layer on one side of this ball, and, by -deepening to a hollow, changes the ball into a double-walled sac. -This is the gastrula—the permanent structure of the sponges and -celenterates, and an (almost) invariable stage in the larval -development of all animals above the sponges and celenterates. The -gastrula becomes a worm (or an insect or a fish through the worm) -by elongation and enlargement, and by the development of the -endoderm, which is the inner layer of the cell wall, into organs of -nutrition and reproduction, and by the development of the ectoderm, -which is the outer cell layer, into organs of motion and -sensation.</p> -<p>The embryonic development of a human being is not different in -kind from the embryonic development of any other animal. Every -human being at the beginning of his organic existence is a -protozoan, about <small><sup>1</sup>⁄<sub>125</sub></small> inch in -diameter; at another stage of development he is a tiny sac-shaped -mass of cells without blood or nerves, the gastrula; at another -stage he is a worm, with a pulsating tube instead of a heart, and -without head, neck, spinal column, or limbs; at another stage he -has, as a backbone, a rod of cartilage extending along the back, -and a faint nerve cord, as in amphioxus, the lowest of the -vertebrates; at another stage he is a fish with a two-chambered -heart, mesonephric kidneys, and gill-slits with gill arteries -leading to them, just as in fishes; at another stage he is a -reptile with a three-chambered heart, and voiding his excreta -through a cloaca like other reptiles; and finally, when he enters -upon post-natal sins and actualities, he is a sprawling, squalling, -unreasoning quadruped. The human larva from the fifth to the -seventh month of development is covered with a thick growth of hair -and has a true caudal appendage, like the monkey. At this stage the -embryo has in all thirty-eight vertebrae, nine of which are caudal, -and the great toe extends at right angles to the other toes, and is -not longer than the other toes, but shorter, as in the ape.</p> -<p>These facts are unmistakable. There is a reason for everything, -and there is a reason for these transformations through which each -generation of living beings journeys. The individual passes through -them because the species to which he belongs has passed through -them. They represent ancestral wanderings. As if to emphasise the -kinship of all of life’s forms and to render incontrovertible the -fact of universal evolution, Nature compels every individual to -commence existence at the same place, and to recapitulate in his -individual evolution the phylogenetic journeyings of his -species.</p> -<p>4. That existing forms of life have been evolved from other -forms, and that these ancestral forms have been different from -those derived from them, is shown by the occasional appearance of -antecedent and abandoned types of structure among the offspring of -existing species. Occasionally a human child is born strangely -unlike its parents, but bearing an unmistakable resemblance in -looks and disposition to his great-grandfather or some other remote -ancestor. This is <em>atavism</em>, that tendency to revert to -ancestral types which is prevalent among all animals. We may think -of it figuratively as a flash of indecision when Nature hesitates -for a moment whether to adopt a new form of structure or cling to -the old and tried. Horses and mules are sometimes born with three -toes on each foot, and zebra-like stripes on their legs and -shoulders; and domestic pigeons, such as are naturally black, red, -or mottled, occasionally produce offspring with blue plumage and -two black wing-bars, like the wild rock-dove, from which all -domestic breeds have sprung. In man the cheekbone and the frontal -bone of the forehead consist normally each of a single bone. But in -children and human embryos these bones are always double, as is -normally the case in adults among some of the anthropoids and other -mammals. Gills appear regularly in the embryos of reptiles, birds, -and mammals, and human young are sometimes born with gill-slits on -the neck. There are times when, owing to inaccurate or incomplete -embryological development, these fish-like characteristics are so -perfect at birth as to allow liquids, on being swallowed, to pass -out through them and trickle down on the outside of the neck. Many -muscles are occasionally developed in man which are normal in the -apes and other mammals. As many as seven different muscular -variations have been found in a single human being, every one of -which were muscles found normally in the structure of the -apes.<sup><small><a href="#part1-chapter9-footnote1" id= -"part1-chapter9-ref1b" name= -"part1-chapter9-ref1b">[1b]</a></small></sup></p> -<p>5. Closely akin to atavism, which is the occasional persistence -of ancestral types of character, is the regular occurrence of -vestigial organs or structures, organs which in ancestral forms -have definite functions, but which in existing species, owing to -changed conditions, are rudimentary and useless. On the back of -each ankle of the horse are two splints, the atrophied remains of -the second and fourth toes. Similar vestiges of two obsolete toes -are also found just back of the wrists and ankles on all the -two-toed ungulates, such as the cow and sheep. In the body of the -whale where hind-limbs would naturally be, there are found the -anatomical ruins of these organs in the form of a few diminutive -bones. The same thing is true in the sirenians. In the Greenland -whale there are remnants of both femur and tibia in the region of -the atrophied hind-limbs. The snakes are limbless, but the pythons -and boas have internal remnants of hind-limbs and sometimes even -clawed structures representing toes. The so-called ‘glass-snake’ or -‘joint-snake’ (which is really a limbless lizard) has four complete -internal limbs. Young turtles, parrots, and whalebone whales have -teeth, but the adults of these animals are toothless. Cows, sheep, -deer, and other ruminants, never have as adults any upper incisors, -but these teeth are found in the foetal stages of these animals -just under the gums. The female frog has rudimentary male -reproductive organs, and the male has corresponding vestiges of -female organs. Similar remnants of the reproductive structures -exist in many other animals. They represent stages in the -transition from the hermaphroditism of primitive animals to the -unisexuality of the higher forms, the separation of the sex organs -into those of male and female having come about through the decay -of one set of structures in each individual.</p> -<p>For reasons which it is not necessary to mention here, -biologists believe that insects all originated from a common -parental form, with two pairs of wings and six legs. Insects all -retain their original allowance of legs, but in many species one or -the other pair of wings has become more or less degenerated. In the -whole order of flies the back pair of wings is represented by a -couple of insignificant knobs. In the Strepsiptera, a sub-order of -beetles, the front-wings are similarly reduced, being mere twisted -filaments. Many parasites, such as fleas and ticks, whose mode of -life renders organs of aerial locomotion unnecessary, are entirely -wingless. The insects of small isolated islands are also largely -without wings, the proportion of wingless species being much larger -than among insects inhabiting continents. This is due to their -greater liability on small land masses of being carried out to sea -and drowned, owing to the feebleness and uncertainty of insect -flight. On the island of Madeira, out of the 550 species found -there, 220 species no longer have the power of flight.</p> -<p>Air-breathing animals—amphibians, reptiles, birds, and -mammals—have normally a pair of lungs—a right one and a left one. -But in snakes and snake-like lizards, where the body is very -slender and elongated, only one lung, sometimes the right one, and -sometimes the left, is fully developed. The right ovary is likewise -aborted in all birds, the left one yielding all the eggs. The -swifts and frigate birds live almost their whole lives long on the -wing, and the legs of these birds have grown so short and weak and -rudimentary, as a result of their constant life in the air, that -they can scarcely walk. The chimney swift is said never to alight -anywhere except on the sooty inner walls of the chimney where its -nest is. Its food consists of insects which it gathers in the air, -and the few dead twigs used in making its nest are nipped from the -tree while the bird continues its flight. The ostriches, -cassowaries, and many other birds, have, on the other hand, -developed their legs at the expense of their wings. The ostrich is -said to be able to outrun the horse, but it has no power of flight, -although it has wings and wing muscles, and even the skin-folds -covering the wings corresponding to those of birds that fly. But -its whole flying apparatus is in ruins. The rudimentary hind-toe of -birds is a vestigial organ, and so are the claws which appear on -the thumb and first finger of all young birds. So also are the -rudiments of eyes in cave crickets, fishes, and other inhabitants -of total darkness. The flounder and other so-called flat fishes -swim straight up, as ordinary fishes do, when young. But as they -grow they incline more and more to one side, and finally swim -entirely on their side, the eye on the lower side migrating around, -and joining the other on the upper side of the head.</p> -<p>About the first thing a human infant does on coming into the -world is to prove its arboreal origin by grasping and spitefully -clinging to everything that stimulates its palms. A little -peeperless babe an hour old can perform feats of strength with its -hands and arms that many men and women cannot equal. It can support -the entire weight of its body for several seconds hanging by its -hands. Dr. Robinson, an English physician, found as a result of -sixty experiments on as many infants, more than half of whom were -less than an hour old, that with two exceptions every babe was able -to hang to the finger or to a small stick, and sustain the whole -weight of the body for at least ten seconds. Twelve of those just -born held on for nearly a minute. At the age of two or three weeks, -when this power is greatest, several succeeded in sustaining -themselves for over a minute and a half, two for over two minutes, -and one for two minutes and thirty-five seconds. The young ape for -some weeks after birth clings tenaciously to its mother’s neck and -hair, and the instinct of the child to cling to objects is probably -a survival of the instinct of the young ape. I believe it is -Wallace who relates somewhere an incident which illustrates the -instinct of the young simian to cling to something. Wallace had -captured a young ape, and was carrying it to camp, when the little -fellow happened to get its hands on the naturalist’s whiskers, -which it mistook, evidently, for the hirsute property of its -mother, and, driven by the powerful instinct of self-preservation, -it hung on to them so desperately it could scarcely be pulled -loose. Many mammals are provided with a well-developed muscular -apparatus for the manipulation of their ears. But in man there does -not exist the same necessity for auricular detection of enemies, -and while these muscles still exist, and are capable of being used -to a slight extent by occasional individuals, they are generally so -emaciated as to be useless.</p> -<p>Another vestigial organ in the body of man, and one of -significance from the standpoint of morphology, is the tail. The -tail is an exceedingly unpopular part of the human anatomy, most -men and women being unwilling to admit that they have such an -appendage. But many a person who has hitherto dozed in ignorance on -this matter has learned with considerable dismay, when he has for -the first time looked upon the undraped lineaments of the human -skeleton, that man actually has a tail. It consists of three or -four (sometimes five) small vertebrae, more or less fused, at the -posterior end of the spinal column. That this is really a -rudimentary tail is proved beyond a doubt by the fact that in the -embryo it is highly developed, being longer than the limbs, and is -provided with a regular muscular apparatus for wagging it. These -caudal muscles are generally represented in grown-up people by -bands of fibrous tissue, but cases are known where the actual -muscles have persisted through life.<sup><small><a href= -"#part1-chapter9-footnote4" id="part1-chapter9-ref4" name= -"part1-chapter9-ref4">[4]</a></small></sup></p> -<p>The nictitating membrane, which in birds and many reptiles -consists of a half-transparent curtain acting as a lid to sweep the -eye, is in the human eye dwindled to a small membranous remnant, -draped at the inner corner. The growth of hair over the human body -surface may be regarded, in view of the sartorial habits of man, as -a vestigial inheritance from hairy ancestors. One of the most -notorious of the vestigial organs of man is the vermiform appendix, -a small slender sac opening from the large intestine near where the -large intestine is joined by the small intestine. In some animals -this organ is large and performs an important part in the process -of digestion. But in man it is a mere rudiment, not only of no -possible aid in digestion, but the source of frequent disease, and -even of death.</p> -<p>There are in all, according to Darwin, about eighty vestigial -organs in the human body. But these organs occur everywhere -throughout the animal kingdom. There is not an order of animals, -nor of plants either, without them. They are necessary facts -growing out of evolution. Organic structures are the result of -adjustment to surrounding conditions. The continual changes in -environment to which all organisms are exposed necessitate -corresponding changes in structure. And the vestiges found in the -bodies of all animals represent parts which in the previous -existence were useful and necessary to a complete adjustment of the -organism, but which, owing to a change of emphasis in surroundings, -have become useless, and consequently shrunken. They are the -obsolete or obsolescent parts of animal structure—parts which have -been outgrown and superseded—the ‘silent letters’ of morphology. -They sustain the same relation to the individual organism as dead -or dwindling species sustain to a fauna. They furnish indisputable -proof of the kinship and unity of the animal world.</p> -<p>6. It is only on the supposition that the life of the earth has -evolved step by step with the evolution of the land masses, and -that the forms of life from which existing forms were evolved were -dispersed over the earth at a time when physiographic conditions -were very different from what they are now, that it is possible to -account for the peculiar manner in which animals are distributed -over the earth. The cassowary is a flightless bird of the ostrich -order inhabiting Australia and the islands to the north of it. This -bird is found nowhere else in the world, and each area has its own -particular species. The same things are also true of the kangaroo. -It is found over a similar region, with a different species -occupying each land mass. Now, on the hypothesis of special -creation there is no thinkable reason why these animals should be -divided, as they are, into distinct species, and restricted to this -particular region. But on the hypothesis of evolution it is -perfectly plain. All of these regions at one time were united with -one another, and were subsequently submerged in part, forming -islands. Each group of animals, being isolated from every other -group and subjected to somewhat different conditions, developed a -style of departure from the original type of structure different -from that of every other group in response to the peculiar -conditions operating upon it. This has led, in the course of -centuries of selection, to the formation of distinct species such -as exist to-day.</p> -<p>Lombock Strait, a narrow neck of water between Bali and Lombock -Island, and Macassar Strait, separating Celebes from Borneo, are -parts of a continuous passage of water which in remote times -separated two continents—an Indo-Malayan continent to which -belonged Borneo, Sumatra, Java, and the Malay Peninsula; and an -Austro-Malayan continent, now represented by Australia, Celebes, -the Moluccas, New Guinea, Solomon’s Islands, etc. Wallace first -announced this ancient boundary, and it has been called ‘Wallace’s -line.’ He was led to infer its existence by the fact which he -observed as he travelled about from island to island, that, while -the faunas of these two regions are as wholes very different from -each other, the faunas of the various land patches in each area -have a wonderful similarity. Australia is a veritable museum of old -and obsolete forms of both plants and animals. Its fauna and flora -are made up prevailingly of forms such as have on the other -continents long been superseded by more specialised species. No -true mammals, excepting men and a few rats, lived in Australia when -Englishmen first went there. The most powerful animals were the -comparatively helpless marsupials. The explanation of these -remarkable facts is probably this: The Australian continent, which -formerly included New Guinea and other islands to the north, has -not been connected with the other land masses for a very long -period of time. The development upon the other continents of the -more powerful mammals, especially of the ungulates and the -carnivora, resulted in the extermination of the more helpless forms -from most of the earth’s surface. But Australia, protected by its -isolation, has retained to this day its old-fashioned forms of -life, neither land animals nor plants having been able to navigate -the intervening straits. This supposition is strengthened by the -fact that fossil remains of marsupials are to-day found scattered -all over the world, while, with the exception of the American -opossums, living marsupials are found only in Australia and its -islands. There is to-day not a single survivor of these -once-numerous races in either Europe, Asia, or Africa. Similar -facts of distribution are furnished by the lemurs—those small, -monkey-like animals with fox faces, which are sometimes called -‘half-apes,’ since they are supposed to be the link connecting the -true apes with lower forms. Fossil lemurs are found in both America -and Europe, but lemurs are now extinct in both continents. Those of -America were probably exterminated by the carnivora, who are known -to be very fond of monkey meat of all kinds. The European lemurs -seem to have migrated southward into eastern Africa at a time when -Madagascar formed a part of the mainland. ‘There they have been -isolated, and have developed in a fashion comparable to that which -has occurred in the case of the Australian marsupials. Of fifty -living species, thirty are confined to Madagascar, and the lemurs -are there exceedingly numerous in individuals. Outside of -Madagascar they only maintain a precarious footing in forests or on -islands, and are usually few in number’.<sup><small><a href= -"#part1-chapter9-footnote3" id="part1-chapter9-ref3b" name= -"part1-chapter9-ref3b">[3b]</a></small></sup></p> -<p>If the earth were peopled by migrations from Ararat, it would -require a good deal of intellectual legerdemain to show why the -sloths are confined to South America and the monotremes to -Australia and its islands. The reindeer of northern Europe and -Asia, and the elk and caribou of Arctic America, are so much alike -they must have descended from a common ancestry, and been developed -into distinct species since the separation of North America and -Eurasia. The same thing is probably also true of the puma and -jaguar, who inhabit the middle latitudes of the New World, and the -lion, tiger, and leopard, occupying like latitudes of the Old -World. They all belong to the cat family, and represent divergences -from a common feline type of structure. The camel does not exist -normally outside of northern Africa and central and western Asia. -And when the camel-like llama of South America first became known -to zoologists, it was a problem how this creature could have become -separated so far from the apparent origin of the camel family. But -since then fossil camels have been found all over both North and -South America. And it has even been suspected that perhaps America -was the original home of the camel, and that, like the horse, the -camel migrated to the eastern hemisphere at a time when the eastern -and western land masses were connected. The foxes, hares, and other -mammals of the upper Alps, also many Alpine plants, are like those -of the Arctic regions. The most probable explanation of these -resemblances is that these Alpine species climbed up into these -inhospitable altitudes, and were left stranded here on this island -of cold, when their relatives, on the return of warmth at the close -of the glacial period, retreated back to the ice-bound fastnesses -around the pole. It is for a similar reason, probably, that the -flora of the upper White Mountains resembles that of Labrador.</p> -<p>7. One of the strongest pieces of evidence bearing on evolution -that is furnished by any department of knowledge is that furnished -by geology. It is the evidence of the rocks. Geology is, among -other things, a history of the earth. This history has been written -by the earth itself on laminae of stone. It is from these records -that we learn incontestably the order in which the forms of life -have made their appearance on the earth.</p> -<p>Three-fourths of the surface of the earth is sea. Over the -surface of the remaining fourth, excepting in mountainous places, -is a layer of soil, varying from a few feet to a few hundred feet -in depth. Beneath this coverlet of soil, extending as far as man -has penetrated into the earth, is rock. Excepting in regions -overflowed by lava poured out from beneath, or along the backbones -of continents where the surface rocks have been upheaved into folds -and carried away by denudation, the rocks immediately beneath the -soil, to a thickness often of thousands of feet, are in the form of -layers, or sheets, arranged one above another. These rocks are -called sedimentary rocks, as distinguished from the unlaminated -rocks of the interior. They have been formed at the bottom of the -sea, and have, hence, all been formed since the condensation of the -oceans. They have been formed out of the detritus of continents -brought down by the rivers and the accumulated remains of animal -and vegetal forms which have slowly settled down through the -waters. They are the successive cemeteries of the dead past. Such -rocks are now forming over the floors of all oceans—forming just as -they have formed throughout the long eons of geological history. -Along the axes of ancient mountains and in deep-cut canyons the -rock layers are exposed to a thickness of thousands of feet, in -some cases thirty or forty thousand feet. Here they lie, piled up, -one on top of another, the great, broad pages upon which are -written the long, dark story of our planet. It is the mightiest and -most everlasting of all annals—the autobiography of a world. It is -possible, by studying these rock records, to know not only the kind -of life that lived in each age, but a good deal regarding the -conditions in which that life lived and passed away. Just as the -naturalist is able, from a single bone of an unknown animal, to -reconstruct the entire animal and to infer something of its -surroundings and habits of life, and as the archeologist, by going -back to the graves of deceased races and digging up the dust upon -which these races wrought, is able to tell much of their history -and characteristics, so the geologist, by studying the bones of -those more distant civilisations, the civilisations sandwiched -among the fossiliferous rocks, is able to know, not only just the -kind of life that lived in each age, but, by comparing the species -of successive strata, can construct with astonishing fulness the -genealogical outline of the entire life process. The succession of -life forms as they appear in the rocks, with a sketch of their -probable genealogy, is traced elsewhere in this chapter. It is only -necessary to say here that the order in which the forms of life -appear in the sedimentary strata is that of a gradually increasing -complexity. The invertebrates appear first; then the fishes, the -lowest of the vertebrates; after these come the amphibians; -following these the reptiles; and finally the birds and -mammals.</p> -<p>8. There is another reason for a belief in evolution furnished -by geology, but of a somewhat different kind from that just stated. -It consists in the fact that there are found in the rocks series or -grades of structures, which fit with amazing accuracy on to the -structures of existing species. Now, this is precisely what, -according to the evolutional hypothesis, is to be expected. For, if -evolution is true, existing species represent the tops of things. -They are the existing and visible parts of processes which extend -indefinitely back into the past, and whose deceased stages may -reasonably be expected to be found fossil in the earth. Considering -the youth and inexperience of paleontology and the torn and -incoherent character of the record, it is surprising that -anatomists have been able to accomplish what they have -accomplished. In many cases—notably, those of man, the snail, the -crocodile, and the horse—antecedent forms of structure have been -found in almost unbroken gradations leading back to types differing -immensely from their existing representatives. Bones and fossils of -men have been found buried beneath the alluvium of rivers, under -old lava-beds, and in caves, crusted over by the deposits of -percolating waters. Many such fossils are found in quaternary -rocks, along with the bones of animals still living and some -extinct. Some of these remains indicate unmistakable affinities -with the ape. The most celebrated of these discoveries is the -fossil of an erect ape-man (<em>Pithecanthropus erectus</em>), -found by a Dutch Governor on the island of Java in 1894. This -fossil, in the shape and size of the head and in its general -structure, strikes about as near as could be the middle between man -and ape. That it is the fossil of an ambiguous form is indicated by -the fact that, when it was examined by a company of twelve -specialists at Berlin soon after its discovery, three of them -declared it to be the remains of an individual belonging to a low -variety of man; three others thought it was a large anthropoid; -while the other six held that it was neither man nor anthropoid, -but a genuine connecting link between them. It is discussed at -length by Haeckel in ‘The Last Link,’ a paper read before the -International Congress of Zoology, at Cambridge, in 1898. ‘It is,’ -says the veteran biologist, ‘the much-sought “missing link” -supposed to be wanting in the chain of primates which stretches -unbroken from the lowest catarhine to the most highly developed -man.’ Associated with this fossil ape-man were the fossils of the -elephant, hyena, and hippopotamus, none of which any longer exist -in that part of the world, also the fossil remains of two orders of -animals now extinct. The genealogy of the crocodile has been traced -by Huxley, through all intermediate stages, back to the giant -reptiles of the early Tertiary.<sup><small><a href= -"#part1-chapter9-footnote5" id="part1-chapter9-ref5" name= -"part1-chapter9-ref5">[5]</a></small></sup>And the pedigree of the -horse has been even more completely worked out by the indefatigable -Marsh. In the museum of Yale University may be seen the fossil -history of this splendid ungulate, from the time it was a clumsy -little quadruped only 14 inches high, and with four or five toes on -each foot, down to existing horses. The earliest known ancestor of -the horse, the eohippus, lived at the beginning of the Eocene -epoch. It had five toes, almost equal, on each front foot (four -toes behind), and was about the size of a fox. The orohippus, which -lived a little later, had four toes on each front-foot, and three -behind. The mesohippus, found in the Miocene, had three toes and -one rudimentary toe on each front-foot, and three toes behind. It -was about the size of a sheep. The miohippus, which is found later, -had three toes on each of its four feet, with the middle toe on -each foot larger than the other two. The pliohippus, living in the -Pliocene epoch, had one principal toe on each foot, and two -secondary toes, the two secondary toes not reaching to the ground. -It was about the size of a donkey. Existing horses have one toe on -each foot—the digit corresponding to the big middle finger—and the -ruins of two others in the form of splints on the back of each -ankle. In the embryo of the horse these splints are segmented, each -of them, into three phalanges. Fossil remains representing all -stages in the development of the horse have been found in the -regions about the upper waters of the Missouri River.</p> -<p>It is an important fact that the types of structure forming any -series grow more and more generalised as the distance from the -present increases, and that different lines of development, when -traced back into the past, often converge in types which combine -the main characters of various existing groups. The horses, -rhinoceroses, and tapirs, great as are the differences among them -now, can be traced back step by step through fossil forms, their -differences gradually becoming less marked, until ‘the lines -ultimately blend together, if not in one common ancestor, at all -events into forms so closely alike in all essentials that no -reasonable doubt can be held as to their common origin.’ ‘The four -chief orders of the higher mammals—the primates, ungulates, -carnivora, and rodents—seem to be separated by profound gulfs, when -we confine our attention to the representatives of to-day. But -these gulfs are completely closed, and the sharp distinctions of -the four orders are entirely lost, when we go back and compare -their extinct predecessors of the Cenozoic period, who lived at -least three million years ago. There we find the great sub-class of -the placentals, which to-day comprises more than two thousand five -hundred species, represented by only a small number of -insignificant pro-placentals, in which the characters of the four -divergent orders are so intermingled and toned down that we cannot -in reason do other than consider them as the precursors of those -features. The oldest primates, the oldest ungulates, the oldest -carnivora, and the oldest rodents, all have the same skeletal -structure and the same typical dentition (forty-four teeth) as -these pro-placentals; all are characterised by the small and -imperfect structure of the brain, especially of the cortex, its -chief part, and all have short legs and five-toed, flat-soled -(plantigrade) feet. In many cases among these oldest placentals it -was at first very difficult to say whether they should be classed -with the primates, ungulates, carnivora, or rodents, so very -closely and confusedly do these four groups, which diverge so -widely afterwards, approach each other at that time. Their common -origin from a single ancestral group follows -incontestably’.<sup><small><a href="#part1-chapter9-footnote6" id= -"part1-chapter9-ref6" name= -"part1-chapter9-ref6">[6]</a></small></sup></p> -<p>9. Man is the most powerful and influential of animals. He rules -the world—rules it with a sovereignty more despotic and extensive -than that hitherto exercised by any other animal. Many races of -beings are, and have been for centuries, completely dominated by -him. These races, during their long subjection, have been changed -and transformed by man in a wonderful manner through his control of -their power to breed. All domestic animals have come from wild -animals; they have been derived by a process of selective evolution -conducted by man himself. By continually choosing as the -progenitors of each generation those with qualities best suited to -his whims and purposes, man has evolved races as different from -each other in appearance and structure, and as different from the -original species, as many groups which, in the wild state, -constitute distinct species; indeed, man has in some cases created -entirely new species, both of plants and animals—species that breed -true and are what biologists call ‘good’—by his own selections.</p> -<p>There are something over 150 different varieties of the domestic -pigeon. Some of these varieties—as many as a dozen, Mr. Darwin -thinks—differ from each other sufficiently to be reckoned, if they -are considered solely with reference to their structures, as -entirely distinct species. The carrier, for instance, the giant of -the pigeons, measures 17 inches from bill-tip to the end of its -tail, and has a beak 1 <small><sup>3</sup>⁄<sub>4</sub></small> -inches long. Around each eye is a large dahlia-like wattle, and -another large wattle is on the beak, giving the beak the appearance -of having been thrust through the kernel of a walnut. The tumbler -is small, squatty, and almost beakless. It has the preposterous -habit of rising high in the air and then tumbling heels over head. -The roller, one of the many varieties of the tumbler, descends to -the ground in a series of back somersaults, executed so rapidly -that it looks like a falling ball. The runt is large, weighing -sometimes as much as the carrier. The fantail has thirty or forty -feathers in its tail, while all other varieties have only twelve or -fourteen, the normal number for birds. The trumpeter, so named on -account of its peculiar coo, has an umbrella-like hood of feathers -covering its head and face, and its feet are so heavily feathered -that they look like little wings. In the correct specimens of this -variety the feathers have to be clipped from the face before the -birds can see to feed themselves. The pouter has the absurd habit -of inflating its gullet to a prodigious size, and the Jacobin wears -a gigantic ruff. The homing pigeon has such a strong attachment for -its cote that it will travel hundreds of miles, sometimes as many -as 1,400 miles, in order to reach the home from which it has been -separated. But it is not simply in their colour, size, habits, and -plumage, that pigeons vary. There are corresponding differences in -their structures, in the number of their ribs and vertebrae, in the -shape and size of the skull, in the bones of the face, in the -development of the breast-bone, and in the length of the neck, -legs, and bill. Pigeons also differ in the shape and size of their -eggs, and in their dispositions and voice. ‘There is,’ says Huxley -in summing up his discussion of the great variety in these birds, -‘hardly a particular of either internal economy or external shape -which has not by selective breeding been perpetuated and become the -foundation of a new race’.<sup><small><a href= -"#part1-chapter9-footnote7" id="part1-chapter9-ref7" name= -"part1-chapter9-ref7">[7]</a></small></sup></p> -<p>All of the 150 different varieties of domestic pigeons have been -evolved by human selection during the past three or four thousand -years from the blue rock-doves which to-day inhabit the seacoast -countries of Europe.</p> -<p>What is true of pigeons is also true largely of most of the -other races associated with man—of cats, cattle, horses, sheep, -swine, goats, fowls, and the like. All varieties of the domestic -chicken—the clumsy Cochin with its feather-duster legs, the tall -and stately Spanish, the great-crested Minorca, the Dorking with -its matchless; comb and wattle, the almost combless Polish, the -blue Andalusian, the gigantic Brahma, the tiny Bantam, the -Wyandottes in all colours (black, white, buff, silver, and golden), -the magnificent Plymouth Rocks, and the exceedingly pugnacious -Game-cock—these and dozens of other varieties, all flightless, have -come from the jungle-bird whose morning clarion still greets Aurora -from the wilds of distant India. The dog is a civilised wolf, and -the wild-boar is the progenitor of the oleaginous swine. The Merino -and South Down breeds of sheep have come from the same stock in the -last century and a half. In 1790 a lamb was born on the farm of -Seth Wright in Massachusetts. It had a long body and short, bowed -legs. It was noticed that this lamb could not follow the others -over the fences. The owner thought it would be a good thing if all -his sheep were like it. So he selected it to breed from. Some of -its offspring were like it, and some were like the ordinary sheep. -By continual selection of those with long bodies and short legs the -ancon breed of sheep was finally produced. In 1770 in a herd of -Paraguay cattle a hornless male calf appeared, and from this -individual in a similar way came the stock of Muleys. The -occasional appearance of horned calves and lambs among the -offspring of hornless breeds of cattle and sheep are examples of -atavism indicating the presence of a vestigial tendency to breed -true to their horned ancestors. The Hereford cattle originated as a -distinct variety about 1769 through the careful selections of a -certain Englishman by the name of Tompkins. All domesticated -quadrupeds, except the elephant, have come from wild species with -erect ears, the ears acting as funnels to harvest the sound-waves. -But there are few of them in which there is not one or more -varieties with drooping ears—cats in China, horses in parts of -Russia, sheep in Italy, cattle in India, and pigs, dogs, and -rabbits in all long-civilised lands. We are so accustomed to seeing -dogs and pigs with pendent ears that we are surprised to know there -are varieties with erect ears. The goldfish is a carp, and in its -native haunts in the waters of China it has the colour of the carp. -The golden hue seen in the occupants of our aquaria has been given -to this fish by the Chinese through the continual selection of -certain kinds. The goldfish, almost as much as the pigeon, has been -the sport of fanciers, and the strangest varieties have resulted. -Some have outlandishly long fins, while others have no dorsal fin -at all. Some are streaked and splotched with gold and scarlet; -others are pure albinos. One of the most monstrous varieties has a -three-lobed tail-fin, and its eyeballs, without sockets, are on the -outside of its head. All of our common barnyard fowls—turkeys, -ducks, geese, and chickens—are flightless, but the varieties from -which the domesticated forms have come all have functional wings, -two of these varieties crossing continents in their annual -migrations.</p> -<p>Not only animals, but plants also, many of them, have been -greatly changed by man in his efforts to adapt them to his uses as -food, ornamentation, and the like. On the seaside cliffs of Chili -and Peru may still be found growing the wild-potato—the small, -tough, bitter ancestor of the mammoth Burbank, Peerless, Early -Rose, and the nearly two hundred other varieties of this matchless -tuber found in the gardens of civilised man. The cabbage, kale, -cauliflower, and kohlrabi are all modifications of the same wild -species (<em>Brassica oleracea</em>), the cauliflower being the -developed flower, kohlrabi the stalk, and kale and cabbage the -leaves. The peach and the almond, Darwin thinks, have also come -from a common ancestral drupe, the peach being the developed fruit, -and the almond the seed. There are nearly 900 different varieties -of apples, varying in the most wonderful manner in size, colour, -flavour, texture, and shape, but all of them probably derived from -the little, sour, inedible Asiatic crab. The many times ‘double’ -roses of our gardens have come from the five-petalled wild-rose of -the prairies. The cultivated varieties of viburnum and hydrangea -have showy corymbs of infertile flowers only, but the wild forms -from which the domestic varieties have been derived have only a -single marginal row of showy infertile flowers surrounding a mass -of inconspicuous fertile flowers. It has been due to their efforts -to please men that bananas, pineapples, and oranges have got into -the habit of neglecting to produce seeds. There are certain species -of grapes that are seedless, also seedless sugar-cane, and a -seedless apple has just been announced by horticulturists. The -development of domesticated plants is only in its infancy, and it -is probably impossible even for the most agile imagination to dream -of the miracles the horticulturist is destined to work in the ages -to come. There is every reason to believe that seedless varieties -of all our common fruits will ultimately be produced, and that in -size, flavour, nutrient constituents, and appearance, they will be -developed into forms utterly different from existing varieties. -Just within the last few years the U.S. Department of Agriculture -has developed a cotton-plant immune to the bacterial diseases of -the soil, which had completely driven the cotton-raising industry -out of large districts of the South. The cultivation of many of the -cereals has gone on so long, and has proceeded so far, that their -origin is lost in antiquity.</p> -<p>Whether or not it is possible for new varieties and species to -be evolved is a question, therefore, which does not need to depend -for reply wholly upon theory. It is known to have taken place; and -the process by which the different varieties of domestic animals -and plants have been evolved—domestic selection—is not different in -principle from the process of natural selection, the chief -operation by which life in general, both plant and animal, is -assumed to have been evolved.</p> -<p>10. There are other reasons for a belief in organic evolution, -but the last one I shall mention is the fact that the theory of -organic evolution harmonises with the known tendencies of the -universe as a whole. The organic kingdoms of the earth—animals and -plants—are as truly parts of the terrestrial globe as the inorganic -kingdom is; and as such they share in, and are actuated by, the -same great tendency or instinct as that which actuates the whole. -Nine-tenths of the substance of all animals and plants is oxygen, -hydrogen, carbon, and nitrogen—the very elements which make up the -entire ocean and air, and enter largely into the composition of the -continents. The human body, which has essentially the same chemical -composition as the bodies of animals in general, is made up of four -solids, five gases, and seven metals—in all, sixteen elements of -the something like seventy which constitute the entire planet. ‘In -the past, man appeared to be a creature foreign to the earth, and -placed upon it as a transitory inhabitant by some incomprehensible -power. The more perfect insight of the present day sees man as a -being whose development has taken place in accordance with the same -laws as those that have governed the development of the earth and -its entire organisation—a being not put upon the earth accidentally -by an arbitrary act, but produced in harmony with the earth’s -nature, and belonging to it as do the flowers and the fruits to the -tree which bears them.’ Animals are not outside of, nor distinct -from, the universe, as one might suspect who has listened much to -the recital of tradition so long accepted as science. They are more -or less detached portions of the planet earth which move over its -surfaces and through its fluids and multiply, but which in their -phenomena obey the same laws of chemistry and physics as those in -accordance with which the rest of the universe acts. Animals are -moulds through which digressing matters from the soil, sea, and sky -pass on rounds of eternal itineracy.</p> -<p>Now, the earth as a planet is in process of evolution. Not many -things are more certain than this. The earth has come out of fire. -It has <em>grown</em> to be what it is. Its mountains, valleys, -plains, seas, shores, islands, lakes, rivers, and continents—these -were not always here. They have been evolved. Not only the earth, -but the entire family of spheres of which the earth is a member—the -solar system—are all evolving. Mr. Spencer never did anything more -profound than when he demonstrated in his ‘Law and Cause of -Progress’ the universal migration of things from a condition of -homogeneity toward a condition of greater and greater -heterogeneity. The whole universe, or as much of it as can be -examined by terrestrial instruments, has probably evolved out of -the same primordial matters. The organic part of the earth has -evolved, therefore, and is destined to continue to evolve, because -it is a part of a whole whose habit or ambition it is to -evolve.</p> -<p>The evidence is overwhelming. The theory of organic evolution is -sustained by a mass of facts not less authoritative and convincing -than that which supports the Copernican theory of the worlds. -Evolution is, in fact, a doctrine so apparent that it only needs to -be honestly and intelligently looked into to be accepted -unreservedly. It is, indeed, <em>more</em> than a -<em>doctrine</em>. It is a <em>known</em> fact. It is a -<em>necessary effect</em> of the <em>conditions known to exist</em> -among the animals and plants of the earth. If beings <em>vary</em> -among themselves generation after generation, if only the -<em>fittest</em> of each generation <em>survive</em> and if the -survivors tend to <em>transmit</em> to their offspring the -qualities of their superiority (and the animals and plants of the -earth are known to do continually all of these things), then it -follows <em>with mathematical certainty</em> that evolution is -going on, and that it will continue to go on as long as these -conditions continue. It is inevitable. It could not be otherwise. -We would <em>know</em> that evolution were going on among organisms -where these conditions existed, even though we had never observed -it.</p> -<p>The boldest and most enthusiastic opponents of evolution have -always been those with the least information about it. But the -evidence is accumulating so rapidly, and is being drawn up in such -unanswerable array, that, if it is not already the case, it will -not be many years before it will be an intellectual reproach for -anyone to discredit, or to be known to have discredited, this -splendid and inspiring revelation.</p> -<p><small id="part1-chapter9-footnote1"><a href= -"#part1-chapter9-ref1a">1a.</a> <a href= -"#part1-chapter9-ref1a">1b.</a> Darwin: <em>Descent of Man</em>, -2nd edit.; London, 1874.</small><br /> -<small id="part1-chapter9-footnote2"><a href= -"#part1-chapter9-ref2">2.</a> Huxley: <em>Man’s Place in -Nature</em>; New York, 1883.</small><br /> -<small id="part1-chapter9-footnote3"><a href= -"#part1-chapter9-ref3a">3a.</a> <a href= -"#part1-chapter9-ref3b">3b.</a> Thompson: <em>Outlines of -Zoology</em>, 3rd edit.; Edinburgh, 1899.</small><br /> -<small id="part1-chapter9-footnote4"><a href= -"#part1-chapter9-ref4">4.</a> Drummond: <em>Ascent of Man</em>; New -York, 1894.</small><br /> -<small id="part1-chapter9-footnote5"><a href= -"#part1-chapter9-ref5">5.</a> See table of geological ages, at the -end of the chapter.</small><br /> -<small id="part1-chapter9-footnote6"><a href= -"#part1-chapter9-ref6">6.</a> Haeckel: <em>The Riddle of the -Universe</em>; New York, 1901.</small><br /> -<small id="part1-chapter9-footnote7"><a href= -"#part1-chapter9-ref7">7.</a> Huxley: <em>On the Origin of -Species</em>, lecture iv.</small></p> -<img src="./images/table-of-geological-ages.jpg" alt= -"Table of Geological Ages" /> -<h3 id="part1-chapter10">X. The Genealogy of Animals.</h3> -<p>Life originated in the sea, and for an immense period of time -after it commenced it was confined to the place of its origin. The -civilisations of the earth were for many millions of years -exclusively aquatic. It has, indeed, been estimated that the time -required by the life process in getting out of the water—that is, -that the time consumed in elaborating the first species of land -animals—was much longer than the time which has elapsed since then. -I presume that during a large part of this early period it would -have seemed to one living at that time extremely doubtful whether -there would ever be on the earth any other kinds of life than the -aquatic. And if those who to-day weave the fashionable fabrics of -human philosophy, and who know nothing about anything outside the -thin edge of the present, had been back there, they would no doubt -have declared confidently, as they looked upon the naked continents -and the uninhabited air and the sea teeming with its peculiar -faunas, that life upon solids or in gases, life anywhere, in fact, -except in the sea, where it had always existed, and to which alone -it was adapted, was absolutely, and would be forever, impossible; -and that feathered fishes and fishes with the power to run and -skip, and especially ‘sharks’ competent to walk on one end and -jabber with the other, were unthinkable nonsense. Life originated -in the sea for the same reason that the first of the series of -so-called ‘civilisations’ which have appeared in human history -sprang from the alluvium of the Euphrates and the Nile, because the -conditions for bringing life into existence were here the most -favourable. The atmosphere was incompetent to perform such a task -as the inventing of <em>protoplasm</em> and there was no land above -the oceans.</p> -<p>The first forms of life were one-celled—simple, jelly-like dots -of almost homogeneous plasm—the <em>protozoa</em>. These primitive -organisms were the common grandparents of all beings. From them -evolved, through infinite travail and suffering, all of the orders, -families, species, and varieties of animals that to-day live on the -earth, and all those that have in the past lived and passed away. -By the multiplication and specialisation of cells, and the -formation of cell aggregates, the sponges, celenterates, and flat -worms were developed from the protozoa.<sup><small><a href= -"#part1-chapter10-footnote1" id="part1-chapter10-ref1" name= -"part1-chapter10-ref1">[1]</a></small></sup> The connecting links -between the one-celled and the many-celled animals consist of a -series of colonial forms of increasing size and complexity, some of -which may be found in every roadside ditch and pool, while others -are extinct. The development of these many-celled organisms -(metazoa) from one-celled organisms was a perfectly natural -process, a process which takes place in the initial evolutions of -every embryo. There is no more mystery about it than there is about -any other act of association. All association is simply a matter of -‘business.’ Many-celled organisms are colonies, or societies, of -more or less closely co-operating one-celled organisms, and they -have come into existence in obedience to the same laws of economy -and advantage as have those more modern societies of metazoa known -as nations, communities, and states, the organised bodies of men, -ants, and millionaires.</p> -<p>The sponges are the lowest of the many-celled animals. They -consist of irregular masses of loosely associated cells, hopelessly -anchored to the sea-floor. They represent the social instinct in -embryo. The cells are but slightly specialised, and each cell leads -a more or less independent existence. The sponge stands at about -that stage of social integration and intelligence represented by -those stupendous porifera which cover continents and constitute the -‘social organisms’ of the civilised world. The nutritive system of -sponges consists of countless pores opening from the surface into a -common canal within, through which ever-waving cilia urge the -alimental waters. In the celenterates the cells arrange themselves -in the form of a cup with one large opening into and from the -vase-like stomach. The unsegmented worms are flat and sac-like, -with bilateral symmetry and the power to move about, but not -tubular, as are the true worms. They are bloodless, like the -celenterates and sponges.</p> -<p>From the flat worms developed the annelid worms, animals -perforated by a food canal and possessing a body cavity filled with -blood surrounding this canal. The body cavity is the space between -the walls of the body and the alimentary canal, the cavity which in -the higher animals contains the heart, liver, lungs, kidneys, etc. -The worms and all animals above them have this cavity. The worms -and all animals above them also have, as an inheritance from the -flat worms, bodies with bilateral symmetry—that is, bodies with two -halves similar. This peculiarity was probably acquired by the flat -worms, and so fastened upon all subsequently evolved species, as a -result of pure carelessness. It probably arose out of the habit of -using continually, or over and over again, the same parts of the -body as fore and aft. It has been facetiously said that if it had -not been for this habit, so inadvertently acquired by these humble -beings so long, long ago, we would not to-day be able to tell our -right hand from our left. In the worm is found the beginning of -that wonderful organ of co-ordination, the brain. The brain is a -modification of the skin. It may weaken our regard for this -imperial organ to know that it is, in its morphology, akin to nails -and corns. But it will certainly add to our admiration for the -infinite labours of evolution to remember that the magnificent -thinking apparatus of modern philosophers was originally a small -sensitive plate developed down in the sea a hundred million years -ago on the dorsal wall of the mouths of primeval worms.</p> -<p>From the worms developed all of the highest four phyla of the -animal kingdom—the echinoderms, the mollusks, the arthropods, and -the chordate animals, the last of which were the progenitors of the -illustrious vertebrates. The lowest of the mollusks are the snails, -and from these humble tenants of our ponds and shores sprang the -headless bivalves and the giant jawed cuttles. The mollusks were -for a long time after their development the mailed monarchs of the -sea, and shared with the worms the dominion of the primordial -waters. But after the development of the more active arthropods, -especially the crustaceans, the less agile worms and mollusks -rapidly declined. Existing worms and mollusks are remnants of once -powerful and populous races.</p> -<p>From the worms also developed the arthropods, the -water-breathing crustaceans and the air-breathing spiders and -insects. The crustaceans came early, away back in the gray of the -Silurian period, just about the time North America was born. North -America lay, a naked, V-shaped infant, in the regions of Labrador -and Canada. The crustaceans rapidly superseded the mollusks as -rulers of the sea, attaining, in extreme species, a length of four -or five feet. The spiders and Insects came into existence toward -the latter part of the Silurian period,<sup><small><a href= -"#part1-chapter10-footnote2" id="part1-chapter10-ref2" name= -"part1-chapter10-ref2">[2]</a></small></sup> probably -contemporaneous, or nearly so, with the appearance of land -vegetation. The spiders and insects were the aborigines of the land -and air. They are the only races of living beings, except the -original inhabitants of the sea, who ever invaded and settled an -unoccupied world. The earliest land fossils so far found are the -fossils of scorpions. But the existence of a sting among the -structural possessions of these animals indicates that there were -already others who contended with them for supremacy in the new -world. The first insects were the masticating insects, insects such -as cockroaches, crickets, grasshoppers, dragon-flies, and beetles. -They are found abundantly in the Devonian and Carboniferous rocks. -The licking insects (bees) and the pricking insects (flies and -bugs) appeared first in the Mesozoic Era, and the sipping insects -(butterflies) in the Cenozoic. The flower-loving insects (the bees -and butterflies) came into the world at the same time as did the -flowers. The wings of insects may be modifications of the gills -used by insect young in respiration during their aquatic existence. -They are, hence, very different in origin from the wings of birds, -which are the modified fore-legs of reptiles.</p> -<p>The most important class of animals arising out of the worms, on -account of their distinguished offspring, were the hypothetical -cord animals. The only existing species allied to these animals is -the amphioxus, a strange, unpromising-looking creature, half worm -and half fish, found in the beach sands of many seas. It has white -blood and a tubular heart. It is without either head or limbs, and -looks very much like a long semitransparent leaf, tapering at both -ends. But it has two unmistakable prophecies of the vertebrate -anatomy: a cartilaginous rod, pointed at both ends, extending along -the back, and above this, and parallel to it, a cord of nerve -matter. These are the same positions occupied by the spinal column -and spinal cord in all true vertebrates. That the amphioxus is a -genuine relative of the ancestor of the vertebrates is also shown -by the fact that these simple forms of column and cord possessed by -amphioxus are precisely the forms assumed by the spinal column and -spinal cord in the embryos of all vertebrates, including man.</p> -<p>From these quasi-vertebrates developed the fishes—first (after -the scaleless, limbless lampreys) the sharks with spiny scales and -cartilaginous skeleton, and after these the lung fishes and the -bony fishes, with flat, horny scales and skeletons of bone. From -the beginning of the Devonian age, when fishes first came into -prominence, till the rise of the great reptiles in the Triassic -time, fishes were the dominant life of the sea. In the fishes first -appeared jaws, a sympathetic nervous system, red blood, backbone, -and the characteristic two pairs of limbs of vertebrates.</p> -<p>The lung fishes (Dipneusta), a small order of strange -salamander-like creatures which live ingeniously on the borderland -between the liquid and the land, may be looked upon as -physiological, if not morphological, links between the fishes and -the frogs. They combine the characters of both fishes and frogs, -and zoologists have been tempted to make a separate class of them, -and place them between the two classes to which they are related. -They are like fishes in having scales, fins, permanent gills, and a -fish-like shape and skeleton. They resemble frogs in having lungs, -nostrils, an incipiently three-chambered heart, a pulmonary -circulation, and frog-like skin glands. There are three genera with -several species. One genus (Neoceratodus) is found in two or three -small rivers of Queensland, Australia; another (Protopterus) lives -in the Gambia and other rivers of Africa; and the third -(Lepidosiren) inhabits the swamps of the Amazon region. They all -breathe ordinarily by means of gills, like true fishes, but have -the habit of coming frequently to the surface and inhaling air. The -air-bladder acts as an incipient lung in supplementing respiration -by gills. They all live in regions where a dry season regularly -converts the watercourses into beds of sand and mud. During the -season of drought these strange animals build for themselves a -cocoon or nest of mud and leaves. This cocoon is lined with mucus, -and provided with a lid through which air is admitted. Here they -lie in this capsule throughout the hot southern summer, from August -to December, breathing air by means of their lungs and living upon -the stored-up fat of their tails, until the return of the wet -season, when they again live in the rivers and breathe water in -true piscatorial fashion. These capsules have often been carried to -Europe, and opened 3,000 miles from their place of construction -without harming the life within.</p> -<p>Here, in these eccentric denizens of the southern world, we find -the beginnings of a grand transformation—a transformation in both -structure and function, a transformation made necessary by the -transition from life in the water to life in the air, a -transformation which reaches its maturity in the higher -air-breathing vertebrates, where the simple air-sac of the fish -becomes a pair of lobed and elaborately sacculated lungs, -performing almost exclusively the function of respiration, and the -gills change into parts of the ears and lower jaw.</p> -<p>The air-bladder of ordinary fishes, which is used chiefly as a -hydrostatic organ to enable the fish to rise and fall in the water, -is probably the degenerated lung of the lung fishes.</p> -<p>From the lung fishes or allied forms developed the amphibians, -the well-known fish quadrupeds of our bogs and brooks. The -amphibians are genuine connectives—living links between the life of -the sea and the life of the land. In early life they are fishes, -with gills and two-chambered hearts. In later life they are -air-breathing quadrupeds, with legs and lungs and three-chambered -hearts. Here is evolution, plenty of it, and of the most tangible -character. And it takes place right before the eyes. The -transformation from the fish to the frog is, however, no more -wonderful than the embryonic transformations of other vertebrates. -It is simply more apparent, because it can be seen. The lungs of -amphibians and the lower reptiles are simple sacks opening by a -very short passage into the mouth. Some amphibians, as the axolotl -of Mexican lakes, ordinarily retain their gills through life, but -may be induced to develop lungs and adapt themselves to terrestrial -life by being kept out of the water. Others, as the newts, which -ordinarily develop lungs, may be compelled to retain their gills -through life by being forced to remain uninterruptedly in the -water. The black salamander, inhabiting droughty regions of the -Alps, brings forth its young bearing lungs, and only a pair at a -time. But if the young are prematurely removed from the body of the -mother and placed in the water, they develop gills in the ordinary -way. These are remarkable instances of elasticity in the presence -of a varying environment.</p> -<p>In the amphibians the characteristic five-toed or five-fingered -foot, which normally forms the extremities of the limbs of all -vertebrates except fishes, is first met with. It was this -pentadactyl peculiarity of the frog, inherited by men and women -through the reptiles and mammals, that gave rise to the decimal -system of numbers and other unhandy facts in human life. The -decimal system arose out of the practice of early men performing -their calculations on their fingers. This method of calculating is -still used by primitive peoples all over the world. The sum of the -digits of the two hands came, in the course of arithmetical -evolution, to be used as a unit, and from this simple beginning -grew up the complicated system of tens found among civilised -peoples. It has all come about as a result of amphibian initiative. -Our very arithmetics have been predetermined by the anatomical -peculiarities of the frog’s foot. If these unthinking foreordainers -of human affairs had had four or six toes on each foot instead of -five, man would no doubt have inherited them just as cheerfully as -the number he did inherit, and the civilised world would in this -case be to-day using in all of its mathematical activities a system -of eights or twelves instead of a system of tens. A system of -eights or twelves would be much superior in flexibility to the -existing system; for eight is a cube, and its half and double are -squares; and twelve can be divided by two, three, four, and six, -while ten is divisible by two and five only.</p> -<p>How helpless human beings are—in fact, how helpless all beings -are! How hopelessly dependent we are upon the past, and how -impossible it is to be really original! What the future will be -depends upon what the present is, for the future will grow out of, -and inherit, the present. What the present is depends upon what the -past was, for the present has grown out of, and inherited, the -past. And what the past was depends upon a remoter past from which -it evolved, and so on. There is no end anywhere of dependence, -either forward or backward. Every fact, from an idea to a sun, is a -<em>contingent link in an eternal chain</em>.</p> -<p>From the amphibians (probably from extinct forms, not from -living) there arose the highest three classes of vertebrates—the -true reptiles, the birds, and the mammals—all of whom have lungs -and breathe air from the beginning to the end of their days. Gills, -as organs of breathing, disappear forever, being changed, as has -been said, into parts of the organs of mastication and hearing. In -the reptiles first appear those organs which in the highest races -overflow on occasions of tenderness and grief, the tear glands. -These organs are, however, in our cold-blooded antecedents, organs -of ocular lubrication rather than of weeping. There are but four -small orders of existing reptiles—snakes, turtles, lizards, and -crocodilians. These are the pygmean descendants of a mighty line, -the last of a dynasty which during the greater part of the Mesozoic -ages was represented by the most immense and powerful monsters that -have ever lived upon the earth. Mesozoic civilisation was -pre-eminently saurian. Reptiles were supreme everywhere—on sea and -land and in the air. Their rulership of the world was not so bloody -and masterful as man’s, but quite as remorseless. Imagine an -aristocracy made up of pterosaurs (flying reptiles), with teeth, -and measuring 20 feet between wing-tips; great plesiosaurs (serpent -reptiles) and ichthyosaurs (fish reptiles), enormous bandits of the -seas; and dinosaurs and atlantosaurs, giant land lizards, 30 feet -high and from 50 to 100 feet in length. A government of demagogs is -bad enough, as king-ridden mankind well know, but dragons would be -worse, if possible. The atlantosaurs were the largest animals that -have ever walked upon the earth. They were huge plant-eaters -inhabiting North America. It has been surmised that one of these -behemoths ‘may have consumed a whole tree for breakfast.’ It was -the mighty saurians of the Mesozoic time who brought into -everlasting subordination the piscatorial civilisation of the -Devonian and carboniferous ages.</p> -<p>Toward the latter part of the Reptilian Age, and somewhere along -about the time of the appearance of hard-wood forests, came the -birds, those beautiful and emotional beings who, in spite of human -destructiveness, continue to fill our groves and gardens with the -miracles of beauty and song. The bird is a ‘glorified reptile.’ How -the ‘slow, cold-blooded, scaly saurian ever became transformed into -the quick, hot-blooded, feathered bird, the joy of creation,’ is a -considerable mystery, yet we know no reason for believing that the -transformation did not take place. Although in their external -appearance and mode of life birds and reptiles differ so widely -from each other, yet, in their internal structure and embryology, -they are so much alike that one of the brightest anatomists that -has ever lived (Huxley) united them both into a single class under -the name Sauropsida. It might naturally be supposed that the birds -are descendants of the flying reptiles, the pterosaurs. But this -may not be true. The pterosaurs were structurally much further -removed from the birds than were certain extinct terrestrial -reptiles. The fact that birds and pterosaurs both had wings has -really nothing to do with the case. For the wings of reptiles, we -almost know, were not homologous with the wings of birds. The -bird’s wing is a feathered fore-leg; the wing of the reptile was an -expanded skin stretching from the much-elongated last finger -backwards to the hind-leg and tail. Wings, it may be remarked in -passing, have had at least four different and distinct beginnings -in the animal kingdom, represented by the bats, the birds, the -reptiles, and the insects. This does not include the parachutes of -the so-called flying squirrels, lemurs, lizards, phalangers, and -fishes.</p> -<p>The first birds had teeth and vertebrated tails. The -archeopteryx, which is the earliest toothed bird whose remains have -yet been found, was about the size of a crow. It had thirty-two -teeth and twenty caudal vertebrae. Two specimens of it have been -found in the Jurassic slates of Bavaria. One of these fossils is in -the British Museum, and the other in the Museum of Berlin. Other -toothed birds have been found fossil by Dr. Mudge in the cretaceous -chalk of North America. These last had short, fan tails like -existing birds.</p> -<p>From the toothed birds developed the beaked birds—the -keel-breasted birds (the group to which most existing birds belong) -and the birds with unkeeled breasts, <em>i.e.</em>, the -ostrich-like birds. The ostrich-like birds are runners. They have -rudimentary wings, and the keel of the breast-bone, which in the -keel-breasted birds acts as a stay for the attachment of the wing -muscles, is lacking. The ostrich-like birds are probably degenerate -flyers, the flying apparatus having become obsolete through disuse. -The feathers of birds are generally supposed to be the modified -scales of reptiles.</p> -<p>The most brilliant offspring of the reptiles were the mammals, -animals capable of a wider distribution over the face of the earth -than the cold-blooded reptiles, on account of their hair and their -warm blood. Cold-blooded animals of great size are able to inhabit -but a small zone of the existing earth’s surface—the torrid belt. -They cannot house themselves during the seasons of cold, as men -can; nor escape to the tropics on the wings of the wind, as do the -birds; nor bury themselves in subaqueous mud, as do the frogs, -snakes, and crustaceans. During the Mesozoic period, when -cold-blooded reptiles of gigantic size flourished over a wide area -of the earth’s surface, the planet was far warmer than now. -Animals, therefore, like the mammals (or birds), capable of -maintaining a fixed temperature regardless of the thermal -fluctuations of the surrounding media, are the only animals of -large size and power capable of uninterrupted existence over the -greater part of the surface of the existing earth. The pre-eminent -life of the Cenozoic time was mammalian. But the decline and fall -of the saurian power was not wholly due to the rise of the more -dynamic mammals. It was in part due, no doubt, to adverse -conditions of climate, and also to the fact that mammals and birds -guard their eggs, and saurians do not.</p> -<p>The lowest of the mammals are the monotremes, animals which -blend in a marvellous manner the characteristics of birds, -reptiles, and mammals. Only two families of these old-fashioned -creatures are left, the echidna and the duck-bill -(ornithorhynchus), both of them found on or near that museum of -biological antiquities, Australia. They are covered with hair and -suckle their young like other mammals, but they have only the -rudiments of milk glands, and they lay eggs with large yolks from a -cloaca, like the reptiles and birds. The duck-bill hides its eggs -in the ground, but the echidna hatches its eggs in a small external -brooding pouch, periodically developed for this purpose. The young -of the monotremes feed on the oily perspiration which exudes from -the body of the mother. The monotremes first appear in the -fossiliferous rocks of the Triassic Age.</p> -<p>From the monotreme-like mammals developed the marsupial mammals, -animals possessing a purse-like pouch on the after part of the -abdomen, in which they carry their young. The young of marsupials -are born in an extremely immature state, and are carried in this -pouch in order to complete their development. The young of the -kangaroo, an animal as large as a man, are only about an inch in -length when they are born. They are carried for nine months after -their birth in the marsupium of the mother, firmly attached to the -maternal nipple. The marsupials came into existence during the -Jurassic Age, and during the next age, the Cretaceous, they arose -to considerable power. During this latter age they were found on -every continent. But they have been almost exterminated by their -more powerful descendants.</p> -<p>From the marsupials developed the placental mammals, animals so -called because their young are developed within the parental body -in association with a peculiar nourishing organ called the -placenta. From the herbivorous marsupials developed the almost -toothless edentates, the rodents, or gnawing animals, the -sirenians, the cetaceans, and the hoofed animals, or ungulates. The -sirenians are fish-like animals with two flippers, and are often -called sea-cows. They resemble whales in many respects, and are -sometimes classed with them. They are plant-eaters exclusively, and -are found grazing along the bottoms of tropical estuaries and -rivers. They have tiny eyes, teeth fitted for grinding (not -spike-like as in the whales), and a strong affection for their -young, the mother, when pursued, often carrying her little one -under her flippers. An immense sirenian, known as Steller’s -manatee, was discovered on the Behring Islands, along the -Kamschatka coast, in 1741. Twenty-seven years afterwards not one of -them was left, all having been murdered by the Russian sailors. The -sirenians are probably degenerate forms of land quadrupeds, having -lost their hind-limbs and developed the fish-like shape in adapting -themselves to aquatic conditions. They appear first in the Eocene -Age.</p> -<p>Among the most interesting derivatives of the herbivorous -marsupials, because the most aberrant, are the whales. They are -true mammals—have warm blood, breathe the air with lungs, and -suckle their young like other mammals. But, like the sirenians, -they live in the surface of the waters, and have flippers and a -fish-like tail and form. They differ from the sirenians, however, -in being carnivorous, in having inguinal instead of pectoral milk -glands, and in being structurally less like quadrupeds. They -probably degenerated from land quadrupeds during the Jurassic -period, and, owing to their longer residence in the waters, have -become further removed from the quadrupedal type than the -sirenians. Whales have two limbs, the hind-limbs having disappeared -as a result of the pre-eminent development of the tail. The tails -of whales and sirenians are flattened horizontally, not vertically, -as in fishes.</p> -<p>Out of generalised forms of hoofed animals now extinct developed -the odd-toed and even-toed races of existing ungulates. The -original ungulates had five hoofs on each foot, and were highly -generalised in their structure. From these original five-toed forms -have arisen the variously hoofed and variously structured tribes of -existing ungulates: the five-toed elephant, the four-toed tapir and -hippopotamus, the three-toed rhinoceros, the two-toed camel, sheep, -swine, deer, antelope, giraffe, and ox, and the one-toed horse and -zebra.</p> -<p>The carnivorous branch of the placental animals came from the -carnivorous branch of the marsupials. From early forms of -carnivorous placentals developed the ape-like lemurs and those -generalised forms of rapacious animals from which arose the -insect-eaters, the bats, and the true carnivora. The seals -represent a by-development from the main line of the carnivora, a -third defection, and a comparatively recent one, from land faunas. -Seals live at the meeting of the land and the waters rather than in -or on the waters, as do the cetaceans and sirenians. They have -retained their fur and their four limbs, but have almost lost their -power of land locomotion by the conversion of their feet into -flippers. The two front-limbs of seals are the only ones used as -ordinary limbs are used. The hind-limbs in most seals stretch -permanently out behind, the webbed digits spreading out fan-shaped -on either side of the stumpy tail, and constituting a rowing -apparatus functionally homologous with the tail of fishes and -whales. According to Jordan, the fur seals and the hair seals are -descended from different families of land carnivora, the former -probably from the bears, and the latter from the cats.</p> -<p>The lemurs are of especial interest to human beings, because in -them are found the first startling approximation in looks and -structure to the ‘human form divine.’ The lemurs are monkey-like -creatures living in trees, but differ enough from true monkeys to -be often placed in an order by themselves. Their milk glands are -abdominal instead of pectoral, as in the monkeys, and the second -digit of each hand and foot ends in a claw. The most of them live -in Madagascar. They are generally nocturnal in their habits, -although some species are diurnal. They appear first in the Eocene -rocks, and Haeckel thinks they may have developed from opossum-like -marsupials in the late Cretaceous or early Eocene Age.</p> -<p>From lemurs or from some other similar sort of semi-apes -developed the true apes—the flat-nosed (platyrhine) apes of the New -World and the narrow-nosed (catarhine) apes of the Old World. There -is considerable difference between the New World apes and those of -the Old World. The differences between the two classes is, in fact, -so striking that they are thought by some to have developed -independently of each other from distinct species of semi-apes. The -apes of the New World have flat noses, and the nostrils are far -apart and open in front of the nose, never below. The Old World -apes have narrow noses, the nostrils being close together and -opening downwards as in man. The tail of (nearly) all New World -apes is prehensile, being used regularly as a fifth limb, while -among Old World apes the tail is never so used. The Old World apes -all have the same number and kinds of teeth as man has, while the -New World apes (excepting the Brazilian marmosets) have an -additional premolar in each half-jaw, making thirty-six in all. The -catarhine apes are, therefore, structurally much nearer to man than -their platyrhine cousins. All tailed apes probably sprang -originally from a single stirp of semi-apes, and spread over the -earth at a time when the eastern and western land masses of the -southern hemisphere were connected with each other. The earliest -remains of apes appear in the Miocene Age.</p> -<p>From the Old World tailed apes were developed the tailless, -man-like, or anthropoid apes—the gorillas and chimpanzees of -Africa, and the orangs and gibbons of Asia and the East Indies. The -anthropoids arose from the tailed apes by the loss of the tail, the -thinning of the hairy covering, the enlargement of the fore-brain, -and by structural adaptations to a more nearly vertical position. -No remains of anthropoids are found earlier than the Pliocene -Age.</p> -<p>The man-like apes are the nearest living relatives of the human -races. It is not probable that man has been derived directly from -any of the existing races of man-like apes. For no one of them in -all particulars of its structure stands closer to him than the -rest. The orang approaches closest to man in the formation of the -brain, the chimpanzee in the shape of the spine and in certain -characteristics of the skull, the gorilla in the development of the -feet and in size, and the gibbon in the formation of the throat and -teeth. The earliest human races probably sprang from man-like races -of apes now extinct, who lived in southern Asia or in Africa during -the Pliocene Age (possibly as early as the Miocene), and who -combined in their structures the various man-like characters -possessed by existing anthropoids.</p> -<p>The earliest races of men were speechless—the ape-like -‘Alali’—beings, living wholly upon the ground and walking upon -their hind-limbs, but without more than the mere rudiments of -language. The vertical position led to a much greater development -of the posterior parts, especially of the muscles of the back and -the calves of the leg. The great toe, which in the ape is -opposable, lost its opposability, or all except traces of it, after -the abandonment of arboreal life. It must have been a sight fit to -stir the soul of the most leathern, these children of the night, -with low brows, stooping gait, and ape-like faces, armed with rude -clubs, clothed in natural hair, and wandering about in droves -without law, fire, or understanding, hiding in thickets and in the -holes of the earth, feeding on roots and fruits, and contending -doubtfully with the species around them for food and existence.</p> -<p>From the ‘Alali’—the speechless ape-men—we may imagine the true -men to have evolved—talking men, men with erect posture and mature -brain and larynx, the woolly-haired ulotrichi and the -straight-haired lissotrichi. There are four existing species of -woolly-haired men: the Papuans of New Guinea and Melanesia, and the -Hottentots, Caffres, and Negroes of southern, equatorial, and north -central Africa respectively. They all have long heads, slanting -teeth, very dark skin, and black, bushy hair, each individual hair -in cross-section being flat or oval in shape. In the -straight-haired races the skin is much fairer than in the -woolly-haired races, being seldom darker than brown, and each -individual hair in cross-section is round like the cross-section of -a cylinder. The principal species of straight-haired men are the -sea-roving Malays of the East Indies and the Pacific, the -round-faced Mongols of eastern and northern Asia, the aboriginal -Americans of the western hemisphere, and the incomparable Aryans, -including the ancient Greeks and Romans and the modern peoples of -India, Persia, and Europe.</p> -<p>Man is to-day the pre-eminent animal of the planet. The -successive ascendancies of the Worm, the Mollusk, the Crustacean, -the Fish, the Reptile, and the Mammal, are followed triumphantly by -the ascendancy of the Children of the Ape.</p> -<p>A large part of the life of the earth has remained steadfastly -where it was cradled, beneath the waves. But more restless portions -have left the sea and crept forth upon the land, or swarmed into -the air. One migration, the most numerous, is represented by the -insects. Another, the most enterprising, was the amphibian. After -ages of evolution the amphibian branch divided. One branch acquired -wings and sailed off into the air. The other divided and -subdivided. One of these subdivisions entered the forests, climbed -and clambered among the trees, acquired perpendicularity and hands, -descended and walked upon the soil, invented agriculture, built -cities and states, and imagined itself immortal. Human society is -but the van—the hither terminus—of an evolutional process which had -its beginning away back in the protoplasm of primeval waters. There -is not a form that creeps beneath the sea but can claim kinship -with the eagle. The philosopher is the remote posterity of the meek -and lowly amoeba.</p> -<p><small id="part1-chapter10-footnote1"><a href= -"#part1-chapter10-ref1">1.</a> See ‘Genealogy of Animals,’ at the -end of the chapter.</small><br /> -<small id="part1-chapter10-footnote2"><a href= -"#part1-chapter10-ref2">2.</a> See table of geological ages, at the -end of the previous chapter.</small><br /></p> -<img src="./images/geneaology-of-animals.jpg" alt= -"Geneaology of Animals" /> -<h3 id="part1-chapter11">XI. Conclusion.</h3> -<p>The resemblances, homologies, and metamorphoses existing -everywhere among animal forms are, therefore, evidence of the most -logical consanguinities. It is all so perfectly plain. The -structures of organic beings have come about as a result of the -action and reaction of environment upon these structures. Every -being—and not only every being, but every species, the whole -organic world—has come to be what it is as a result of the -incessant hammerings of its surroundings, the hammerings not only -of the present, but of the long-stretching past. By surroundings is -meant, of course, the rest of the universe. Those animals belonging -to the same stock resemble each other because they have been -subjected to the same experiences, the same series of selections. -They have lain on the same great anvil, and felt the down-comings -of the same sledge. The similarities among animal forms in general -indicate relationships, just as the similarities among the races of -men indicate racial consanguinities. All men belong to the human -species because they are all fundamentally alike. But there are -differences in the character of the hair, in the colour of the -skin, in the conformation of the skull, and in the structure of the -language, among the different varieties of the species, indicating -striking variety in relationship and origin. An eminent biologist -has said that if Negroes and Caucasians were snails they would be -classed as entirely distinct species of animals. Whether, as is -thought by some, the woolly-haired races are the descendants of the -African anthropoids, and the straight-haired varieties are the -posterity of the orangs and gibbons, we may never know positively. -But we do know that these two great branches of mankind must have -different genealogies, extending to a remote antiquity, and that -the varieties belonging to each great group sustain to each other -the relations of a common kinship. Englishmen look like each other, -act like each other, and speak the same language. So do Frenchmen -and Swedes and Chinese. Every people is peculiar. This is not the -result of accident or agreement, but the result of law. Mongolians -do not all have short heads, yellow faces, slanting eyes, and -prominent malars because they have agreed to have them, but as a -result of a common pedigree. Similarity of structure implies -commonalty of origin, and commonalty of origin means -consanguinity.</p> -<p>And this is true whether you contemplate the featural -resemblances of brothers and sisters of the same human parent, or -those more fundamental characteristics which distinguish species, -orders, and sub-kingdoms. All animals are composed of protoplasm, -which is a compound of clay, because all animals are descended from -the same first parents, protoplasmic organisms evolved out of the -elemental ooze. All vertebrates have nerve-filled backbones with -two pairs of ventrally branching limbs, because the original -ancestors of the vertebrates had nerve-filled backbones with two -pairs of ventrally branching limbs. Insects individually evolve -from worms because worms are their phylogenetic fathers and -mothers. Man has hands and a vertical spine, and walks on his -hind-limbs, not because he was fashioned in the image of a god, but -because his ancestors lived among the trees. The habit of using the -posterior limbs for locomotion, and the anterior for prehension, -and the resulting perpendicular, are peculiarities developed by our -simian ancestors wholly on account of the incentives to such -structure and posture afforded by aboreal life. These peculiarities -would not likely have been acquired by quadrupeds living upon and -taking their food from a perfectly level and treeless plain. If -there had been no forests on the earth, therefore, there would have -been no incentive to the perpendicular, and the ‘human form divine’ -would have been inconceivably different from what it is to-day. And -if fishes had had three serial pairs of limbs instead of two, and -their posterity had inherited them, as they certainly would have -had the foresight to do if they had had the opportunity, the -highest animals on the earth to-day, the ‘paragons of creation,’ -would probably be two-handed quadrupeds (centaurs) instead of -two-handed bipeds. And much more efficient and ideal individuals -they would have been in every way than the rickety, peculiar, -unsubstantial plantigrades who, by their talent to talk, have -become the masters of the universe, and, by their imaginations, -‘divine.’</p> -<p>Kinship is universal. The orders, families, species, and races -of the animal kingdom are the branches of a gigantic arbour. Every -individual is a cell, every species is a tissue, and every order is -an organ in the great surging, suffering, palpitating process. Man -is simply one portion of the immense enterprise. He is as veritably -an animal as the insect that drinks its little fill from his veins, -the ox he goads, or the wild-fox that flees before his bellowings. -Man is not a god, nor in any imminent danger of becoming one. He is -not a celestial star-babe dropped down among mundane matters for a -time and endowed with wing possibilities and the anatomy of a -deity. He is a mammal of the order of primates, not so lamentable -when we think of the hyena and the serpent, but an exceedingly -discouraging vertebrate compared with what he ought to be. He has -come up from the worm and the quadruped. His relatives dwell on the -prairies and in the fields, forests, and waves. He shares the -honours and partakes of the infirmities of all his kindred. He -walks on his hind-limbs like the ape; he eats herbage and suckles -his young like the ox; he slays his fellows and fills himself with -their blood like the crocodile and the tiger; he grows old and -dies, and turns to banqueting worms, like all that come from the -elemental loins. He cannot exceed the winds like the hound, nor -dissolve his image in the mid-day blue like the eagle. He has not -the courage of the gorilla, the magnificence of the steed, nor the -plaintive innocence of the ring-dove. Poor, pitiful, glory-hunting -hideful! Born into a universe which he creates when he comes into -it, and clinging, like all his kindred, to a clod that knows him -not, he drives on in the preposterous storm of the atoms, as -helpless to fashion his fate as the sleet that pelts him, and lost -absolutely in the somnambulism of his own being.</p> -</div> -<div id="part2" class="margin-vertical"> -<h2>The Psychical Kinship</h2> -<div class="center"> -<ol> -<li><a href="#part2-chapter1">The Conflict of Science and -Tradition</a></li> -<li><a href="#part2-chapter2">Evidences of Psychical -Evolution</a></li> -<li><a href="#part2-chapter3">The Common-sense View</a></li> -<li><a href="#part2-chapter4">The Elements of Human and Non-human -Mind Compared</a></li> -<li><a href="#part2-chapter5">Conclusion</a></li> -</ol> -</div> -<blockquote class="margin-vertical"> -<p>‘I saw, deep in the eyes of the animals, the human soul look out -upon me.’<br /> -‘I saw where it was born down deep under feathers and fur, or -condemned for awhile to roam four-footed among the brambles. I -caught the clinging mute glance of the prisoner, and swore that I -would be faithful.’<br /> -‘Thee, my brother and sister, I see and mistake not. Do not be -afraid. Dwelling thus and thus for awhile, fulfilling thy appointed -time—thou too shalt come to thyself at last.’<br /> -‘Thy half-warm horns and long tongue lapping round my wrist do not -conceal thy humanity any more than the learned talk of the pedant -conceals his—for all thou art dumb we have words and plenty between -us.’</p> -<p class="small-caps center no-padding-no-margin">— Edward -Carpenter.</p> -</blockquote> -<h2>The Psychical Kinship</h2> -<h3 id="part2-chapter1">I. The Conflict of Science and -Tradition.</h3> -<p>The doctrine that on mankind’s account all other beings came -into existence, and that non-human beings are mere hunks of matter -devoid of all psychic qualities found in man, is a doctrine about -as sagacious as the old geocentric theory of the universe. Conceit -is a distinctly human emotion. No other animal has it. But it has -been lavished upon man with a generosity sufficient to compensate -for its total absence from the rest of the universe. Man has always -overestimated himself. In whatever age or province of the world you -look down on the human imagination, you find it industriously -digging disparities and establishing gulfs. Man, according to -himself, has had great difficulty many times in the history of the -world in escaping the divine. According to the facts, he has only -in recent biological times and after great labour and uncertainty -abandoned his tail and his all-fours. According to himself, man was -made ‘in the image of his maker,’ and has been endowed with powers -and properties peculiarly his own. According to the facts, he has -come into the world in a manner identical with that of all other -animals, and has been endowed with like nature and destiny. Man has -never manifested a warmer or more indelicate enthusiasm than the -enthusiasm with which he has appreciated himself. And with the same -ardour with which he has praised himself he has maligned and -misrepresented others. Man has set himself up as the supreme judge -and executive of the world, and he has not hesitated to award to -himself the lion’s share of everything. He has ransacked his fancy -for adjectives with which to praise himself, and driven his -inventive faculties to the verge of distraction in search of -justification for his crimes upon those around him. Every -individual bent on deeds of darkness first seeks in his own mind -justification for his purposed sins. And it is a caustic comment on -the character of human conviction that no enthusiastic -criminal—from the marauder of continents to the kitchen -pilferer—ever yet sought unsuccessfully at the court of his -conscience for a sinful permit. It was an easy matter, therefore, -for man—aided as he was by such an experienced imagination—to -convince himself that all other animals were made for him, that -they were made without feeling or intelligence, and that hence he -was justified in using in any way he chose the conveniences so -generously provided by an eccentric providence. But Darwin has -lived. Beings have come into the world, we now know, through the -operation of natural law. Man is not different from the rest. The -story of Eden is a fabrication, bequeathed to us by our -well-meaning but dimly-lighted ancestors. There has been no more -miracle in the origin of the human species than in the origin of -any other species. And there is no more miracle in the origin of a -species than there is in the birth of a molecule or in the breaking -of a tired wave on the beach. Man was not made in the image of the -hypothetical creator of heaven and earth, but in the image of the -ape. Man is not a fallen god, but a promoted reptile. The beings -around him are not conveniences, but cousins. Instead of stretching -away to the stars, man’s pedigree slinks down into the sea. -Horrible revelation! Frightful antithesis! Instead of celestial -genesis and a ‘fall’—long and doleful promotion. Instead of elysian -gardens and romance—the slime. Instead of a god with royal nostrils -miraculously animating an immortal duplicate—a little lounging -cellule, too small to be seen and too senseless to distinguish -between midnight and noon. But the situation is not half so -horrible as it looks to be to those who see only the skin of -things. Is it not better, after all, to be the honourable outcome -of a straightforward evolution than the offspring of flunky-loving -celestials? Are the illustrious children of the ape less glorious -than the sycophants of irrational theological systems? Darwin dealt -in his quiet way some malicious blows to human conceit, but he also -bequeathed to a misguided world the elements of its ultimate -redemption.</p> -<p>The supposed psychical gulf between human and non-human beings -has no more existence, outside the flamboyant imagination of man, -than has the once-supposed physical gulf. It is pure fiction. The -supposition is a relic of the rapidly dwindling vanity of -anthropocentricism, and is perpetuated from age to age by human -selfishness and conceit. It has no foundation either in science or -in common-sense. Man strives to lessen his guilt by the laudation -of himself and the disparagement and degradation of his victims. -Like the ostrich, who, pursued by death, improvises an imaginary -escape by plunging its head into the desert, so man, pursued by the -vengeful correctives of his own conscience, fabricates a fictitious -innocence by the calumniation of those upon whom he battens. But -such excuses cannot much longer hold out against the rising -consciousness of kinship. Psychology, like all other sciences, is -rapidly ceasing to attend exclusively to human phenomena. It is -lifting up its eyes and looking about; it is preparing to become -comparative. It has come to realise that the mind of man is but a -single shoot of a something which ramifies the entire animal world, -and that in order to understand its subject it is necessary for it -to familiarise itself with the whole field of phenomenon. The soul -of man did not commence to be in the savage. It commenced to be in -the worm, whose life man grinds out with his heel, and in the -bivalve that flounders in his broth. The roots of consciousness are -in the sea. Side by side with physical evolution has gone on -psychical evolution; side by side with the evolution of organs and -tissues has gone on the evolution of intellect, sensibility, and -will. Human nature and human mind are no more <em>sui generis</em> -than are human anatomy and physiology. The same considerations that -prove that man’s material organism is the cumulative result of long -evolution proclaim that human mind, the immaterial concomitant of -the material organism, is also the cumulative result of long -evolution.</p> -<p>We might just as well recognise facts first as last, for they -will have to be recognised some time. Truths are not put down by -inhospitality—they are simply put off. The universe has a policy, a -program. We may close our eyes to the facts around us, hoping in -this way to compel them to pass away or be forgotten. But they do -not pass away, nor will they be forgotten. They simply become -invisible. They will live on and present themselves to other minds -or ages or climes more hospitable or honest than our own. The only -proper attitude of mind to assume toward the various doctrines -existing among men is the attitude of perfect willingness to -believe <em>anything</em>—anything that appeals to us as being -reasonable and right. The great majority of men, however, are -intellectual solids—unable to move and unwilling to think. They -have certain beliefs <em>to which they are determined to hold -on</em>, and everything that does not fit in with these beliefs is -rejected as a matter of course.</p> -<h3 id="part2-chapter2">II. Evidences of Psychical Evolution.</h3> -<p>That mind has evolved, and that there is a psychical kinship, an -actual consanguinity of feelings and ideas, among all the forms of -animal life is proved incontestably by the following facts:</p> -<p>1. The evolution of mind is implied by the fact of the evolution -of structures. ‘I hold,’ says Romanes, in the introduction to his -great work on ‘Mental Evolution,’ ‘that, if the doctrine of organic -evolution is accepted, it carries with it, as a necessary -corollary, the doctrine of mental evolution.’ It makes no -difference what theory we adopt regarding the essential natures of -the physical and the psychical—whether we agree with the -materialist that mind is an attribute of matter, with the idealist -that matter is a creation of mind, with the monist that mind and -body are only different aspects of the same central entity, or with -the dualist that body and soul are two distinct but temporarily -dependent existences—we must in any case recognise the fact, which -is perceived by all, that there is an ever-faithful parallel -between the neural and psychical phenomena of every organism. And -if the elements which enter into and make up the physical structure -of man have been derived from, and determined by, preceding forms -of life, the elements which enter into and make up the psychical -counterpart of the physical have also, without any doubt, been -inherited from, and determined by, ancestral life forms.</p> -<p>2. Closely allied to the foregoing reason for a belief in the -evolution of mind is that derived from a comparative survey of the -nervous system in man and other animals. In man, mind is closely -associated with a certain tissue or system of tissues—<em>nerve -tissue or the nervous system</em>. That mind is correlated with -nerve structure, and that mental anatomy may be learned from a -study of the anatomy of the nervous system, especially of the -brain, is the basic postulate of the science of physiological -psychology. Now, nerve cells exist in all animals above the sponge, -and a comparatively well-developed nervous system is found even -among many of the invertebrates, as the higher worms, crustaceans, -insects, and mollusks. The nervous system of invertebrates, though -composed of the same kind of tissue, is constructed according to a -somewhat different plan of architecture from that of the -vertebrates. But in all of the great family of backboned animals -the nervous system is built on the same general plan as in man, -with a cerebro-spinal trunk extending from the head along the back -and motory and sensory nerves ramifying to all parts of the body. -There is also a sympathetic nervous system in all animals down as -far as the insects. The brain, which is the most important part of -the nervous system, and which has been called the ‘organ of -consciousness,’ presents throughout the animal kingdom, from its -beginning in the worms to man, a graduated series of increasing -complication proceeding out of the same fundamental type. This is -especially true of the vertebrates. Fishes, amphibians, reptiles, -birds, and mammals, all have in their brains the same primary -parts, the same five fundamental divisions, as are found in the -brain of man. Hence, whatever may be thought about the mental -states of invertebrates, we have the right, in the case of the -vertebrate orders of life, to infer, from the general similarity of -their nervous system to our own, that they have a corresponding -similarity to ourselves in mental constitution and experience.</p> -<p>3. The evolution of mind is suggested by the existence in the -animal world of all grades of intelligence, from almost mindless -forms to forms even exceeding in some respects the mental -attainments of men. The jelly-fish and the philosopher are not -mental aliens. They are linked to each other by a continuous -gradation of intermediate intelligences. The existence of these -grades of mental development suggest psychical evolution and -kinship, just as the existence of like grades of structural -development suggest physical evolution.</p> -<p>4. In the mental life of animals the same factors of evolution -exist as those by means of which organic structures have been -brought into existence, and it is reasonable to suppose that the -operation of these factors have produced in the mental world -results analogous to those produced by the operation of the same -factors among organic structures.</p> -<p>Men and other animals <em>vary</em> in their natures and mental -faculties quite as much as they do in colour, size, and shape. It -is commonly supposed that the mental and temperamental variety -existing among individual men does not exist among individual -birds, quadrupeds, insects, etc. But a little observation or -reflection ought to be enough to convince anyone that such a -supposition belongs to that batch of pre-Darwinian mistakes -presented to us by an over-generous past. We are <em>not -acquainted</em> with the inhabitants of our fields and barn-yards. -We are almost as ignorant of the mental life and personality of -these door-yard neighbours and friends of ours as we would be if -they were the inhabitants of another continent. That is why our -obtuse minds lump them together so indiscriminately—we do not know -anything about them. We never take the trouble, or think it worth -while, to get acquainted with them, much less to study and know -them. We have grown up in the falsehood that they are altogether -different from what we are, and that it is really not worth while -to bother our gigantic heads about them, except to use them when it -comes handy, or kick them to one side, or execute them, when they -get in the way. Everybody else looks at the matter in about the -same way, so we just let it go at that.</p> -<p>There is a sameness about foreigners and other classes of -<em>human</em> beings with whom we are but slightly, or not at all, -acquainted, until we come to know them and can discriminate one -from another. I remember once asking my sister, if her baby, which -looked to me like all other babies I had ever seen, were mixed up -with a lot of other babies of about the same age, whether she could -pick hers out from all the rest, and she gave me an unmistakable -affirmative by answering, ‘What a foolish question!’</p> -<p>There is less variety among the individuals of non-human races -than among individual men, just as there is less variety among -individual savages than among the members of a civilised community. -But there is mental diversity among all beings, and we only need to -whittle our observation a little to recognise the fact. You never -hear the keeper of a menagerie or any intelligent associate of -dogs, horses, birds, or insects say there is no individuality among -these animals. Brehm, the great German naturalist, assures us that -each individual monkey of all those he kept tame in Africa had its -own peculiar temper and disposition. And this is no more than what -everyone who knows anything about it knows to be true of dogs, -horses, cats, cattle, birds, and even fishes and insects. Any -intelligent dog-fancier or pigeon-fancier can tell you the personal -peculiarities of every one of the fifty or a hundred dogs or -pigeons in his charge. He has watched and studied them since they -came into existence, and through this continuous association he has -come to <em>know</em> them. He simply makes discriminations that -are not made by the casual or superficial observer. The Laplander -knows and names each reindeer in his herd, though to a stranger -they are all as much alike as the multitudes on an ant-hill. The -Peckhams of Milwaukee, those indefatigable investigators of spiders -and insects, are constantly telling us of the wonderful -individuality possessed by these lowly lessees of our fields and -gardens. In their work on ‘The Habits and Instincts of the Solitary -Wasps,’ speaking of the ammophiles, these authors say: ‘In this -species, as in every one that we have studied, we have found a most -interesting variation among the different individuals, not only in -methods, but in character and intellect. While one was beguiled -from her hunting by every sorrel blossom she passed, another stuck -to her work with indefatigable perseverance. While one stung her -caterpillars so carelessly and made her nest in so shiftless a way -that her young could survive only through some lucky chance, -another devoted herself to these duties not only with conscientious -earnestness, but with an apparent craving after artistic perfection -that was touching to see.’ The variation in the mental phenomena of -animals, including man, is partly innate, and partly the result of -environment or education.</p> -<p>Animals not only vary in their mental qualities, but they also -<em>inherit</em> these variations, just as they do physical -properties and peculiarities. Evidence of this is furnished by -every new being that comes into the world. Insanity runs in -families, and so does genius and criminality. Even the most -trifling idiosyncrasies are often transmitted, not only by men, but -also by dogs, horses, and other animals. Such qualities of mind as -courage, fidelity, good and bad temper, intelligence, timidity, -special tastes and aptitudes, are certainly transmitted in all the -higher orders of animal life.</p> -<p>Animals are also <em>selected</em>, are enabled to survive in -the struggle for life quite as much through the possession by them -of certain mental qualities as on account of their physical -characters. Whether the selections are made by nature or by man, -they are not determined by the physical facts of size, strength, -speed, and the like, more than by cunning, courage, sagacity, -skill, industry, devotion, ferocity, tractability, and other mental -properties. The fittest survive, and the fittest may be the most -timid or analytic as well as the most powerful. No better -illustration of this truth can be found than that furnished by man -himself. Man is by nature a comparatively feeble animal. He is -neither large nor powerful. Yet he has been selected to prosper -over all other animals because of his ingenuity, sympathy, and art. -The great feeling and civilisation of higher men have been built up -by slow accretion due to the operation of the law of survival -extending over vast measures of time. Creeds and instincts, -governments and impulses, forms of thought and forms of expression, -have struggled and survived just as have cells and species. A -struggle for existence is constantly going on, as Max Müller has -pointed out, even among the words and grammatical forms of every -language. The better, shorter, easier forms are constantly gaining -the ascendancy, and the longer and more cumbrous expressions grow -obsolete.</p> -<p>If, therefore, the higher types of mind have not come into -existence as have the higher types of structure, through evolution -from simpler and more generalised forms, it has not been due to the -absence of the factors necessary for bringing about this -evolution.</p> -<p>5. The presumption created by the existence of the factors of -psychic evolution is strengthened by the facts of artificial -selection. We <em>know</em> mind <em>can</em> evolve, <em>for it -has done so in many cases</em>. The races of domesticated animals, -the races whom man has exploited and preyed upon during the past -several thousand years, have, many of them, been completely changed -in character and intelligence through human selection. Old -instincts have been wiped out and new ones implanted. In many -instances the psychology has been not only revolutionised, but -remade.</p> -<p>Take, for instance, the dog. The dog is a reformed bandit. It is -a revised wolf or jackal. It has been completely transformed by -human selection; indeed, it may be said that the dog in the last -ten or fifteen thousand years has made greater advances in sagacity -and civilisation than any other animal, scarcely even excepting -man. Man has made wonderful strides along purely intellectual -lines, but in the improvement of his emotions he has not been so -successful. The rapid development of the dog in feeling and -intelligence has no doubt been due to the fact that his utility to -man has always depended largely on his good sense and fidelity, and -man has persistently emphasised these qualities in his selection. -Fierceness and distrust—two of the most prominent traits in the -psychology of the primitive dog—have been entirely eradicated in -the higher races of dogs. There is not anywhere on the face of the -earth a more trustful, affectionate, and docile being than this -one-time cut-throat. Whether the dog has been derived from the wolf -or from some wild canine race now extinct, or from several distinct -ancestors, he must have had originally a fierce, distrustful, and -barbaric nature, for all of the undomesticated members of the dog -family wolves, foxes, jackals, etc.—have natures of this sort.</p> -<p>There are about 175 different races of domestic dogs. They -represent almost as great a range of development as do the races of -men. Some of them are exceedingly primitive, while others are -highly intelligent and civilised. The Eskimo dogs are really -nothing but wolves that have been trained to the service of man. -They look like wolves, and have the wolf psychology. They are not -able to bark, like ordinary dogs; they howl like wolves, and their -ears stand up straight, like the ears of all wild Canidae. Some of -the more advanced of the canine races—like the sheep-dogs, -pointers, and St. Bernards—are animals of great sympathy and -sensibility. When educated, these dogs are almost human in their -impulses and in their powers of discernment. In patience, -vigilance, and devotion to duty, they are superior to many men. At -a word, or even a look, from its master, the loyal collie will -gather the sheep scattered for miles around to the place -designated, and do it with such tact and expedition as to command -admiration. It has been said that if it were not for this faithful -and competent canine the highlands of Scotland would be almost -useless for sheep-raising purposes, because of the greater expense -that would be entailed if men were employed. One collie will do the -work of several men, and will do it better, and the -generous-hearted creature pours out its services like water. It -requires no compensation except table refuse and a straw bed. In -South America sheep-dogs are trained to act as shepherds and assume -the whole responsibility of tending the flock. ‘It is a common -thing,’ says Darwin, ‘to meet a large flock of sheep guarded by one -or two dogs, at a distance of some miles from any house or man.’ -When the dogs get hungry, they come home for food, but immediately -return to the flock on being fed. ‘It is amusing,’ remarks this -writer, ‘to observe, when approaching a flock, how the dog -immediately advances barking, while the sheep all close in his rear -as around the oldest ram.’ Romanes relates an incident which well -illustrates the high character and intelligence of the dog and its -wonderful devotion to a trust. ‘It was a Scotch collie. Her master -was in the habit of consigning sheep to her charge without -supervision. On this particular occasion he remained behind or -proceeded by another road. On arriving at home late in the evening, -he was astonished to learn that his faithful animal had not made -her appearance with the drove. He immediately set out in search of -her. But on going out into the streets, there she was coming with -the drove, not one missing, and, marvellous to relate, she was -carrying a young puppy in her mouth. She had been taken in travail -on the hills, and how the poor creature had contrived to manage her -drove in her condition is beyond human calculation, for her road -lay through sheep all the way. Her master’s heart smote him when he -saw what she had suffered and effected. But she was nothing -daunted, and after depositing her young one in a place of safety -she again set out full speed for the hills, and brought another and -another, till she brought the whole litter, one by one; but the -last one was dead’.<sup><small><a href="#part2-chapter2-footnote1" -id="part2-chapter2-ref1a" name= -"part2-chapter2-ref1a">[1a]</a></small></sup></p> -<p>What a wonderful transformation in canine character! The very -beings whose blood the dog once drank with ravenous thirst it now -protects with courage and fidelity. And this transformation in -character is not due to education simply. It is innate. Young dogs -brought from Tierra del Fuego or Australia, where the natives do -not keep such domestic animals as sheep, pigs, and poultry, -invariably have an incurable propensity for attacking these -animals.</p> -<p>The feeling of ownership possessed by so many dogs is an -entirely new element in canine character, a trait implanted wholly -by human selection. Bold and confident on his own premises, the dog -immediately becomes weak and apologetic when placed in -circumstances in which he feels he has no rights.</p> -<p>The pointers and setters have been developed as distinct breeds -by human selection during the past 150 or 200 years.</p> -<p>What is true of the dog is true also, to a large extent, of the -cat, cow, horse, sheep, goat, fowl, and other domestic animals. -Serene and peaceful puss is the tranquillised descendant of the -wild cat of Egypt, one of the most untamable of all animals. The -migratory instinct, so strong in wild water-fowl, is almost absent -from our geese and ducks, as is the fighting propensity (prominent -in the Indian jungle-bird) from most varieties of the domesticated -chicken. There are now as many as a hundred different kinds of -domesticated animals, and there is scarcely one of these animals -that has not been profoundly changed in character during the period -of its domestication. There are much greater changes in some races -than in others. Some races have been much longer in captivity than -others. And then, too, there is great difference in the degree of -plasticity in different races, the races of ancient origin being -much more fixed in their psychology than those of more recent -beginnings. In some races, too—as in the sheep—the selections made -by man have been made primarily with reference to certain physical -qualities, and in these cases the mental qualities have been only -incidentally affected. In Polynesia, where it is selected for its -flavour instead of for its fleetness or intelligence, the dog is -said to be a very stupid animal. But in most cases of domestication -the changes wrought by selection in the mental make-up of the race -have been fully as great as the changes in body, and in some -instances much greater. And the process by which these great -changes in psychology have been effected is in principle -identically the same as that by which mental evolution in general -is assumed to have been brought about.</p> -<p>History everywhere has come out of the night, out of the deep -gloom of the unrecorded. But it has not leaped forth like lightning -out of the darkness. It has dawned, night being succeeded by the -amorphous shadows of legend and tradition, and these in turn by the -attested events of true history. Almost every civilised people can -trace back its genealogy to a time when it was represented on the -earth by one or more tribes of savage or half-savage ancestors. The -Anglo-Saxons go back to the Angles, Saxons, and Jutes, three -semi-savage tribes who came to England from the borderlands of the -Baltic fourteen or fifteen centuries ago. The French are the -descendants of the Gauls, who formed the scattered population of -warring and superstitious tribes referred to by Julius Caesar in -the opening lines of his ‘Commentaries.’ The blue-eyed Germans came -from the Cimbri, the Goths, and the Vandals, those bold, wild -hordes who charged out of the north to battle with the power of -Rome. And all of the Aryan races—English, German, Italian, -Scandinavian, Russian, Roman, Greek, and Persian—trace their -ancestry back, by means of common languages and legends, to a time -when they were wandering tribes of nomads tenting somewhere on the -plains of transcaspian Asia.</p> -<p>6. The evolution of mind in the animal world in general is -suggested by the fact that mind in man has evolved. The rich, -luminous intellect of civilised man, with its art, science, law, -literature, government, and morality, has been evolved from the -rude, raw, demon-haunted mind of the savage. Evidence of this -evolution is furnished by the recorded facts of human history, by -the antiquarian collections of our museums, and by a study of -existing savages.</p> -<p>In all our museums there are collections of the relics of -prehistoric peoples. These collections consist of objects upon -which men in distant ages of the world have wrought—their weapons, -ornaments, utensils, implements, and playthings—which have been -saved from the teeth of Time by their durability. The character of -the minds which operated on these objects, which produced and used -them, may be inferred from the character of the objects, just as -the life and surroundings of an ancient animal or plant may be -inferred from its fossil. These relics are of stone, bone, bronze, -and iron. They are found in almost every region of the earth—all -over Europe and its islands, in western and central Asia, in China -and Japan, in Malay, Australia, and New Zealand, in the islands of -the Pacific, and throughout the length and breadth of America. They -antedate human history by thousands of years. They are the ruins of -the Stone Age, the Bronze Age, and the Iron Age of mankind. In all -of these remains there is evidence of a slow but gradual -improvement as we approach the present. There are places on the -earth where the evolution of human implements, from the rudest -chipped stones to the comparatively finished products of historic -peoples, is epitomised in the deposits of a few feet in depth. One -of these occurs at Chelles, a suburb of Paris, and was made the -subject of a paper by Professor Packard in the <em>Popular Science -Monthly</em> for May, 1902. Here three distinct layers, containing -human remains entirely different in character from each other, -appear within a depth of 30 feet from the surface. The lowest bed, -a layer of pebbles and sand, and probably preglacial in origin, -contains the famous Chellean ‘axes,’ rude almond-shaped implements -of chipped flint, and used by these ancient inhabitants by being -held in the hand. In this bed are also found the bones of the -straight-tusked elephant, cave-bear, big-nosed rhinoceros, and -other species now extinct. The next bed is the interglacial, and -contains implements entirely different from the one below it, among -which are skin-scrapers and lance-points. The animal remains of -this bed are also different from those found in the bed below, and -include animals like the musk-ox and the reindeer, which were -probably driven to this southern clime from more northern regions -by the excessive cold of the time. The third bed, which lies just -below the surface soils, contains polished stone axes and other -remains of human industry cotemporaneous with the Swiss -lake-dwellers. From the swamps and loams are sometimes dug up the -remains of Gallo-Roman civilisations—Gallic coins, serpentine axes, -and bronzes of the time of the Antonines.</p> -<p>No one can fully realise the vast advance that has been made by -the human mind until he has looked upon a savage—has seen the -savage in his native haunts attacking the problems of his daily -life, and has tasted of his philosophy and disposition. The savage -is the ancestor of all higher men. When we look upon the savage, we -look upon the infancy of the human world. All of the laws, -languages, sciences, governments, religions, and philosophies of -civilised man, or nearly all of them at any rate, are the -exfoliated laws, languages, sciences, governments, religions, and -philosophies of savages. It is impossible to understand the laws of -civilised societies without a knowledge of the laws of savage -societies. The same thing is true of government, religion, and -philosophy—and of human nature itself. Human nature as exhibited by -civilised men and women—I mean men and women with a veneering of -civility, not really civilised folks, for there are none of them on -the earth—is a perpetual enigma unless it is illumined by -retrospection, by a comparative study of human nature, by a study -of human nature as seen in more and more primitive men and women. -The mind of the savage, as compared with that of civilised man, is -exceedingly primitive. The picture drawn by Gilbraith of the North -American Sioux is a typical picture of savage life and character. -Gilbraith lived among these tribes for several years, and was -thoroughly acquainted with them. He says:</p> -<p>‘They are bigoted, barbarous, and exceedingly superstitious. -They regard most of the vices as virtues. Theft, arson, rape, and -murder are regarded by them as the means of distinction. The young -Indian is taught from childhood to regard killing as the highest of -virtues. In their dances and at their feasts, the warriors recite -their deeds of theft, pillage, and slaughter as precious things; -and the highest, indeed the only, ambition of the young brave is to -secure “the feather,” which is but the record of his having -murdered, or participated in the murder of, some human -being—whether man, woman, or child, it is -immaterial’.<sup><small><a href="#part2-chapter2-footnote2" id= -"part2-chapter2-ref2" name= -"part2-chapter2-ref2">[2]</a></small></sup></p> -<p>‘Conscience,’ says Burton, ‘does not exist in East Africa, and -“repentance” simply expresses regret for missed opportunities for -crime. Robbery makes an honorable man; and murder, the more -atrocious the crime the better, makes the hero’.‘Conscience,’ says -Burton, ‘does not exist in East Africa, and “repentance” simply -expresses regret for missed opportunities for crime. Robbery makes -an honorable man; and murder, the more atrocious the crime the -better, makes the hero’.<sup><small><a href= -"#part2-chapter2-footnote3" id="part2-chapter2-ref3" name= -"part2-chapter2-ref3">[3]</a></small></sup></p> -<p>Many things appear natural and self-evident to the savage which -seem to us actually revolting. When the Fuegians are hard pressed -by want, they kill their old women for food rather than their dogs, -saying: ‘Old women no use; dogs kill otters.’ ‘What I’ said a negro -to Burton, ‘am I to starve while my sister has children whom she -can sell?’</p> -<p>Lubbock, in his great work on ‘The Origin of Civilisation,’ -cites hundreds of instances of savage rudeness and simplicity which -seem almost incredible to one accustomed all his life to types of -human character such as are found in Europe and America. For -instance, ‘when the natives of the Lower Murray first saw -pack-oxen, some of them were frightened and took them for demons -with spears on their heads, while others thought they were the -wives of the settlers, because they carried the baggage.’ Speaking -of the wild men in the interior of Borneo, this writer says: ‘They -live absolutely in a state of nature, neither cultivating the -ground nor living in huts. They eat neither rice nor salt, and do -not associate with each other, but rove about the woods like wild -beasts. The sexes meet in the jungle. When the children are old -enough to shift for themselves, they usually separate, neither one -afterwards thinking of the other. At night they sleep under some -large tree whose branches hang low. They fasten the children to the -branches in a kind of swing, and build a fire around the tree to -protect them from snakes and wild beasts. The poor creatures are -looked on and treated by the other Dyaks as wild beasts.’ Lubbock -sums up his conclusions on the morality of savages in the following -pathetic acknowledgment: ‘I do not remember a single instance in -which a savage is recorded as having shown any symptoms of remorse; -and almost the only case I can call to mind in which a man -belonging to one of the lower races has accounted for an act by -saying explicitly that it was right, was when Mr. Hunt asked a -young Figian why he had killed his mother’.<sup><small><a href= -"#part2-chapter2-footnote4" id="part2-chapter2-ref4a" name= -"part2-chapter2-ref4a">[4a]</a></small></sup></p> -<p>A few pages further on, the same author adds, regarding the -deplorable state of morality among savages: ‘That there should be -races of men so deficient in moral feeling was altogether opposed -to the preconceived ideas with which I commenced the study of -savage life, and I have arrived at the conviction by slow degrees, -and even with reluctance. I have, however, been forced to this -conclusion, not only by the direct statements of travellers, but -also by the general tenor of their remarks, and especially by the -remarkable absence of repentance and remorse among the lowest races -of men.’ Among ourselves the words used to distinguish right and -wrong are metaphors. Right originally meant ‘straight,’ and wrong -meant ‘twisted.’ Language existed, therefore, before morality; for -if moral ideas had preceded language, there would have been -original words to stand for them. Religion, according to Lubbock, -has no moral aspect or influence except among the more advanced -races of men. ‘The deities of savages are evil, not good; they may -be forced into compliance with the wishes of man; they generally -delight in bloody, and often require human, sacrifices; they are -mortal, not immortal; they are to be approached by dances rather -than by prayers; and often approve what we call vice rather than -what we esteem as virtue. In fact, the so-called religion of the -lower races of mankind bears somewhat the same relation to religion -in its higher forms as astrology does to astronomy or alchemy to -chemistry’.<sup><small><a href="#part2-chapter2-footnote4" id= -"part2-chapter2-ref4b" name= -"part2-chapter2-ref4b">[4b]</a></small></sup></p> -<p>Savages have few general ideas of any kind, as is evidenced by -the almost total absence among them of words denoting general -ideas. Many savage races cannot comprehend numbers greater than -five or six, and are unable to make the simplest mathematical -computations without using the fingers. The languages of savages -are extremely rude, words being freely pieced out with pantomime. -Savages talk with difficulty in the dark, because of their great -reliance on gesture in conversation. The rich vocabularies of the -languages of Europe and America have grown up step by step with the -evolution of European and American mind. Every language is an -evolution. The languages of many primitive peoples lack the verb to -be entirely, and all nouns are proper nouns. Words are often little -more than grunts or clucks, and are without the euphony and -articulation found in the languages of the civilised. Darwin says -that the language of the Fuegians sounds like a man clearing his -throat. Not only every language, but every word, both in its form -and meaning, is in process of evolution. <em>Spirit</em>, for -instance, originally meant ‘blowing,’ <em>understanding</em> meant -‘getting beneath,’ and <em>development</em> the physical act of -‘unfolding.’ Words are continually drifting from their original -meanings under the stress of incessant use, as ships drag their -anchors in a gale. Those words that are exposed to common use -undergo the most rapid changes, while words sheltered from the rush -of human affairs, like harboured ships, hold to their moorings -forever. <em>Let</em>, for instance, once meant ‘hinder’; now it -means ‘allow.’ <em>Bisect</em>, on the other hand, a word of rare -and technical use, has remained unaltered in significance for -twenty centuries.</p> -<p>Even our alphabet has been evolved. The twenty-six symbols -composing it have been eroded into the peculiar forms in which they -appear at present by the various peoples through whose hands they -have come to us. The originals were pictographs such as are still -found on the aged monuments of earth’s earliest civilisations. The -English got their alphabet from the Romans, who obtained it, along -with almost everything else they had, from the Greeks. The Greeks -received it from the Phenicians, and the Phenicians from the -papyrus writers of Egypt, who in turn procured it from those -hieroglyph chiselers who carved their curious literature on the -granite tombs of the Nile in the remotest dawn of human history. -<em>A</em>, the first letter of our alphabet, is a figure which has -been evolved, as the result of long wear and tear, from the picture -of an eagle; <em>B</em> was originally the picture of a crane; -<em>C</em> represents a throne; <em>D</em> a hand; <em>F</em> an -asp; <em>H</em> a sieve; <em>K</em> a bowl; <em>L</em> a lioness; -<em>M</em> an owl; <em>N</em> a water-line; <em>R</em> a mouth; -<em>S</em> a garden; <em>T</em> a lasso; <em>X</em> a chairback; -and <em>Z</em> a duck.</p> -<p>The psychology of civilised man, though derived from that of the -savage, and hence resembling it fundamentally, is, nevertheless, -very different from it, both in character and in what it contains. -The mind of the savage is rude, unresourceful, vicious, and -childlike, while that of the civilised man or woman may be -overflowing with wisdom and benignity. This gulf has not been -covered by a stride, but by the slow operation of the same laws of -Inheritance, Variation, and Selection by which all progress has -been brought about.</p> -<p>7. Degeneration is a necessary part of the process of organic -evolution. All progress, whether anatomical, intellectual, or -social, takes place through selection, and selection means the -pining and ultimate passing away of that which is left. In -individual evolution it is organs, ideas, and traits of character -that are eliminated, and in social evolution it is customs and -institutions. One of the reasons given in the preceding chapter for -the belief in the evolution of structures is the existence in man -and other animals of <em>vestigial organs</em>, organs which in -lower forms of life are useful, but which in higher forms are -represented by useless or even injurious remnants. Similar remnants -are found in the <em>psychology</em> of man and other animals. -These vestiges of mind are not so easily recognised as the vestiges -of structure, but they are everywhere. We find them in the -antiquated instincts of man and the domestic animals, in the silent -letters and worn-out words of languages, and in the emaciated -remains of abandoned beliefs and institutions.</p> -<p>The hunting and fishing instinct of civilised man is a vestigial -instinct, normal in the savage, but without either sense or decency -among men devoted to industrial pursuits. The savage hunts and -fishes because he is hungry, never for pastime; civilised men and -women do so because they are too mechanical to assort their -impulses. Civilised man is a mongrel, a cross between a barbarian -and a god. His psychology is a compound of the jungle and the sky. -In their loftier moments, many men are able to obscure the cruder -facts of their origin and to put into temporary operation those -more splendid processes of mind which characterise their ideals. -But even the most civilised are forever haunted by the returning -ghosts of departed propensities—propensities which grew up in ages -of hate, which are now out-of-date, but which in the trying tedium -of daily life come back and usurp the high places in human nature. -Revenge, hate, cruelty, pugnacity, selfishness, vanity, and the -like, are all more or less vestigial among men who have entered -seriously on the life of altruism. Like the vermiform appendix and -the human tail, these old obsolete parts of the human mind are -destined, in the ripening of the ages, to waste away and disappear -through disuse.</p> -<p>The practice of the dog of turning round two or three times -before lying down is in response to an instinct which was no doubt -beneficial to it in its wild life, when it was wont to make its bed -in the grasses, but which is now a pure waste of time. Darwin -records it as a fact, that he has himself seen a simple-minded dog -turn round twenty times before lying down. The sheep-killing mania, -which sometimes comes over dogs when three or four of them get -together and become actuated by the ‘mob’ spirit, is a vestige of -the old instinct of the carnivore which centuries of domestication -have not yet quite erased. Goodness, if too prolonged, becomes -irksome to dogs for the same reason that it does to men. Dogs have -come from savages just as men have, and, while the civilised nature -of the dog is more constitutional than that of civilised man, the -old deposed instincts mount to the throne once in awhile, and the -faithful collie is for the time being a wolf again. The instinct of -domestic sheep to imitate their leader in leaping over obstacles is -another probable survival of wild life. If a bar or other obstacle -be placed where the leader of a flock of sheep is compelled to leap -over it, and the obstacle is then removed, the entire band of -followers will leap at the same place regardless of the fact that -the obstruction is no longer there. No other animals do this. The -instinct is probably a survival of wild life, when these animals, -pursued by their enemies over chasms and precipices, were compelled -to imitate in the flight those in front of them in order to live. -Darwin thinks the donkey shows its aboriginal desert nature in its -aversion for crossing the smallest stream, and its relish for -rolling in the dust. The same aversion for everything aquatic -exists also in the camel. Quails kept in captivity, I am told, -persist in scratching at the pan when they are feeding, just as -they would need to do, and were accustomed to do, among the leaves -and grasses of the groves. The restlessness of cage-birds and -domestic fowls at migrating time, the mimic dipping and sporting of -ducks when confined to a terrestrial habitat, the grave marshalling -of geese by the chief gander of the band, the ferocity of cows, -ewes, and the females of other domestic animals during the first -few days of motherhood, the hunting instinct of dogs kept as -shepherds and pets, the squatting of young pigs when suddenly -alarmed—all of these are vestigial instincts, functional in the -wild state, but now useless and absurd.</p> -<p>The silent letters and superannuated words and phrases found -everywhere in literature are the vestigial parts of language. Every -silent letter was originally sounded, and every obsolete word was -at one time used. In the French word, <em>temps</em>, for instance, -which means ‘time,’ neither the <em>p</em> nor the <em>s</em> is -sounded. But in the Latin word <em>tempus</em>, from which the -French word is derived, all of the letters are sounded.</p> -<p>Man has been defined as a creature of habit. As he has done a -thing once, or as his ancestors have done a thing, so he does it -again. By precept and example he transmits to each new generation -the customs, beliefs, and points of view which he has invented. -Social changes take place with extreme moderation. The drowsy ages -take plenty of time to get anywhere. Civilisation is lazy, -deliberate, unimpassioned. It loafs and hesitates. It holds on to -the past. Living civilisations always drag behind them a trail of -traditions from dead civilisations. Religions and philosophies -change, and creeds and governments flow into strange and -undreamed-of forms; but their personalities survive, their souls -live on, their remnants, transmitted as traditions from generation -to generation, defy the meddlings of innovators. Hence in every -society there are forms and ceremonies, laws and customs, games and -symbols, etc., which have been completely diverted from their -original purposes, or which have become so reduced in importance as -to be of no use. Spencer has shown that the forms of salutation in -vogue among civilised societies are the vestiges of primitive -ceremonial used to denote submission. The May Day festivals with -which the opening spring is usually hailed are the much-modified -survivals of pagan festivals in honour of plant and animal -fecundity. Superstition and folklore are vestigial opinions. The -gorgeous Easter egg is a survival of a dawn myth older than the -Pyramids, and our Christmas dinner is a reminiscence of a cannibal -carnival celebrating the turning back of the sun at the winter -solstice (Brinton). In the English government, where democracy has -in recent centuries made such inroads on the monarchy, there are -numerous examples of vestigial institutions—institutions which -continue to exist purely because they have existed in the past, but -which were functional a few centuries ago. The supreme office -itself is one of these. The King represents the petered-out -tail-end of a privilege which in the time of the early Stuarts was -almost unlimited. Similar vestiges exist in the United States, -where the national spirit during the last century and a half has so -completely wiped out colonialism. Such are the Town Meetings of -Boston and of New Haven. The earliest form of human marriage was -marriage by capture. The man stole the woman and carried her away -by force. This form of marriage was in the course of evolution -succeeded by marriage through purchase. A man anxious to become a -husband could do so by paying to the father a stipulated amount of -cash or cattle for his daughter. This second form of marriage -finally evolved into marriage arranged by direct and peaceful -negotiation between the prospective husband and wife. This is the -form most commonly employed at the present time among the more -advanced societies of men. But in the ceremonies which surround the -nuptial event among civilised peoples survive vestiges of many of -the facts associated with aboriginal marriages. A marriage in high -life is a sort of epitome of the evolution of the institution. The -coyness and hesitancy of the woman in accepting the offers of her -proposed spouse are the lineal descendants of the original -reluctance of her savage sisters. The wedding-ring is the old token -accepted by the woman when she gave her pledge of bondage. The -coming of the groom with his aids to the marriage is a figurative -marauding expedition. The honeymoon is the abduction. And the -charivari and missile-throwing indulged in by friends and relatives -on the departure of the wedded twain is a good-humoured counterfeit -of the armed protest made by relatives of old when a bride-snatcher -came among them.<sup><small><a href="#part2-chapter2-footnote5" id= -"part2-chapter2-ref5" name= -"part2-chapter2-ref5">[5]</a></small></sup></p> -<p>The vestiges found everywhere in the mental and social phenomena -of man and other animals have arisen as necessary facts in the -process of mental evolution. <em>They are the vermiform appendices -of the mind</em>.</p> -<p>8. One of the strongest reasons for a belief in the physical -evolution of animal species is that furnished by individual -evolution. Each individual animal recapitulates in a wonderful -manner the phylogenesis of its species. Now, it is extremely -significant that a similar parallel exists in the case of mental -evolution. Each individual mind ascends through a series of mental -faculties which epitomises in a remarkable manner the psychogenesis -of the animal kingdom.</p> -<p>The human child is not born with a full-grown mind any more than -with a full-grown body. It grows. It exfoliates. It ripens with the -years. It begins in infancy at the zero-point, and in manhood or -womanhood may blaze with genius and philanthropy.</p> -<p>But the mind of the child not only unfolds: it unfolds in a -certain order, the more complex parts and the more civilised -emotions invariably appearing last. The initial powers of the -newborn babe are those of sensation and perception. The babe cannot -think. It has no feeling of fear, no affection, no sympathy, and no -shame. It can see, and hear, and taste, and feel pain and -satisfaction—and these are about all. Even these are vague and -confused. In a week the perceptions are more sharp and vivid, more -distinct and orderly. Memory arises. Memory is the power of -reproducing past impressions. At three weeks the emotions begin to -sprout. The first to make their appearance are fear and surprise. -When the babe is seven weeks old the social affections show -themselves, and the simplest acts of association are performed. At -the age of twelve weeks jealousy and anger may be expected, -together with simple exhibitions of association by similarity. At -fourteen weeks affection and reason dawn. Sympathy germinates at -about the age of five months; pride and resentment germinate at -eight months; grief, hate, and benevolence at ten months; and shame -and remorse at fifteen months.</p> -<p>Now, the remarkable thing about this is that this is the order, -or very much like the order, in which mind in the animal kingdom as -a whole has apparently evolved. The lower orders of animal life -have none of the higher emotions and none of the more complicated -processes of mind. There is no shame in the reptile, no -dissimulation in the fish, no sympathy in the mollusk, and no -memory in the sponge. Memory dawns in the echinoderms, or somewhere -near the radiate stage of development, and fear and surprise in the -worms. Pugnacity makes its appearance in the insects, imagination -in the spiders, and jealousy in the fishes. Pride, emulation, and -resentment originate in the birds: grief and hate in the carnivora; -shame and remorse among dogs and monkeys; and superstition in the -savage.<sup><small><a href="#part2-chapter2-footnote1" id= -"part2-chapter2-ref1b" name= -"part2-chapter2-ref1b">[1b]</a></small></sup></p> -<p>It is also an important fact bearing on the general problem of -evolution, that the civilised child, from about the age of one on, -is a sort of synopsis, rude but unmistakable, of the historic -evolution of the human race. The child is a savage. It has the -emotions of the savage, the savage’s conceptions of the world, and -the desires, pastimes, and ambitions of the savage. It hates work, -and takes delight in hunting, fishing, fighting, and loafing, like -other savages. The hero of the child is the bully, just as the -demigod of primitive man is a blood-letting Caesar or Achilles. The -children of the civilised are savages—some more so than others—and -if they ever become civilised—some do, and some do not—they do so -through a process of rectification and selection similar to that -through which the Aryan races have passed during the ages of human -history.</p> -<p>There is a similar evolution in the young of other animals, -especially of the higher animals. Each individual begins in a -perfectly mindless form, and grows mentally as it develops -physically. The young puppy has a very different thinking and -feeling apparatus from the grown-up mastiff. It is controlled -almost exclusively by sense and instinct. It is devoid of -common-sense, and divides its time impartially between play and -sleep. It is easily frightened, and cries at every little thing. It -has the rollicking, awkward, irresponsible personality of a boy of -six. About the same thing is true of kittens, colts, calves, bear -cubs, the whelps of wolves, and other young quadrupeds. A kitten -will chase shadows, try to catch flies crawling on the other side -of a windowpane, sit and watch in wonder the moving objects about -it, and do many other things which it never thinks of doing when it -has grown to be a wise and sophisticated puss trained in the ways -of the world about it. Doghood, cathood, and horsehood, like -manhood and womanhood, are the ripened products of long processes -of growth and exfoliation.</p> -<p>The parallel is, of course, imperfect. There are many -abbreviations, many breaks and ambiguities, in the summary -presented by the individual mind of the evolution of the race. And, -in the present state of psychogeny, only the barest outline can be -traced. <em>But enough is known to render the fact -unquestionable</em>.</p> -<p>9. If human mind has been evolved, it is logical to expect to -find in other animals, especially in those more closely resembling -ourselves in structure, mind elements similar to those we find in -ourselves.<sup><small><a href="#part2-chapter2-footnote6" id= -"part2-chapter2-ref6" name= -"part2-chapter2-ref6">[6]</a></small></sup> And this is precisely -what we do find. The same great trunk impulses that animate men -animate also those more rudimentary but not less real individuals -below and around men. The great primary facts of sex, of -self-preservation, of pleasure and pain, of life and death, of -egoism and altruism, of motherhood, of alimentation, etc.—all of -these are found everywhere, down almost to the very threshold of -organic life. And they are the antecedents of the same great -tendencies as those that control the lives of men. It is often -supposed by the superficial that the facts of sex and alimentation, -which are so prominent in other animals, have been relegated to a -very subordinate place in the nature of man. But nothing could be -much farther from the truth. It has been said that there are only -two things that will induce the typical African or Australian to -undergo prolonged labour—hunger and the sex appetite. It is -probable that men—not only primitive men, but the most evolved -races, including even poets and philosophers—will do more desperate -and idiotic things and undergo more trying experiences when -actuated by the sex impulse than from the effects of any other -impulse in human nature. This impulse is especially overmastering -in races like the Italian and Spanish, and has been mentioned by -ethnologists as a probable factor in the deterioration of these -races. The sentiments of love, marital affection, and family life -control mankind more completely than any other motives. And next to -these comes hunger. Let anyone who imagines that only the non-human -creatures are carnal observe with what uniformity almost every -function in both savage and civilised life gravitates toward eating -and drinking. If it is a picnic, a convention, a national holiday, -a Christmas celebration, a meeting of a fraternal society, a -thanksgiving ceremony, or what not, eating is one of the main -things, and the one exercise into which four-fifths of those -present probably enter with the greatest enthusiasm.</p> -<p>The human soul is the blossom, not the beginning, of psychic -evolution. Mother-love compassionated infancy long before a babe -came from the stricken loins of woman. The inhabitants of the earth -had been seeking pleasure and seeking to avoid pain, and seeking -ever with the same sad futility, long before man with his retinue -of puny philosophies strutted upon the scene. Hate poisoned the -cisterns of the sea and dropped its pollutions through the steaming -spaces ages before there was malice among men. Altruism is older -than the mountains, and selfishness hardened the living heart -before the continents were lifted. There was wonder in the woods -and in the wild heart of the fastnesses before there were waitings -in synagogues and genuflections about altar piles. The frogs, -crickets, and birds had been singing love a thousand generations -and more when the first amoroso knelt in dulcet descant to a -beribboned Venus. Human nature is not an article of divine -manufacture, any more than is the human form. It came out of the -breast of the bird, out of the soul of the quadruped. The human -heart does not draw back from the mysterious dissolutions of death -more earnestly than does the hare that flees before resounding -packs or the wild-fowl that reddens the reeds with its -flounderings. Bowerbirds build their nest-side resorts, decorate -them with gay feathers, and surround them with grounds ornamented -with bright stones and shells, for identically the same reason as -human beings design drawing-rooms, hang them with tapestries, and -surround them with ornamented lawns. The scarlet waistcoat of the -robin and the flaming dresses of tanagers and humming-birds, which -seem, as they flash through the forest aisles, like shafts of -cardinal-fire, serve the same vanities and minister to the same -instincts as the plumage of the dandy and the tints and gewgaws of -gorgeous dames. Art is largely a manifestation of sex, and it is -about as old and about as persistent as this venerable impulse. How -did Darwin’s dog know his master on his master’s return from a -five-years’ trip around the world? Just as the boy remembers where -the strawberries grow and the philosopher recalls his facts—by that -power of the brain to retain and to reproduce past impressions. Why -does the thinker search his soul for new theories and the spaces -for new stars? For the same reason that the child asks questions -and the monkey picks to pieces its toys. What is reason? A habit of -wise men—an expedient of ants—a mania the fools of all ages are -free from. All of the activities of men, however imposing or -peculiar, are but elaborations in one way or another of the humble -doings of the animalcule, whose home is a water-drop and whose -existence can be discovered by human senses only by the aid of -instruments.</p> -<p>10. Mind has evolved because the universe has evolved. Whether -mind is a part of the universe, or all of it, or only an attribute -of it, it is, in any case, inextricably mixed up with it. And, -since the universe as a whole has evolved, it is improbable that -any part of it or anything pertaining to it has remained impassive -to the general tendency. There are no solids. Nothing stands. The -whole universe is in a state of fluidity. Even the ‘eternal hills,’ -the ‘unchanging continents,’ and the ‘everlasting stars,’ are -flowing, flowing ever, slowly but ceaselessly, from form to form. -So is mind. Indeed, if there is anywhere in the folds of creation a -being such as the one whom man has long accused of having brought -the universe into existence, we may rest assured that even he is -not sitting passively apart from the enormous enterprise which he -has himself inaugurated.</p> -<p>The evidence is conclusive. The evolution of mind is supported -by a series of facts not less incontrovertible and convincing than -that by which physical evolution is established. The data of mental -evolution are not quite so definite and plentiful as those of -physical evolution. But this is due to the greater intangibility of -mental phenomena and to the backward condition of the psychological -sciences, especially of comparative psychology. Mental phenomena -are always more difficult to deal with than material phenomena, and -hence are always more tardily attended to in the application of any -theory. But taking everything into account, including the close -connection between physical and psychical phenomena, it may be -asserted that it is not more certain that the physical structure of -man has been derived from sub-human forms of life than it is that -the human mind has also been similarly derived.</p> -<p>Man is the adult of long evolution. The human soul has ancestors -and consanguinities just as the body has. It is just as reasonable -to suppose that the human physiology, with its definitely -elaborated tissues, organs, and systems, is unrelated to the -physiology of vertebrates in general, and through vertebrate -physiology to the physiology of invertebrates, as to suppose that -the states and impulses constituting human nature and consciousness -began to exist in the anthropic type of anatomy and are unrelated -to the states and impulses of vertebrate consciousness in general, -and through vertebrate consciousness to those remoter types of -sentiency lying away at the threshold of organic life. Human -psychology is a part of universal psychology. It has been evolved. -It has been evolved according to the same laws of heredity and -adaptation as have physiological structures. And it is just as -impossible to understand human nature and psychology unaided by -those wider prospects of universal psychology as it is to -understand the facts of human physiology unaided by analogous -universalisations.</p> -<p><small id="part2-chapter2-footnote1"><a href= -"#part2-chapter2-ref1a">1a.</a> <a href= -"#part2-chapter2-ref1a">1b.</a> Romanes: <em>Mental Evolution in -Animals</em>; New York, 1898.</small><br /> -<small id="part2-chapter2-footnote2"><a href= -"#part2-chapter2-ref2">2.</a> Gilbraith: <em>Ethnological -Journal</em>, 1869, p. 304.</small><br /> -<small id="part2-chapter2-footnote3"><a href= -"#part2-chapter2-ref3">3.</a> Burton: <em>First Footsteps in East -Africa</em>; London, 1856.</small><br /> -<small id="part2-chapter2-footnote4"><a href= -"#part2-chapter2-ref4a">4a.</a> <a href= -"#part2-chapter2-ref4b">4b.</a> Lubbock: <em>Origin of -Civilisation</em>; New York, 1898.</small><br /> -<small id="part2-chapter2-footnote5"><a href= -"#part2-chapter2-ref5">5.</a> Demoor: <em>Evolution by -Atrophy</em>; New York, 1899.</small><br /> -<small id="part2-chapter2-footnote6"><a href= -"#part2-chapter2-ref6">6.</a> This topic is more fully presented in -the chapter “The elements of the human and non-human mind -compared.”</small><br /></p> -<h3 id="part2-chapter3">III. The Common-sense View.</h3> -<p>But it is not necessary to be learned in Darwinian science in -order to know that non-human beings have souls. Just the ordinary -observation of them in their daily lives about us—in their comings -and goings and doings—is sufficient to convince any person of -discernment that they are beings with joys and sorrows, desires and -capabilities, similar to our own. No human being with a -conscientious desire to learn the truth can associate intimately -day after day with these people—associate with them as he himself -would desire to be associated with in order to be interpreted, -without presumption or reserve, in a kind, honest, straightforward, -magnanimous manner; make them his friends and really enter into -their inmost lives—without realising that they are almost unknown -by human beings, that they are constantly and criminally -misunderstood, and that they are in reality beings actuated by -substantially the same impulses and terrorised by approximately the -same experiences as we ourselves. They eat and sleep, seek pleasure -and try to avoid pain, cling valorously to life, experience health -and disease, get seasick, suffer hunger and thirst, co-operate with -each other, build homes, reproduce themselves, love and provide for -their children, feeding, defending, and educating them, contend -against enemies, contract habits, remember and forget, learn from -experience, have friends and favourites and pastimes, appreciate -kindness, commit crimes, dream dreams, cry out in distress, are -affected by alcohol, opium, strychnine, and other drugs, see, hear, -smell, taste, and feel, are industrious, provident and cleanly, -have languages, risk their lives for others, manifest ingenuity, -individuality, fidelity, affection, gratitude, heroism, sorrow, -sexuality, self-control, fear, love, hate, pride, suspicion, -jealousy, joy, reason, resentment, selfishness, curiosity, memory, -imagination, remorse—all of these things, and scores of others, the -same as human beings do.</p> -<p>The anthropoid races have the same emotions and the same ways of -expressing those emotions as human beings have. They laugh in joy, -whine in distress, shed tears, pout and apologise, and get angry -when they are laughed at. They protrude their lips when sulky or -pouting, stare with wide open eyes in astonishment, and look -downcast when melancholy or insulted. When they laugh, they draw -back the corners of their mouth and expose their teeth, their eyes -sparkle, their lower eyelids wrinkle, and they utter chuckling -sounds, just as human beings do.<sup><small><a href= -"#part2-chapter3-footnote1" id="part2-chapter3-ref1" name= -"part2-chapter3-ref1">[1]</a></small></sup> They have strong -sympathy for their sick and wounded, and manifest toward their -friends, and especially toward the members of their own family, a -devotion scarcely equalled among the lowest races of mankind. They -use rude tools, such as clubs and sticks, and resort to cunning and -deliberation to accomplish their ends. The orang, when pursued, -will throw sticks at his pursuers, and when wounded, and the wound -does not prove instantly fatal, will sometimes press his hand upon -the wound or apply grass and leaves to stop the flow of blood. The -children of anthropoids wrestle with each other, and chase and -throw each other, just as do the juveniles of human households. The -gorilla, chimpanzee, and orang all build for themselves lodges made -of broken boughs and leaves in which to sleep at night. These -lodges, rude though they are, are not inferior to the habitations -of many primitive men. The Puris, who live naked in the depths of -the Brazilian forests, do not even have huts to live in, only -screens made by setting up huge palm-leaves against a -cross-pole.<sup><small><a href="#part2-chapter3-footnote2" id= -"part2-chapter3-ref2" name= -"part2-chapter3-ref2">[2]</a></small></sup> Some of the African -tribes are said to live largely in caves and the crevices of rocks. -This is the case with many primitive men. According to a writer in -the <em>Journal</em> of the Anthropological Institute of Great -Britain and Ireland (January, 1902), ‘common forms of dwelling -among the wild tribes of the Malay Peninsula are rock-shelters -(sometimes caves, but more commonly natural recesses under -overhanging ledges) and leaf-shelters, which are sometimes formed -on the ground and sometimes in the branches of trees. The simplest -form of these leaf-shelters consists of a single palm-leaf planted -in the ground to afford the wanderer some slight shelter for the -night.’</p> -<p>When they sleep, the anthropoids sometimes lie stretched out, -man-like, on their backs, and sometimes they lie on their side with -their hand under their head for a pillow. The orang retires about -five or six o’clock in the evening, and does not rise until the -morning sun has dissipated the mists of the forest. The gorilla and -chimpanzee seem to mate for life. The former lives, as a rule, in -single families, each family consisting of a male and a female and -their children. During the day this primitive family roams through -the forests of equatorial Africa in search of food. They live on -fruits and nuts and the tender shoots and leaves of plants. They -are especially fond of sugar-cane, which they eat in small-boy -fashion by chewing and discarding the juiceless pulp. Among the -foods of the gorilla is a walnut-like nut which it cracks with -stones. As evening comes on, the head of the family selects a -sleeping-place for the night. This is usually some low tree with a -dense growth at the top, and protected as much as possible by -higher trees from the chilly night wind. Here, on a bed of broken -branches and leaves, the mother and little ones go to sleep, while -the father devotedly crouches at the foot of the tree, with his -back against the trunk to guard his family from leopards and other -nocturnal cut-throats who eat apes.<sup><small><a href= -"#part2-chapter3-footnote3" id="part2-chapter3-ref3a" name= -"part2-chapter3-ref3a">[3a]</a></small></sup> When the weather is -stormy, they cover themselves with broad pandanus leaves to keep -off the rain. Koppenfels relates an incident of a gorilla family -which makes one think of things he sometimes sees among men. The -family consisted of the parents and two children. It was meal-time. -The head of the family reposed majestically on the ground, while -the wife and children hustled for fruits for him in a near-by tree. -If they were not sufficiently nimble about it, or if they were so -wanton as to take a bite themselves, the paterfamilias growled and -gave them a cuff on the head.<sup><small><a href= -"#part2-chapter3-footnote3" id="part2-chapter3-ref3b" name= -"part2-chapter3-ref3b">[3b]</a></small></sup> Notwithstanding the -sensational tales of the ferocity of this being, the gorilla never -attacks anyone at any time unless he is -molested.<sup><small><a href="#part2-chapter3-footnote3" id= -"part2-chapter3-ref3c" name= -"part2-chapter3-ref3c">[3c]</a></small></sup> He much prefers to -attend to his own business. But if he is not allowed to do so, if -he is attacked, he is as fearless as a machine. He approaches his -antagonist walking upright and beating his breast with his fists. -He presents one of the most terrifying of all spectacles, as, with -gleaming eyes, hair erect, and resounding yells, he bears down on -the object of his resentment. The natives fear the gorilla more -than they fear any other animal.</p> -<p>The chimpanzee in his native wilds lives in small tribes -consisting of a few families each. Like the gorilla, it passes the -most of its time on the ground, going among the trees only for food -or sleep. It builds a sleeping-place at night in the trees, as in -the case of the gorilla. Brehm, who brought up a number of -chimpanzees in his own home as comrades and playmates of his -children, and who studied them and associated with them for years, -says: ‘The chimpanzee is not only one of the cleverest of all -creatures, but a being capable of deliberation and judgment. -Everything he does is done consciously and deliberately. He looks -upon all other animals, except man, as very inferior to himself. He -treats children entirely different from grown-up people. The latter -he respects; the former he looks upon as comrades and equals. He is -not merely inquisitive: he is greedy for knowledge. He can draw -conclusions, can reason from one thing to another, and apply the -results of experience to new circumstances. He is cunning, even -wily, has flashes of humour, indulges in practical jokes, manifests -moods, and is entertained in one company and bored in another. He -is self-willed but not stubborn, good-natured but not wanting in -independence. He expresses his emotions like a human being. In -sickness he behaves like one in despair, distorts his face, groans, -stamps, and tears his hair. He learns very easily whatever is -taught him, as, for instance, to sit upright at table, to eat with -knife and fork and spoon, to drink from a glass or cup, to stir the -sugar in his tea, to use a napkin, to wear clothes, to sleep in a -bed, and so on. Exceedingly appreciative of every caress, he is -equally sensitive to blame and unkindness. He is capable of deep -gratitude, and he expresses it by shaking hands or kissing without -being asked to do so. He behaves toward infants with touching -tenderness. The behaviour of a sick and suffering chimpanzee is -most pathetic. Begging piteously, almost humanly, he looks into his -master’s face, receives every attempt to help him with warm thanks, -and soon looks upon his physician as a benefactor, holding out his -arm to him, stretching out his tongue whenever told, and even doing -so of his own accord after a few visits from his physician. He -swallows medicines readily, and even submits to surgical -operations—in short, behaves very like a human patient in similar -circumstances. As his end approaches, he becomes more gentle, and -the nobler traits of his character stand out -prominently’.<sup><small><a href="#part2-chapter3-footnote4" id= -"part2-chapter3-ref4a" name= -"part2-chapter3-ref4a">[4a]</a></small></sup></p> -<p><em>The New York Herald</em>, in its issue of July 2, 1901, -contained an account of the death of Charlemagne, a chimpanzee who -died a short time before at Grenoble, France. This anthropoid at -the time of his death was the most popular inhabitant of the town. -His popularity was due to his good-nature and intelligence, and -especially to the fact that a few years before his death he had -saved a child from drowning in a well. The ape saw the child fall, -and without a moment’s hesitation climbed down the rope used for -the buckets, seized the child, and climbed out again by the same -rope by which he had descended. The people of the town thought so -much of him that they followed his remains to the grave, and the -municipal council voted to erect a bronze statue to his memory.</p> -<p>A heartless hunter—maybe one of those assassins who fill the -wilds with widows and orphans in the name of Science—tells of the -murder of a mother chimpanzee and her baby in Africa. The mother -was high up in a tree with her little one in her arms. She watched -intently, and with signs of the greatest anxiety, the hunter as he -moved about beneath, and when he took aim at her the poor doomed -thing motioned to him with her hand precisely in the manner of a -human being, to have him desist and go away.</p> -<p>According to Emin Pasha, who was for a number of years Governor -of an Egyptian province on the Upper Nile, and whom Stanley made -his last expedition to ‘rescue,’ chimpanzees sometimes make use of -fire. He told Stanley that, when a tribe of chimpanzees who resided -in a forest near his camp came at night to get fruit from the -orchards, they always came bearing torches to light them on their -way. ‘If I had not seen it with my own eyes,’ he declares, ‘I never -could have believed that these beings have the power of making -fire’.<sup><small><a href="#part2-chapter3-footnote5" id= -"part2-chapter3-ref5" name= -"part2-chapter3-ref5">[5]</a></small></sup> This same authority -relates that on one occasion a band of chimpanzees descended upon -his camp and carried off a drum. The marauders went away in great -glee, beating the drum as they retreated. He says he heard them -several times after that, at night, beating their drum, in the -forest.</p> -<p>The monkeys are little inferior to the man-like races in their -intelligence and in the general similarity of their feelings and -instincts to those of men. Monkeys live in tribes, and at the head -of each tribe is an old male chief who has won his place by his -strength, courage, and ability. Monkeys have excellent memories and -keen observation, and are able to recognise their friends in a -crowd even after long absences. They are proverbially imitative, -have a strong desire for knowledge, and are exceedingly sensitive -and sympathetic in their natures. Sympathy and curiosity, the two -most prominent traits in simian psychology, are, significantly, the -two most important facts in the psychology of man. Sympathy and -curiosity lie at the foundation of human civilisation, sympathy at -the foundation of morals, and curiosity of invention and science. -The monkey whose diary appears in the closing pages of Romanes’ -‘Animal Intelligence’ was possessed of an almost ravenous desire to -know. He spent hour after hour in exploration, examining with the -indomitable patience of a scientist everything that came within the -bounds of his little horizon. And when he had found out any new -thing, he was as delighted over it as a boy who has solved a hard -problem, repeating the experiment over and over until it was -thoroughly familiar to him. Among the many things he discovered for -himself was the use of the lever and the screw. Monkeys are the -most affectionate of all animals excepting dogs and men. This -affection reaches its culmination, as among men, in the love of the -mother for her child. The mother monkey’s little one is the object -of her constant care and affection. She nurses and bathes it, licks -it and cleans its coat, and folds it in her arms and rocks it as if -to lull it to sleep, just as human mammas do. She divides every -bite with her little one, but does not hesitate to chastise it with -slaps and pinches when it is rude. The monkey child is generally -very obedient, obedient enough for an example to many a human -youngster.</p> -<p>‘Very touching,’ says Brehm, from whom many of the foregoing -facts are gleaned, ‘is the conduct of the mother when her baby is -obviously suffering. And if it dies she is in despair. For hours, -and even for days, she carries the little corpse about with her, -refuses all food, sits indifferently in the same spot, and often -literally pines to death’.<sup><small><a href= -"#part2-chapter3-footnote4" id="part2-chapter3-ref4b" name= -"part2-chapter3-ref4b">[4b]</a></small></sup></p> -<p>Orphan monkeys, according to Brehm, are often adopted by the -tribe, and carefully looked after by the other monkeys, both male -and female. The great mass of human beings, who know about as much -about the real emotional life of monkeys as wooden Indians do, are -inclined to pass over lightly all displays of feeling by these -people of the trees. But the poet knows, and the prophet knows, and -the world will one day understand, that in the gentle bosoms of -these wild woodland mothers glow the antecedents of the same -impulses as those that cast that blessed radiance over the lost -paradise of our own sweet childhood. The mother monkey who gathered -green leaves as she fled from limb to limb, and frantically stuffed -them into the wound of her dying baby in order to stanch the cruel -rush of blood from its side, all the while uttering the most -pitiful cries and casting reproachful glances at her human enemy, -until she fell with her darling in her arms and a bullet in her -heart, had in her simian soul just as genuine mother-love, and love -just as sacred, as that which burns in the breast of woman.</p> -<p>The affection of monkeys is not confined to the love of the -mother for her child, but exists among the different members of the -same tribe, and extends even to human beings, especially to those -who make any pretensions to do to them as they would themselves be -done by. The monkey kept by Romanes, already referred to, became so -attached to his master that he went into the wildest demonstrations -of joy whenever his master, after an absence, came into the room. -Standing on his hind-legs at the full length of his chain, and -reaching out both hands as far as he could reach, he screamed with -all his might. His joy was so hysterical that it was impossible to -carry on any kind of conversation until he had been folded in his -master’s arms, when he immediately grew quiet.</p> -<p>‘After I took this monkey back to the Zoological Gardens,’ says -Romanes, ‘and up to the time of his death, he remembered me as well -as the day he was returned. I visited the monkey-house about once a -month, and whenever I approached his cage he saw me with astounding -quickness—indeed, generally before I saw him—and ran to the bars, -through which he thrust both hands with every expression of joy. -When I went away he always followed me to the extreme end of the -cage, and stood there watching me as long as I remained in -sight.’</p> -<p>The following account of the attachment of a male monkey for his -murdered consort is a pitiful tale of human inhumanity and of -simian tenderness and devotion:</p> -<p>‘A member of a shooting-party killed a female monkey, and -carried her body to his tent under a banyan-tree. The tent was soon -surrounded by forty or fifty of the tribe, who made a great noise -and threatened to attack the aggressor. When he presented his -fowling-piece, the fearful effects of which they had just -witnessed, and appeared perfectly to understand, they retreated. -The leader of the troop, however, stood his ground, threatening and -chattering furiously. At last, finding threats of no avail, the -broken-hearted creature came to the door of the tent and began a -lamentable moaning, and by the most expressive signs seemed to beg -for the dead body of his beloved. It was given to him. He took it -sorrowfully in his arms and bore it away to his expecting -companions’.<sup><small><a href="#part2-chapter3-footnote6" id= -"part2-chapter3-ref6a" name= -"part2-chapter3-ref6a">[6a]</a></small></sup></p> -<p>The chattering of monkeys is not, as is vulgarly supposed, -meaningless vocalisation. It is language. It is meaningless to -human ears for the same reason that the chattering of Frenchmen is -meaningless to Americans—<em>because human beings are -foreigners</em>. The conversation of monkeys is to convey thought. -Every species that thinks and feels has means for conveying its -thoughts and feelings, and the means for this exchange, whether it -be sounds, symbols, gestures, or grimaces, is language. As Wundt -somewhere says: ‘If psychologists of to-day, ignoring all that an -animal can express through gestures and sounds, limit the -possession of language to human beings, such a conclusion is -scarcely less absurd than that of many philosophers of antiquity -who regarded the languages of barbarous nations as animal cries.’ -Mr. Garner, who has so long and so sympathetically associated with -monkeys, has been able to translate a number of their words and to -enter into slight communication with them. Among the words he has -been able to understand are the words for ‘alarm,’ ‘good-will,’ -‘listen,’ ‘food,’ ‘drink,’ ‘monkey,’ and ‘fruit.’ According to him, -the simian tongue has about eight or nine sounds which may be -changed by modulation into three or four times that number, and -each different species or kind has its own peculiar tongue slightly -shaded into dialects. There may be more discriminating students -than Garner, but few certainly who have approached their favourite -problem with more feeling and humanity. Every one should read his -beautiful book on ‘The Speech of Monkeys.’ ‘Among the little -captives of the simian race,’ says he tenderly, in closing his -chapter on the emotional character of these people, ‘I have many -little friends to whom I am attached, and whose devotion to me is -as warm and sincere, so far as I can see, as that of any human -being. I must confess that I cannot discern in what intrinsic way -the love they have for me differs from my own for them; nor can I -see in what respect their love is less divine than is my own.’</p> -<p>Dogs are distinguished for their great intelligence, the -pre-eminence of the sense of smell, fidelity to duty, nobleness of -nature, patience, courage, and affection. In all of these -particulars many individual dogs are superior to whole races of -men. Dogs are more sensitive to physical suffering than savages, -and will cry piteously from slight wounds or other injuries. Dogs -of high life have genuine feelings of dignity and self-respect, and -are easily wounded in their sensibilities. Such dogs have -considerable sense of propriety, and suffer, like sensitive -children, from disapprobation. Romanes had a dog that was so -sensitive that he resented insult, and so sympathetic that he -always fought in defence of other dogs when they were punished or -attacked. When out driving with his master, this dog always caught -hold of his master’s sleeve every time the horse was touched with a -whip.<sup><small><a href="#part2-chapter3-footnote6" id= -"part2-chapter3-ref6b" name= -"part2-chapter3-ref6b">[6b]</a></small></sup> Romanes also tells of -a Scotch terrier who, having grown old and useless, and been -supplanted by a younger dog, Jack, became painfully jealous, and -imitated his rival in everything that he did, even to ridiculous -details, in order to retain the attentions of the household. When -Jack was tenderly caressed, the old dog would watch for a time, and -then burst out whining as if in the deepest -distress.<sup><small><a href="#part2-chapter3-footnote6" id= -"part2-chapter3-ref6c" name= -"part2-chapter3-ref6c">[6c]</a></small></sup> Dogs communicate -their ideas to each other and to human beings, generally by means -of sounds and gestures. They growl in anger, yelp in eagerness, -howl in despair, bark in joy or warning, bay in wonder, wail in -bitterness and pain, whine in supplication, and prostrate -themselves in submission or apology. It has been said that there -never was a man who possessed the stateliness of a St. Bernard, the -unerring sagacity of the collie, or the courage and tenacity of the -bulldog. The vainest dandy is not more delicate in his ways than -the Italian greyhound, nor more soft and affectionate than the -Blenheim. Many a deed of heroism has been done by dogs which would, -if done by men, have been honoured by the Order of the Victoria -Cross. The St. Bernards belonging to the monks on the passes -between Switzerland and Italy are especially celebrated for their -devotion to the business of saving human life. They often lose -their own lives in their efforts to rescue travellers baffled and -overcome by storm. One particularly sagacious individual, who lost -his life in this way some years ago, wore a medal stating that he -had been the means of saving twenty-two human lives. In devotion -the dog is superior to all other animals, not even excepting man. -‘How could one get relief from the endless dissimulation, falsity, -and malice of mankind,’ exclaimed Schopenhauer in one of his -inspired moments, ‘if there were no dogs into whose honest faces he -could look without distrust?’ A dog will follow a handful of rags -wrapped around a homeless beggar, day after day, through heat and -cold and storm and starvation, just as faithfully as he will follow -the purple of a king. The dog who stood over the lifeless body of -his master, grieving for recognition and starting at every flutter -of his garments, till he himself died of starvation, had in his -faithful breast a nobler heart than that which beats in the bosom -of most men. And the devotion of Greyfriars Bobby, who every night -for twelve years, in all kinds of weather, slept on his master’s -grave, was well worthy the marble tribute which to-day stands in -Edinburgh to his memory. There has never been recorded in the -history of the world an instance of more extravagant trust and -devotion than that told of the canine companion of a certain -vivisector, which licked the hand of his master while undergoing -the crime of being cut to pieces. Such deeds of self-sacrifice -remind one of the tales told of imaginary saints. But they are the -deeds of <em>only dogs</em>—of beings whom half the world look upon -with indifference and contempt, and whom the other half would feel, -if they came within reach, under the strictest obligations to -kick.</p> -<blockquote> -<p>‘When some proud son of man returns to earth,<br /> -Unknown to glory but upheld by birth,<br /> -The sculptor’s art exhausts the pomp of woe,<br /> -And storied urns record who rests below;<br /> -When all is done, upon the tomb is seen,<br /> -Not what he was, but what he should have been;<br /> -But the poor dog, in life the firmest friend,<br /> -The first to welcome, foremost to defend,<br /> -Whose honest heart is still his master’s own.<br /> -Who labours, fights, lives, breathes, for him alone,<br /> -Unhonoured falls, unnoticed all his worth—<br /> -Denied in heaven the soul he had on earth.’<br /></p> -</blockquote> -<p>I am not one of those who regard the evidence for the -post-mortem existence of the human soul as being either abundant or -conclusive. But of one thing I am positive, and that is, that there -are the same grounds precisely for believing in the immortality of -the bird and the quadruped as there are for the belief in human -immortality. And it is delightful to find great thinkers like -Haeckel, great biologists and philosophers, holding the same -conviction. Haeckel is the giant of the Germans, and in his -brilliant book ‘The Riddle of the Universe’ appears this rather -poetical paragraph: ‘I once knew an old head-forester, who, being -left a widower and without children at an early age, had lived -alone for more than thirty years in a noble forest of East Prussia. -His only companions were one or two servants, with whom he -exchanged merely a few necessary words, and a great pack of -different kinds of dogs, with whom he lived in perfect psychic -communion. Through many years of training this keen observer and -friend of nature had penetrated deep into the individual souls of -his dogs, and he was as convinced of their personal immortality as -he was of his own. Some of his most intelligent dogs were, in his -impartial estimation, at a higher stage of psychic development than -his old stupid maid and his rough and wrinkled man-servant. Any -unprejudiced observer who will study the psychic phenomena of a -fine dog for a year, and follow attentively the processes of its -thought, judgment, and reason, will have to admit that it has just -as valid a claim to immortality as man himself.’</p> -<p>Fido was a shaggy terrier who lived years ago in the old home on -the farm by the beautiful brook. He was one of the very first -acquaintances the writer of these lines made on coming into -existence. In his earlier years, before age had dimmed his mind and -rheumatism had fastened upon him, he was an exceedingly agreeable -and clever canine, active in all the affairs of the farm. He knew -the old homestead by heart, and he took about as much interest in -having everything go right as anybody—more, perhaps, even than we -boys did. He chased the pigs out of the orchard without being asked -to do so, and guarded the house at night with the vigilance of a -hired watchman. He seemed to realise the demands of everyday -situations about as well as any of us. He could distinguish between -neighbours who were accustomed to come on the premises and -strangers who were not. He always knew when company came, for he -invariably attempted to profit by the fact. He had been taught -early the propriety of keeping in the background when his tyrants -were feeding, and ordinarily on such occasions he slept dutifully -by the kitchen stove. But just as sure as a guest sat at table, -Fido would turn up, and, tapping the visitor gently to get his -attention, would sit up perfectly straight, with his paws pendent -and a peculiar grin on his face, in expectation of a morsel. Dear -old Fido! How much he thought of all of us! And how meagerly, as I -know now, were his matchless love and services requited; On Sundays -sometimes the human members of the household would go away and stay -all day, and Fido and the cat would be left alone to get along the -best way they could. He knew as well as any of us when these days -came around, and he dreaded them. I suppose he had learned from -experience to associate cessation of farm work and peculiar -preparations with a day alone. The long, lonely hours probably -affected him somewhat as they do a human being who is compelled to -stay alone all day with nothing to do. But what a welcome he gave -us in the evening when we came back! This was indubitable evidence -of his loneliness. The first familiar object we would see in the -evening, on coming in sight of home, was faithful Fido, sitting out -in the road on the hill above the house—sitting straight up in that -peculiar way of his—watching and waiting for our home-coming. He -knew, or seemed to know, the direction from which to expect us, and -was able to recognise us a long way off. The years have been many, -and Fido’s dust has long been scattered by the gusts over the farms -of north-west Missouri; but now, in fancy, I can see this faithful -creature bounding down the road in the sunset to meet us, as he -used to do in the golden long-ago, leaping and smiling and wagging -his tail, and wriggling and barking in a perfect ecstasy of -gladness.</p> -<p>Well, I <em>know</em> Fido could feel and think, that he loved -and feared and longed and dreaded and dreamed and hated and grieved -and sympathised and reasoned and rejoiced—in short, that he was -moved by about the same passions and considerations as human beings -usually are. He gave the same evidence of it precisely as a human -being does.</p> -<p>The dog is the oldest of human associates. Long before the -historical period the dog was domesticated in Europe, Asia, and -Africa. No race of men is too primitive to be without the dog. The -bones of the dog are found in the middens of the Baltic, and rude -representations of it are chiseled on the oldest monuments of Egypt -and Assyria. The dog was the servant of man away in paleolithic -times, when the mastodon was on earth, and man was a naked -troglodyte, and Europe extended westward to the Azores. And he has -been a faithful friend, a tireless ally, and an enthusiastic slave -of a thankless and inhuman master ever since.</p> -<p>Birds are pre-eminently emotional and artistic. This is shown by -their fondness for singing, their fine dress, their pining for -their dead, their dainty architecture, their pretty forms and -manners of life, their joyousness, and their love for their young. -Birds are the most beautiful and engaging of all terrestrial -beings. Endowed with the power of flight, eminently active, -light-hearted and free, attired in all the colours of the rainbow, -and with voices of unrivalled richness and melody, birds are the -admiration and envy of all of those that dwell on the earth. Birds -possess naturally and in marvellous perfection that power of -locomotion which has been so long sought for by slow-shuffling man. -Birds are also incomparable musicians, no other animals, not even -men, approaching them in the surpassing brilliancy and sweetness of -their song. No human musician in high-sounding hall can equal the -artless lay of the wild bird ringing melodiously through the leafy -colonnades of the woods. Like men, birds sing chiefly of love; but -they also sing for pastime or pleasure. Their singing is sweetest -during the season of courtship, and attains its highest development -in the males. Birds are ardent lovers. To win their brides, the -males contend with each other, and display their charms of plumage -and song with the wildness of human Romeos.</p> -<p>The song of birds is generally acquired by inheritance from the -species, but is sometimes borrowed by imitation from other birds, -or even from other animals. Birds taken from their species when -young, before they have heard their native song, sing generally the -song of their kind, but it is likely to be interspersed with notes -and phrases from the birds around them. Birds thus isolated have -been known to adopt entirely the song of their surroundings. Olive -Thorne Miller vouches for the fact that an English sparrow she once -knew grew up in company with a canary, and came in time to sing the -song of its more talented companion to perfection. It must have -been a Shakspere of a bird, however, to have soared so high above -the excruciating accomplishments of the generality of its -species.</p> -<p>The songs of birds can be set to music just as the melodies of -men can. The songs of several birds were published in the -<em>American Naturalist</em> a few years ago. And Winchell, the -well-known English student of birds, has written a clever book on -the ‘Cries and Call-notes of Wild Birds,’ in which he prints the -calls and songs of most of the native birds of England. According -to this writer, who has perhaps studied the music of birds more -critically than anyone else, the song of the nightingale, when -printed in the notation of ordinary human music, is like a piano -solo. It is made up of a score or so of different strains, with -trills and crescendos, and all executed in so inimitable a manner -that it is unrecognisable when repeated on a musical instrument or -the human voice. One of these strains, curiously enough, is -identical with the song of a certain bush-warbler of western -Canada—as if the English vocalist had plagiarised the song of its -humbler cousin in compiling its incomparable repertoire. The song -of the mocking-bird is a magnificent medley, made up of the calls, -trills, twitters, warbles, warnings, and love-songs, of a score or -more of other birds. I have heard this bird along the Solomon and -Arkansas valleys repeat in the most perfect manner the notes and -songs of the pewee, purple martin, kingbird, flicker, blue jay, -catbird, canary, crow, English sparrow, red-headed woodpecker, -quail, cardinal, cuckoo, robin, red-wings, grackle, meadowlark, -night-hawk, whip-poor-will, besides many other calls and notes, -perhaps of birds I did not know. In the case of some of these birds -the mocker made all of the different sounds of each bird. The song -of the mocking-bird is delivered at any time, day or night, and -generally in a state of high ecstasy and excitement, the performer -flying from tree to tree and from house-top to barn-top, -occasionally throwing himself into the air in the most absurd -manner, and all the time pouring forth such a stream of melody that -one would think all the birds in the neighbourhood had suddenly -come together and let loose in a grand festival of song.</p> -<p>According to Chapman, many of the notes of birds are language -notes rather than sounds expressive of sentiment. Of the robin this -well-known student of birds says: ‘The song and call-notes of this -bird, while familiar to everyone, are in reality understood by no -one, and offer excellent subjects for the student of bird language. -Its notes express interrogation, suspicion, alarm, and caution, and -it signals to its companions to take wing. Indeed, few of our birds -have a more extended vocabulary.’ Winchell says that the common -English sparrow has as many as seven different notes, which it uses -to express the thoughts and feelings passing through its rather -active but not very highly honoured head: (1) The common note of -address of the male to the female; (2) a note of alarm used by both -male and female adults, but never by the young; (3) an emphatic -alarm note, always uttered by sentinels when a hawk is near or when -a man approaches with a gun; (4) the note of the female when -surrounded by several noisy and contending male rivals; (5) an -autumn cry uttered by the first one of the company perceiving -danger and flying up from the hedges and fields—never uttered by -young, but by adults of both sexes; (6) the love note of both male -and female, used mostly by the female, and generally with a -fluttering or shaking accompaniment of her wings; (7) a curious -note sometimes heard in London—meaning not well understood, but -supposed to be a sort of chuckle or sign of contentment. Each one -of these several different notes may be used to stand for various -ideas depending on the circumstances by being given different -emphasis and inflection, just as in the languages of many primitive -races of men a small vocabulary of words is used to stand for a -much larger number of ideas by being pronounced differently. In the -Chinese language, for instance, the words are increased to three or -four times the original number by modulation; but the same thing is -observed in all languages, both human and non-human. Verbal poverty -is pieced out by verbal variation. We say ać-cent or ac-cent́, -depending on whether we wish to express the idea of a noun or a -verb.</p> -<p>The memory of birds is well developed. Many of them remember the -very grove or meadow, and even the very knot-hole or bush, in which -they built their nest the season before, although in the meantime -they have journeyed over lands and seas and sojourned thousands of -miles away. Every year, for several seasons past, in late summer -and early fall, after the nesting-time is over and the young ones -are all grown, the purple martins have gathered in large numbers -about the Field Columbian Museum, in Jackson Park, Chicago. They -stay here for a few weeks, foraging the surrounding air for insects -by day, and sleeping on the great dome of the Museum by night, -finally flying away to be seen no more in such numbers till next -year. These birds, many of them anyway, must remember from one year -to another this annual assembly here by the big waters, else why -would they come together at this particular spot from all over the -country? I have no doubt that some of them, having sojourned here -year after year for some time, remember well the great ugly -building where they meet, and are more or less familiar with the -surrounding locality from having searched it so often. I wonder -what led to the establishing of the custom in the first place. -Customs do not fall from the skies. And what advantage is there in -the practice? What are they up to as they chirp and wheel in the -air, and flutter up the slopes and sail down again, and perch on -the pinnacles and twitter? Maybe it is a sort of Saratoga for them, -where they all come together ostensibly to dip their bills in the -blue waves, but where sons swell in their new feathers, and sly -mammas find prospects for unmarketable misses.</p> -<p>A parrot has been known to remember the voice of its mistress -after an absence of a year and a half—a very remarkable feat even -for the grey matter of a bird. A flock of geese mentioned by -Romanes showed their knowledge of the arrival of market-day, which -came every two weeks, by assembling regularly on such days, early -in the morning, in front of the town inn where the market was held, -to pick up the corn. They never came on the wrong day; and on one -occasion, when the market was omitted on account of a holiday, here -came the unfailing fowls cackling and shouting as usual in merry -anticipation of their fortnightly feast, but ignorant of the -national necessities which had doomed them to be -disappointed.<sup><small><a href="#part2-chapter3-footnote6" id= -"part2-chapter3-ref6d" name= -"part2-chapter3-ref6d">[6d]</a></small></sup></p> -<p>Parrots remember and call for their absent friends, and mumble -phrases in their dreams which have been taught to them. These -gifted birds learn long poems by heart, and sing songs with -considerable art. A parrot belonging to the canon of the Cathedral -of Salzburg was given instruction regularly two hours every day for -ten years, from 1830 to 1840. The bird became very proficient in -speech and exceedingly intelligent. It took part in conversations, -whistled tunes, and was able to sing a number of popular songs, -among them an entire aria from Flotow’s opera of -‘Martha’.<sup><small><a href="#part2-chapter3-footnote7" id= -"part2-chapter3-ref7a" name= -"part2-chapter3-ref7a">[7a]</a></small></sup></p> -<p>Educated birds though, like educated dogs, horses, cats, mice, -men, and everything else, are very different beings from the -uneducated. Cultivation is a key that unlocks all sorts of -miracles. Cats are cultivated tigers; and the richest grains that -ripen in the fields of men, and the loveliest flowers that blow, -are only educated weeds. Even the flea may be taught to exchange -leaping for walking, to draw a tiny wagon, to ride on the seat, to -fire a toy cannon, and do many other feats.</p> -<p>There is one family of birds in which the superior size, -gorgeousness, and vivacity, usual to the males, are found in the -other sex, the females being the larger and more brightly -coloured—the Phalarope family. Indeed, the members of this small -family not only reverse the usual arrangement of the sexual -characters of birds, but completely upset many of the most -cherished traditions of the avian household. The female does the -wooing, and takes the lead in selecting the nest site. And while -she lays the eggs, the privilege of incubation she hands over -magnanimously to her dull-coloured mate.</p> -<p>Birds have a keen observation and a good deal of that invaluable -faculty known as common-sense. It is wonderful how quickly they -learn to avoid telegraph-wires when these invisible but deadly -gossamers are first stretched across a country, and how unerringly -they keep at safe distances when hunted with firearms. An -experienced crow can tell a cane from a gun-barrel almost as far as -he can see it.</p> -<p>Nearly all birds build nests of some kind in which to cradle -their eggs and young. The cow-bird and cuckoo (European), however, -are exceptions. These birds have the rather human practice of -turning their cares and labours over to somebody else. They are -loafers and parasites. They lay their eggs secretly in the nests of -other birds, where their eggs are hatched and their young cared for -by an alien mother. I have seen a mother song-sparrow hustling -about among the shrubs and grasses for an hour at a time almost, -gathering food for a young cow-bird nearly twice as big as she was, -while her foundling sat phlegmatically at the foot of a tree -chirping and fluttering its wings, and acting as a thankless and -apparently bottomless receptacle for the morsel after morsel -laboriously harvested for it by its tireless little foster-mother. -Sand-martins and kingfishers burrow in the earth and rear their -broods in subterranean cradles; gulls and gamebirds build on the -ground; the flamingoes and barn-swallows build mud nests; the -woodpeckers mine holes in trees; doves and eagles make platforms of -sticks; the tailor-bird bastes living leaves together; the social -weavers construct great straw roofs covering the top of a tree, and -build their nests on the limbs beneath; most singing birds build -daintily-lined baskets, and swing them in trees and bushes.</p> -<p>It is often said that all the birds of a species build their -nests in precisely the same way, and that, while men change and -improve their dwelling-places from generation to generation, birds -build their abodes in the same old way, just as their ancestors -built theirs centuries and centuries ago. This is a favourite -thought with the fogies, with those who change not in their -thinking from the ways hacked out for them centuries and centuries -ago. Birds are like men. Some of them—some races and some -individuals—are much more given to initiative than others. There is -as wide a difference between the hang-bird and the auk in the -construction of their domiciles as between the millionaire and the -savage. And the hang-bird has come by her home-making art through -centuries of improvement, just as the millionaire has arrived at -his. It is believed by ornithologists that the first nests of birds -were the niches of rocks or simple hollows scooped in the sand and -soil, such as are still seen among the more primitive bird races, -and that from these aboriginal beginnings have come, through ages -of evolution, the elaborate creations of the cotton-bird, -weaver-bird, tailorbird, oven-bird, the baya-sparrow, the finches, -and the orioles. The savage who lives unmolested generation after -generation in the same land and country builds his simple hut in -just the same way as his ancestors built theirs, and thinks the -same things his ancestors thought a thousand years before him. Sir -Samuel Baker, in a paper on ‘The Races of the Nile Basin,’ points -out that each tribe of men in eastern Africa, like each species of -bird, has its own peculiar style of hut, and that the huts of the -various tribes are as constant in their types as are the nests of -birds. The same thing is true of their headdresses as of their -huts; and this fixed character exists also in their languages, -customs, and religions. It is only some races of men that are given -to growth and fluidity, and only some men of these special -races.</p> -<p>Right in our own country, among the remote mountain recesses of -Appalachia, surrounded on all sides by the most wonderful -development, material and intellectual, the world has ever seen, -lives a race of rude mountain folk almost as aboriginal in their -ways and views of life, and as unaffected by civilisation, as if -they were in the heart of Africa. They live huddled together in -one-room log-cabins without windows or floors, eat bacon and -cornmeal, carry on almost constant wars, and execute the deputies -of civilisation who happen to stray into their illicit dominions, -just as they have done from the time these mountain silences were -first broken by them 150 or 200 years ago.</p> -<p>Birds, as a rule, use a great deal of care and thought in the -location of their nests. After they have selected a certain grove -or field as the one best suited to their purposes, or as the one -around which cluster the happiest memories, it usually requires -several days of flying and peeping about, of spying and -exploration, before the exact spot for the precious domicile is -finally settled upon. It is a delicate matter for many birds, for -security from sun, storm, and enemies must all be taken into -account. Old birds, as has been frequently observed, build better -nests and select more clever locations for their nests than the -young and inexperienced. The nest-building habits of many birds are -known to have changed during the past few hundred years. The -American house-swallow did most certainly not build under the eaves -of human houses 300 years ago, nor did the hair-bird in her nest -with horsehair as she invariably does now. The fact that wrens, -swifts, and martins now build almost altogether in boxes and -chimneys shows that birds are able and willing to adapt themselves -to new conditions. The chimney-swift and purple martin, it is said, -still cling to their aboriginal custom of rearing their young in -hollow trees in the unsettled parts of America. The indomitable -house-sparrow builds its nest almost anywhere, from knot-holes and -tin cans to electric-light globes and tree-tops. Its original -dwelling was probably an arboreal affair, like that of other -sparrows, and different nesting-places have been adopted as a -result of its association with man. Not only in its architecture, -but in several other ways, this bird has departed from the -traditions of its tribe. The Fringillidae (the sparrow family of -birds) are seed-eaters, both in structure and practice. But the -house-sparrow, since it left the fields and groves to become a -gamin on human streets, has learned to eat almost anything, and one -thing, too, about as cheerfully as another. The varied habits of -this bird are probably due to its natural elasticity in the first -place, supplemented by the unsettling influences of its rather -kaleidoscopic experiences during the past few hundred years.</p> -<p>The fear of birds for man is an acquired trait due to ages of -persecution. If man would treat birds kindly, they would act toward -him as they do toward any other friendly animal. When unfrequented -islands are first visited by man, the birds are found to be -perfectly fearless of him, flying about him, feeding from his hand, -and manifesting no more timidity than if he were a big-hearted bird -himself. Darwin states that, when he stopped at the Galapagos -Islands on his famous trip around the world in the <em>Beagle</em>, -he found the birds there so tame that he could push them from the -branches of the trees with his gun-barrel. Professor Cutting, of -the State University of Iowa, in an article in the <em>Popular -Science Monthly</em> for August, 1903, tells of the almost absolute -fearlessness of the birds on the island of Laysan, an isolated -atoll in the Pacific west of the Hawaian Islands, which he visited -during that summer. The island swarms with bird life—petrels, -albatrosses, and tropical birds of various kinds—and these birds -betray no more fear in the presence of man than if he were a cow. -The albatrosses were so numerous and so indifferent to the presence -of man that it was necessary to shove them aside with one’s foot to -keep from stepping on them when one went for a walk along the -sand-stretches of the shore. Professor Cutting took photographs of -birds which literally posed for him in all sorts of positions, and -half-savage jackies amused themselves by going about and pulling -the pretty tail feathers from the tropical birds as they sat on -their nests. I have known of two cases where persons, by going to -the same place day after day with food and kindness, have in the -course of a few weeks taught robins, sparrows, and other birds, to -lose all fear of them, so much so as to sit on their shoulders and -arms and eat out of their hands. This is the spirit all birds would -show all the time toward their featherless lords if these -featherless ones would only treat them with half the consideration -they merit.</p> -<p>The love of a bird for the treasures of her nest is one of the -most beautiful things of this world. Mother-like, the parent bird -will do anything almost for the sake of her little ones. Who has -not seen the kildeer strive with all the tact of her clever little -soul to allure some big giant of a human being, who has wandered -into her neighbourhood, away from her nest of precious young? Many -a time as a boy on the farm I have followed one of these birds -limping and tumbling and fluttering along on the ground a few feet -ahead of me, utterly disabled, as I supposed, but always managing -to keep just a little beyond the reach of my eager hands. And when -the artful mother has led me far from the sacred spot where lay all -there was in this world to her, how triumphantly she has lifted -herself on her unharmed wings and, to my utter astonishment, sailed -away. The partridge and the mourning-dove are, if possible, even -more artful in their acting than the kildeer. After I became a -large boy and had been told the meaning of these exhibitions by -parent birds, I often followed the mourning-dove, thinking the bird -must be really wounded after all, so perfectly did it pretend. But -the cunning of the kildeer is not confined to luring one away from -the nest. If by some accident one finds her nest (and the nest is -so cleverly concealed that, if it is discovered at all, it will be -by pure accident), the resourceful mother is ready with other -expedients to outwit you. She watches you all the time from the -proper distance, and knows by your conduct the moment you have -found her nest. And before you have even had time to admire the -skill displayed by the mother in blending so perfectly her abode -with its surroundings, a single peculiar note from her has caused -the whole nestful of cuddling young ones to dart out of their -cradle and disappear among the surrounding clods as if by magic. No -amount of searching can find one of them. They have vanished as -effectually as if they had evaporated. And it is enough to touch -the heart of the most indifferent to see the anxious mother bird, -as I have seen her from the cranny of a neighbouring rock-pile, -come back to her nest and call her scattered children together -again after they have once dispersed at her command. Circling -around the nest two or three times to assure herself that no one is -nigh, she alights and begins a low clucking sound like that of a -hen calling her brood. The little ones come out of their -hiding-places one after another as mysteriously as they vanished. -You can’t see for the life of you where they come from. They seem -to just <em>emanate</em>. And if one of them fails to come at her -call—for the devoted mother knows very well just how many she -has—she extends her search farther out from her nest, looking all -around and keeping up that peculiar little cluck, until the -half-scared-to-death little slyboots finally comes creeping out -from his improvised snuggery somewhere. If a kildeer’s nest has -once been found, and the mother feels that it is in danger of -future visits, she will move her family at night to some other -locality, and it is practically impossible ever to find it again. -The family relations of the ring-dotterels are said to be ‘so -charming and touching that even hunters recoil from shooting a -female surrounded by her young ones.’</p> -<p>Human beings, true to their instinct never to call into action -their ability to think if they can employ their faculty for -nonsense instead, call this love of the mother bird ‘machinery.’ -But there are some of us (and our numbers are increasing) who are -disposed to put off the adoption of this conclusion until we go -mad. The bird builds her nest, weaving it of the rarest fibres. She -hides it in the copse or prudently hangs it far out on some -inaccessible bough. She lays her beautiful eggs, and hatches them -with the warmth and life of her own breast. She tends her young, -bringing them food and drink, and watching over them with a tender -and tireless vigilance. She protects them in storm with her own -little body, worries about them when danger lurks, and dreams of -them, no doubt, as she rocks and sleeps under the silent stars. She -sings to them in the overflow of her gladness and hope, and risks -her very existence to shield them from harm. She teaches them to -fly, to find their food, and to detect their enemies. She is true -to her mate, and her mate is true and kind to her. As the days of -summer shorten, and the cool, long nights warn of approaching -autumn, she leads her children away from the old place, she and her -faithful mate, out into the wide old world. And I say there is love -in the heart of that mother as truly as in the heart of woman, and -there are joy and genuineness and sorrow and fidelity in that -sylvan home more sacred than may sometimes bloom in the cold -mansions of men.</p> -<p>Conjugal love is also very strong in many of the feathered -races, especially among those in which the wedding is for -successive seasons or for life. The pining of love-birds for their -dead sweethearts is well known. The mandarin duck is proverbial for -its marital faithfulness, and a pair of these fowls is carried by -the Chinese in their marriage processions as an emblem of -constancy. Many instances are recorded of birds, after having been -deprived of their mates, refusing steadfastly the attentions of -other birds, and even sometimes separating themselves entirely from -the society of their kind. The following account of the devotion of -a widowed pigeon for her deceased consort sounds like a tale of -human woe:</p> -<p>‘A man set to watch a field much patronised by pigeons shot an -old male pigeon who had long been an inhabitant of the farm. His -mate, around whom he had for many a year cooed, whom he had -nourished with his own crop and had assisted in rearing numerous -young ones immediately settled on the ground by his side She -refused to leave him, and manifested her grief in the most -expressive manner. The labourer took up the dead bird and hung it -on a stake. The widow still refused to forsake her husband, and -continued day after day slowly walking around the stake on which -his body hung. The kind-hearted wife of the farmer heard of the -matter, and went to the relief of the stricken bird. On arriving at -the spot, she found the poor bird still watching at the side of her -dead, and making an occasional effort to get to him. She was much -spent with her long fasting and grief. She had made a circular -beaten path around the corpse of her -companion’.<sup><small><a href="#part2-chapter3-footnote8" id= -"part2-chapter3-ref8a" name= -"part2-chapter3-ref8a">[8a]</a></small></sup></p> -<p>And these are the beings whose bones men jest over at their -feasts, and brutes shoot for pastime on human holidays. Much has -been said of the sorrow of birds for their deceased mates, but not -too much. For the avian soul may be smothered by the gloom and -loneliness that come upon the heart, when the great light of love -and companionship has gone out, quite as completely as the soul of -a bereaved human. In not many human homes where loved ones lie sick -and dying are felt the pangs of more genuine grief than those -sometimes suffered by birds when their friends and companions are -stricken in death. The following incident, vouched for by Dr. -Franklin, who observed it, is only one among many such instances -recorded in the literature on birds:</p> -<p>A pair of parrots had lived together on the most loving terms -for four years, when the female was taken with a serious attack of -gout. She grew rapidly worse, and was soon so weak as to be unable -to leave her perch for food, when the male, faithful and tender as -a human spouse, took it upon himself to carry food to her regularly -in his beak. ‘He continued feeding her in this way for four months, -but the infirmities of his companion increased day by day, until at -last she was no longer able to support herself on the perch. She -remained cowering down in the bottom of the cage, making from time -to time ineffectual efforts to regain her perch. The male was -always near her, and did everything in his power to aid the feeble -efforts of his dear better-half. Seizing the poor invalid by the -beak or the upper part of her wing, he tried his best to enable her -to rise, and repeated his efforts several times. His constancy, his -gestures, and his continued solicitude, all showed in this -affectionate bird the most ardent desire to relieve the sufferings -and assist the weakness of his sinking companion. But the scene -became still more affecting when the female was dying. Her unhappy -consort moved about her incessantly, his attentions and tender -cares redoubled. He even tried to open her beak to give some -nourishment. He ran to her, and then returned with a troubled and -agitated look. At intervals he uttered the most plaintive cries; -then, with his eyes fixed on her, kept a mournful silence. At -length his companion breathed her last. From that moment he pined -away, and in the course of a few weeks died’.<sup><small><a href= -"#part2-chapter3-footnote6" id="part2-chapter3-ref6e" name= -"part2-chapter3-ref6e">[6e]</a></small></sup></p> -<p>Even the rough-looking ostrich has sensibility enough to die of -a broken heart, as was the case in the Jardin des Plantes at Paris -a few years ago. There is many a heart with a slabless grave far -from the haunts of men, and many a tear in secret brews that never -wets the eye.</p> -<p>The individual who has never acquired the enthusiasm for a -knowledge of the birds and a love for their presence and -association has omitted some of the richest emotions of life. ‘The -sight of a bird or the sound of its voice is at all times an event -of such significance to me,’ says Chapman, ‘a source of such -unfailing pleasure, that when I go afield with those to whom birds -are strangers I am deeply impressed by the comparative barrenness -of their world, for they live in ignorance of a great store of -enjoyment that might be theirs for the asking.’</p> -<blockquote> -<p>‘I cannot love the man who does not love, As men love light, the -song of happy birds.’</p> -</blockquote> -<p>I have seen a mother mouse in a moment of peril flee from her -home among the falling pieces of a cord-wood pile, and disappear -under the roots of a neighbouring oak. I have seen her a little -later, recovered from her initial dismay, making her way back -again, clambering along among the tangled timbers, stopping now and -then to look and listen, her eyes wild and anxious, and her whole -little body quaking with excitement. I have seen her go among the -ruins of her dwelling, take a poor little squeaking young one in -her mouth, and hurry away with it to the gloomy refuge in the roots -of the oak. I have watched her return again and again, each time -taking in her careful teeth the tiny body of a babe, until five -mouthfuls of precious pink were safely lodged within the fortress -of the oak. And I could as soon believe that woman, when she saves -her children from some fearful harm, is a soulless machine as think -that that brave little wood-mother, out there alone under the -trees, snatching her darlings from the jaws of death, was a heroine -without sense or feeling. That little hairy mother with four feet -and bead-like eyes loved her young ones in just the same way and -for just the same reason as a human mother loves her young ones. -She looked upon her babies, in all probability, with the same -mother-love and tenderness as a human mother looks upon hers, and -felt in miniature, with evil hovering above them, the same -consternation a woman feels when destruction reaches out after -those that are nearest and dearest. And when it was all over, when -the good angel of deliverance had finally spread its healing white -wings over that afflicted family, the heart of that little rodent -was doubtless soothed by the same joy as that which, in the hour of -deliverance, calms the hearts of humankind.</p> -<p>Ants tend their fields, gather their harvests, domesticate other -insects, and keep slaves. They help each other bear heavy burdens, -extricate each other from misfortune, speak to each other when they -meet, and bury their dead. They build roads and bridges, and -manifest wonderful engineering skill in their construction. They -even tunnel under rivers. They go far from home, and find their way -back again. They inhabit towns, and build splendid and spacious -palaces. Each ant knows every other citizen of its own town, and an -ant from any other town is immediately recognised as a foreigner. -Ants have their overseers of industrial enterprises, and regular -hours for work and sleep. The ant is the most pugnacious of all -animals, and the most muscular compared with its size. It will -boldly attack the biggest creature that walks if this creature -invades its home. It will fasten its mandibles into an enemy, and -allow itself to be torn to pieces without relaxing its hold. Among -some savage tribes, certain species of ants are said to be used as -surgeons. Infuriated ants are allowed to fasten their mandibles on -the opposite edges of a gash, and in this way the wound is closed. -The ants are decapitated, and their bodiless heads with their -relentless jaws serve as stitches to the wound. Ants have holidays -and athletic festivals. On such occasions they romp and chase each -other and play hide-and-seek like children. They stand on their -hind-legs, embrace each other with their fore-limbs, grasp each -other by the feet or antennae, pull each other down the entrances -to their towns, wrestle and roll over on the sand, and so on—all in -the friendliest manner. It is greatly to the credit of these little -people that no observer has ever yet known them to become so -inventively helpless or so athletically hard up as to play -slug-ball. Ants educate their young, and practise the fundamental -principles of human states and societies. Forel, the great Swiss -student of ants, says that several hundred nests are sometimes -united into a single confederation. Each ant knows every other ant -of the entire confederation, and they all take part in the common -defence. Haeckel says, speaking of social evolution in ants, that -the aboriginal ants of the Chalk Age had as little idea of the -division of labour and organisation of modern ant states as -paleolithic flint-chippers had of the complexity and organisation -of twentieth-century civilisation. ‘If we take an ant’s nest, we -not only see that work of every description—rearing of progeny, -foraging, building, rearing of aphides, and so on—is performed -according to the principles of voluntary mutual aid, but we must -also recognise, with Forel, that the fundamental feature of the -life of many species of ants is the obligation of every ant to -share its food, already swallowed and partly digested, with every -member of the community which may apply for it. Two ants belonging -to the same nest or to the same confederation of nests will -approach each other, exchange a few movements with the antennae, -and if one of them is hungry or thirsty—and especially if the other -has its crop full—it immediately asks for food. The individual thus -requested never refuses. It sets apart its mandibles, takes a -proper position, and regurgitates a drop of transparent fluid, -which is licked up by the hungry ant. Regurgitating food for others -is so prominent a feature in the life of the ants, and it so -constantly recurs both for feeding hungry comrades and for feeding -larvae, that Forel considers the digestive tube of ants to consist -of two different parts, one of which—the posterior—is for the -special use of the individual, and the other—the anterior part—is -chiefly for the use of the community. If an ant which has its crop -full has been selfish enough to refuse to feed a comrade, it will -be treated as an enemy. If the refusal has been made while its -kinsfolks were fighting with some other species, they will fall -upon the greedy individual with greater vehemence even than upon -the enemies themselves. All this has been confirmed by the most -accurate observations and experiments’.<sup><small><a href= -"#part2-chapter3-footnote9" id="part2-chapter3-ref9" name= -"part2-chapter3-ref9">[9]</a></small></sup></p> -<p>Ants keep slaves. And the slaves, in some instances, carry their -masters about, feed them, groom them, and attend to their every -want, just as human lackeys do helpless aristocrats. In some -species the institution of slavery is so old that the physical -structures of the masters have been modified until the masters are -physically unable to feed themselves, and will perish from hunger, -though surrounded by food, if they are left to themselves. The -brain of the ant, as Darwin says, is one of the most wonderful bits -of matter in the universe. It is scarcely one-fourth the size of -the head of a pin, yet it is the seat of the most astonishing -wisdom and activity. If human intelligence were as great, compared -with the mass of the human brain, as is the ant’s, man would be -several hundred times as wise as he is now, and would then probably -not fall far short of that state of erudition which the average man -imagines he already represents. Ants remember, and a fact becomes -impressed by repetition, showing that the faculty of memory in ants -is governed by the same laws as is this faculty in man. Sir John -Lubbock found it necessary to teach his ants the way by repeating -the lesson where the way was long or unusual. ‘Sensation, -perception, and association follow in the social insects, on the -whole, the same fundamental laws as in the vertebrates, including -ourselves. Furthermore, attention is surprisingly developed in -insects’ (Forel). Ants keep standing armies, make alliances, and -maraud neighbouring states. They have their wars, civil and -foreign, and their massacres and enslavements of the conquered. But -they have never got so low yet, so far as anyone knows, as to -hypocritically prosecute their conquests in the name of God and -humanity. The battlefields of ants resemble the carnage-plains of -men, strewn with ghastly corpses and covered with the headless and -dying. And the accounts of their expeditions—their going forth in -regular columns, with captains, scouts, and skirmish lines, their -battles, and their return laden with plunder and captives—read like -the grisly tales of human history. Ants perform, in short, about -all the antics of civilised man, except maltreating the females and -drinking gin. And shall we say their civilisation is less real -because it is miniature and because it is carried on far below the -Brobdingnagian contemplations of man? ‘When we see an ant-hill -tenanted by thousands of industrious inhabitants, excavating -chambers, forming tunnels, making roads, guarding their home, -gathering food, feeding the young, tending their domestic animals, -each one fulfilling its duties industriously and without confusion, -it is difficult altogether to deny them the gift of reason or to -escape the conviction that their mental powers differ from those of -men not so much in kind as in degree’ (Lubbock).</p> -<p>The industrious and gifted bee, with its wonderful social -system, in advance even of that of the most enlightened societies -of men; the generous horse, who thinks and feels so much more than -the clowns who maul him ever suspect; the artful spider, that -confirmed waylayer lurking in his lair of silk; the soft and -predaceous cat; the timid-hearted hare, poor hounded little dweller -of the fields and stream-sides; the beautiful and vivacious -squirrel; the lowly lady-bug; the cautious fox; the irascible -serpent, so cruelly misunderstood by men; the patient camel; the -scornful peafowl; the indomitable goat; the grave and vindictive -elephant; the ingenious beaver, the woodman of the primeval -wilderness; the lordly and polygamous cock; the maternal hen; the -wary trout, beset everywhere by the villainous traps of impostors; -the bride-like butterfly; the delicate antelope and deer; and the -sturdy, incorruptible ox—all of these beings have within them souls -composed primarily of the same elements as those that compose the -souls of men.</p> -<p>Ground-wasps have been observed to use tiny stones as hammers in -packing the dirt firmly over their nests—a very remarkable act of -intelligence, since the use of tools is not common even among the -higher mammals.<sup><small><a href="#part2-chapter3-footnote10" id= -"part2-chapter3-ref10" name= -"part2-chapter3-ref10">[10]</a></small></sup></p> -<p>Fishes have been taught to assemble at the ringing of a bell, -and toads and tortoises to come at the call of their favourite -friends. An alligator which was kept tame for several years became -so much attached to its master that ‘it followed him about the -house like a dog, scrambling up the stairs after him, and showing -much affection and docility.’ The favourite friend and companion of -this alligator was the cat; and, whenever the cat stretched herself -on the floor in front of the fire, the alligator would lie down -beside her, with its head on the cat, and go to sleep. ‘When the -cat was absent, the alligator was restless, but it always appeared -happy when the cat was near it’.<sup><small><a href= -"#part2-chapter3-footnote8" id="part2-chapter3-ref8b" name= -"part2-chapter3-ref8b">[8b]</a></small></sup></p> -<p>Wolves and foxes sometimes cooperate with each other in their -hunting expeditions, somewhat as men do in theirs. One of their -number will crouch in ambush by the side of a road known to be used -by hares or other small animals, and leap on the unsuspecting -fugitives when driven that way by others of the hunting band. Many -animals post sentinels when they eat or sleep or engage in other -hazardous undertakings, and these sentinels show a good deal of -discrimination in distinguishing between animals that are friendly -and those that are not. Beavers not only build lodges to live in, -but also construct dams to keep the water in which the villages are -located at a certain height. The outlet of these dams is carefully -regulated, being regularly lessened and enlarged to suit the supply -of water in the stream. The trees used by the beavers in their -enterprises are felled by them along the margins of the stream, and -floated to the place where they are used. In old communities, where -the supply of timber near the stream has been exhausted, artificial -canals are cut by these indomitable engineers for use in the -transportation of their materials. These excavations are made at a -great cost of labour and for the deliberate purpose of enabling the -builders to accomplish that which they could not accomplish in any -other way. ‘In executing this purpose,’ says Romanes, ‘there is -sometimes displayed a depth of engineering forethought over details -of structure required by the circumstances of special localities -which is even more astonishing than the execution of the general -idea’.<sup><small><a href="#part2-chapter3-footnote6" id= -"part2-chapter3-ref6f" name= -"part2-chapter3-ref6f">[6f]</a></small></sup> When, for instance, a -canal has been carried so far from the original water-supply that, -owing to the rising ground, it cannot be continued without a very -great expenditure of effort in digging, a second dam is built -higher up-stream, and with water drawn from this the canal is -continued on at a higher level. Sometimes a third dam is built -above the second, and the canal again continued at a still higher -level before the valuable timber of the higher grounds is reached. -These enterprising rodents also carve sometimes enormous channels -across the necks of land formed by winding rivers, to serve as -cut-offs in travel and transportation. And yet all of these -things—all of the intelligence, feeling, and ingenuity displayed by -the non-human races—are still lumped together by belated -psychologists under the head of ‘instinct,’ by which is meant a -blind, unconscious knack of doing the right thing without in any -way realising what is being done or what it is being done for! The -principle in accordance with which mind is denied to non-human -beings would, if carried to its legitimate conclusions, make -machines out of all of us, and limit the possession of conscious -intelligence to the individual who promulgates the theory. The -attitude assumed by many psychologists toward the mental faculties -of inferior races reminds one of Heine’s interview with the old -lizard at Lucca. In the discussion which ensued between the poet -and the reptile, the poet dropped the words, ‘I think.’ ‘Think!’ -snapped the lizard with a sharp, aristocratic tone of profound -contempt—‘think! Which of you thinks? For 3,000 years, wise sir, I -have investigated the spiritual functions of animals, and I have -made men and apes the special objects of my study. I have devoted -myself to these queer creatures with as great zeal and diligence as -Lyonnet to his caterpillars. And as the result of my researches, I -can assure you no man thinks. Now and then something occurs to him, -and these accidentally occurring somethings he calls thoughts, and -the stringing of them together he calls thinking. But you can take -my word for it, no man thinks—no philosopher thinks. And, so far as -philosophy is concerned, it is mere air and water, like pure -vapours in the sky. There is, in reality, only one true philosophy, -and that is engraven in eternal hieroglyphics on my own -tail’.<sup><small><a href="#part2-chapter3-footnote7" id= -"part2-chapter3-ref7b" name= -"part2-chapter3-ref7b">[7b]</a></small></sup></p> -<p>This attitude of the lordly saurian toward the human race is a -stinging burlesque on the anthropocentric conceit which perverts -all of man’s views of the other orders of life.</p> -<p>It is not contended that non-human beings are psychically -identical with human beings. The races of men are not psychically -identical with each other. The difference between the intellectual -splendours of a Spencer evolving volumes of the profoundest -philosophy and the mind of an Australian who cannot count six, or -between the understanding of an Edison, the wizard of the -electrical world, and that of the South Sea islanders, who, when -Captain Cook gave them some English nails, planted them in the hope -of raising a new crop, is almost infinite. The lowest races of men -have neither superstition nor the power of abstract thought as have -the higher races. They have a word for black stone, white stone, -and brown stone, but no word for stone; for elm-tree, oak-tree, and -the like, but no word for tree. As Kingsley says, ‘It is difficult -to believe that a dog does not form as clear an abstract idea of a -tree as these people do.’ There are human beings living in the -forests of Asia, Africa, and Australasia that wander about from -place to place in herds without chief, law, weapons, or fixed -habitations. They go naked, mate by chance, and climb trees like -monkeys. Some of these races know nothing of fire, religion, or a -moral world, chatter to each other like apes, and live on such -natural products as roots, fruits, serpents, mice, ants, and honey. -One of these creatures, we are told, will lie flat on his front for -an hour by the runway of a field-mouse, waiting for a chance to -snatch up the little creature when it comes along and eat it. -Dozens of such degraded races are mentioned by Blichner in his -‘Man: Past, Present, and Future,’ and by Sir John Lubbock in his -‘Origin of Civilisation.’</p> -<p>Non-human beings have, as a rule, neither the psychic variety -nor the intensity of higher humans. And it is not contended that in -language, science, and superstition they are capable of being -compared with the foremost few of civilised societies, any more -than savages, especially the lowest savages, are capable of such -comparison. But it is maintained that the non-human races of the -earth are <em>not</em> the metallic and soulless lot of fixtures -they are vulgarly supposed to be; that they are just as real living -beings, with just as precious nerves and just as genuine feelings, -rights, heartaches, capabilities, and waywardnesses, as we -ourselves: and that, since they are our own kith and kindred, we -have no right whatever, higher than the right of main strength -(which is the right of devils), to assume them to be, and to treat -them as if they were, our natural and legitimate prey.</p> -<p><small id="part2-chapter3-footnote1"><a href= -"#part2-chapter3-ref1">1.</a> Darwin: <em>Expression of Emotions in -Men and Animals</em>; New York, 1899.</small><br /> -<small id="part2-chapter3-footnote2"><a href= -"#part2-chapter3-ref2">2.</a> Starr: <em>Human Progress</em>; -Pennsylvania, 1895.</small><br /> -<small id="part2-chapter3-footnote3"><a href= -"#part2-chapter3-ref3a">3a.</a> <a href= -"#part2-chapter3-ref3b">3b.</a> <a href= -"#part2-chapter3-ref3c">3c.</a> Hartmann: <em>Anthropoid Apes</em>; -New York, 1901.</small><br /> -<small id="part2-chapter3-footnote4"><a href= -"#part2-chapter3-ref4a">4a.</a> <a href= -"#part2-chapter3-ref4b">4b.</a> Brehm: <em>From North Pole to -Equator</em>; London, 1896.</small><br /> -<small id="part2-chapter3-footnote5"><a href= -"#part2-chapter3-ref5">5.</a> Stanley: <em>In Darkest Africa</em>, -vol i.; New York, 1890.</small><br /> -<small id="part2-chapter3-footnote6"><a href= -"#part2-chapter3-ref6a">6a.</a> <a href= -"#part2-chapter3-ref6b">6b.</a> <a href= -"#part2-chapter3-ref6c">6c.</a> <a href= -"#part2-chapter3-ref6d">6d.</a> <a href= -"#part2-chapter3-ref6e">6e.</a> <a href= -"#part2-chapter3-ref6f">6f.</a> Romanes: <em>Animal -Intelligence</em>; New York, 1899.</small><br /> -<small id="part2-chapter3-footnote7"><a href= -"#part2-chapter3-ref7a">7a.</a> <a href= -"#part2-chapter3-ref7b">7b.</a> Evans: <em>Evolutional Ethics and -Animal Psychology</em>; New York, 1898.</small><br /> -<small id="part2-chapter3-footnote8"><a href= -"#part2-chapter3-ref8a">8a.</a> <a href= -"#part2-chapter3-ref8b">8b.</a> Jesse: <em>Gleanings in Natural -History</em>, vol. i.; London, 1832.</small><br /> -<small id="part2-chapter3-footnote9"><a href= -"#part2-chapter3-ref9">9.</a> Kropotkin: <em>Mutual Aid a Factor of -Evolution</em>; New York, 1902.</small><br /> -<small id="part2-chapter3-footnote10"><a href= -"#part2-chapter3-ref10">10.</a> Peckham and Peckham: <em>Instincts -and Habits of the Solitary Wasps</em>; Madison, Wisconsin, -1898.</small><br /></p> -<h3 id="part2-chapter4">IV. The Elements of Human and Non-human -Mind Compared.</h3> -<p>The analysis of human mind and the comparison of its elements or -powers with the powers of non-human mind corroborate the -conclusions already arrived at through observation and deductive -inference. The chief powers of the mind of man are -<em>sensation</em>, <em>memory</em>, <em>emotion</em>, -<em>imagination</em>, <em>volition</em>, <em>instinct</em>, and -<em>reason</em>. All of these faculties are found in non-human -beings, some of them developed to a much higher degree than they -are in man, and some of them to a much lower.</p> -<p><em>Sensation</em> is the effect produced on the mind when a -sense organ is affected in some way by external stimuli. Sensation -is the lumber of the mind, the raw material out of which are -elaborated all other forms of consciousness. The chief species of -sensation are those of sight, sound, smell, taste, and feeling. The -original sense was feeling, and out of this sense were evolved the -other four. The organs of seeing, hearing, smelling, and tasting -are therefore modifications of the skin, which is the organ of -original sense. The fact that in all animals, down almost to the -very beginnings of life, sense organs exist, suggests that -sensation may be almost, if not quite, coextensive with animal -life. All mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, and fishes have the -same special sense organs as man, and the organs of sight, sound, -taste, and smell occupy in all vertebrates the same relative -positions in the head. Birds see better than any other animals, and -carnivora smell better. Ruminants see, hear, and smell with great -acuteness. Fishes also see and hear well; and the wings of the bat -are so exceedingly sensitive that it will move about blindfolded -and with ears stopped with cotton almost as unerringly as when -aided by sight and sound. Insects have smell, sight, and taste well -developed, as is shown by their keen appreciation of the colours, -perfumes, and flavours of flowers. They also hear. Stridulation -proves this. Worms have eyes and ears, and land-leeches scent the -approach of their prey at a long distance. The starfish and the -medusa respond to all the five classes of stimuli which affect the -five senses of man, and nervous substance is found in all animals -above the sponge.</p> -<p><em>Memory</em> is the power of retaining or recognising past -states of consciousness. The power to retain impressions follows in -origin close upon the power to receive impressions. Memory is the -historic faculty of the mind—the power of the mind to store up its -experiences—and is found in nearly all animals. The lowly limpet, -whose world is a seaside rock, will come back from its little -roamings time after time to the same rude lodge from which it set -out. Bees remember where they get honey or sugar months afterwards, -and when it is necessary will sometimes go back to the old home -hive which they left the year before. Ants retrace their steps -after making long journeys from their nest, and are able in some -way to recognise their friends after months of separation. The -stickleback (fish) knows the way back to his nest, although he has -been absent several hours. Fishes return and hatch their young year -after year in the same waters; birds come back to their old -nesting-places; and horses remember their way along devious roads -over which they have not been for years. Horses used in the -delivery of milk, or in other occupations in which they are -accustomed to travel daily over about the same route, come in time -to remember every alley, street, and stopping-place of the whole -round almost as accurately as their drivers. Darwin’s dog -remembered and obeyed him after an absence of five years. The power -of dogs, squirrels, and other animals of remembering where they -have long before cached food is indeed wonderful. A squirrel will -come down out of a tree when the earth is covered to a depth of -several inches with lately fallen snow and hop away, without the -slightest hesitancy or mistake, to the exact spot where it has -months before stored its mid-winter acorns. A lion has been known -to recognise its keeper after seven years of separation, and an -elephant obeyed all his old words of command on being recaptured -after fifteen years of jungle life. The similarity of memory in -other animals to the same faculty in man is shown by the fact that -memory everywhere is governed by the same laws. In all animals, -including man, memory is strengthened by repetition—that is, -impressions are always deepened and confirmed by being made over -and over. A parrot or a raven masters a new sentence by working at -it and saying it over and over again, just as a boy memorises his -rules and catechisms.</p> -<p><em>Imagination</em> is the picturing power of the mind. In its -lowest stages of manifestation it is akin to memory. Imagination, -however, in its higher reaches, not only reimages previous -impressions, but combines them in new and original relations. -Imagination is displayed in dreams, images, delusions, -anticipation, and sympathy. It also furnishes wings for speculation -and reason. Spiders, when they attach stones to their webs to -steady them during anticipated gales, probably exercise -imagination. The tame serpent which was carried away from its -master’s house and found its way back again, though the distance -was one hundred miles, no doubt carried in its imagination vivid -pictures of its old home.<sup><small><a href= -"#part2-chapter4-footnote1" id="part2-chapter4-ref1a" name= -"part2-chapter4-ref1a">[1a]</a></small></sup> Cats, dogs, horses, -and other animals dream, and parrots talk in their sleep. Horses -and cattle sometimes stampede at imaginary objects, and often -distort real objects into imaginary monsters. When a horse at night -takes fright at a big black stump by the roadside, he no doubt -imagines it to be some terrible creature ready to eat him up if he -should go near it, just as a timid child does in the same -circumstances. There is a great difference in horses in this -respect, just as there is among children and men, some of them -taking fright at every unusual thing, while others are more bold or -stolid. The cat playing with a ball of yarn converts it by means of -its imagination into an object of prey, just as a girl converts a -doll into a baby, or a boy changes a stick into a steed. Sympathy -is the putting or picturing of one’s self in the place of another, -and by means of the imagination sharing or simulating the psychic -conditions of that other. This high and holy exercise of the -imagination is exhibited by horses, cattle, dogs, deer, elephants, -monkeys, and birds—in fact, by nearly all animals as far down as -the fishes and insects.</p> -<p><em>Emotion</em> is the stirring of the sensibilities by way of -the intellect or the imagination. The following emotions are found -in non-human beings: fear, surprise, affection, pugnacity, play, -pride, anger, jealousy, curiosity, sympathy, emulation, resentment, -appreciation of the beautiful, grief, hate, cruelty, joy, -benevolence, revenge, shame, remorse, and appreciation of the -ludicrous. Excepting the emotions of conscience and religion, which -are really compounds, with fear as the main ingredient, this list -of non-human emotions is coextensive with the list of human -emotions. Many of these emotions germinate low down in the animal -kingdom, fear, anger, sexuality, and jealousy all being found in -fishes and in the higher invertebrates. In the higher vertebrates -many of these emotions are almost as strong as they are in men. -Does anyone who has felt the throbbing sides of a frightened puppy -or hare have any doubt that these creatures suffer the keenest -agony of fear? Apes have been known to fall down and faint when -suddenly confronted by a snake, so great is their instinctive -horror of serpents; and gray parrots, which are extremely nervous -birds, have been known to drop from their perch unconscious under -the influence of great fear.<sup><small><a href= -"#part2-chapter4-footnote2" id="part2-chapter4-ref2" name= -"part2-chapter4-ref2">[2]</a></small></sup></p> -<p>The horse is, perhaps, of all animals, the one which -occasionally gives itself over most completely to the emotion of -fear, as everyone who has witnessed the terrible abandon of a -runaway team can testify. Ants, fishes, birds, cats, dogs, horses, -monkeys, porpoises, and many other animals play. Young kittens, -colts, and puppies enjoy a scuffle about as well as boys do. -Pugnacity originates among the spiders and insects, and is highly -developed in the ant, cock, and bulldog. This emotion is strong in -the males of nearly all vertebrates. Anyone who has observed the -vigilance displayed by fishes in protecting their nests can have -little doubt that these comparatively primitive beings possess -pugnacity. I was one evening floating in a boat by the edge of a -Long Island pond just over a village of perches. Each nest was -guarded by an assiduous male, who hovered over it vigilantly, or -darted this way and that to drive off the piscatorial <em>hoi -polloi</em> hanging about the neighbourhood, ready to slip in at -the first opportunity and eat the eggs. Just to see what would -happen, I put my hand down into the water and moved it slowly -toward one of the nests. To my surprise, the guardian of the nest, -instead of fleeing in alarm, proceeded to show fight. It chased my -hand away time after time, and when the hand was not removed it -would nip it vigorously, not once simply, but two or three times if -necessary, and each time with increasing energy. It contended with -the courage of a little hero. I pushed it and jostled it about, and -even took it in my hand and lifted it clear out of the water. To my -amazement, on getting back into the water, it returned promptly to -the attack. It fought until it was really fagged, for its onsets -were at last much feebler than at first. I came away after twenty -minutes, leaving the little hero in triumphant possession of his -charge.</p> -<p>Among some species of monkeys several individuals will join -together in overturning a stone for the possible ants’ eggs under -it; and, when a burying beetle has found a dead mouse or bird, it -goes and gets its companions to help it in the -interment.<sup><small><a href="#part2-chapter4-footnote3" id= -"part2-chapter4-ref3a" name= -"part2-chapter4-ref3a">[3a]</a></small></sup> Crows show -benevolence by feeding their blind and helpless companions, and -monkeys adopt the orphans of deceased members of their tribe. Brehm -saw two crows feeding in a hollow tree a third crow which was -wounded. They had evidently been doing this for some time, for the -wound was several weeks old. Darwin tells of a blind pelican which -was fed upon fishes, which were brought to it by its friends from a -distance of thirty miles.<sup><small><a href= -"#part2-chapter4-footnote4" id="part2-chapter4-ref4a" name= -"part2-chapter4-ref4a">[4a]</a></small></sup> The devotion of -cedar-birds to each other and their kindness to all birds in -distress are well known to every student of ornithology. Olive -Thorne Miller tells of a cedar-bird that raised a brood of young -robins that had been left orphans by the accidental killing of the -parents. Weddell saw more than once during his journey to Bolivia -that when a herd of vicunas were closely pursued the strong males -covered the retreat of the weaker and less swift members of the -herd by lagging behind and protecting them.<sup><small><a href= -"#part2-chapter4-footnote3" id="part2-chapter4-ref3b" name= -"part2-chapter4-ref3b">[3b]</a></small></sup></p> -<p>A remarkable instance of altruism which he once saw exhibited by -the king-crabs in a London aquarium is mentioned by Kropotkin in -his work on ‘Mutual Aid a Factor in Evolution.’ One of these crabs -had fallen on its back in a corner of the tank. And for one of -these great creatures, with its saucepan carapace, to get on its -back is, even in favourable circumstances, a serious matter. The -seriousness was increased in this instance by an iron bar, which -hindered the normal activities of the unfortunate crustacean. ‘Its -comrades came to the rescue, and for one hour’s time I watched how -they endeavoured to help their fellow-prisoner. They came two at -once, pushed their friend from beneath, and after strenuous efforts -succeeded in lifting it upright. But then the iron bar prevented -them from achieving the work of rescue, and the crab again fell -heavily on its back. After many attempts, one of the helpers went -into the depth of the tank and brought two other crabs, who began -with fresh forces the same pushing and lifting of their helpless -comrade. We stayed in the aquarium for more than two hours, and, -when leaving, came to cast a glance upon the tank. The work of -attempted rescue still continued. Since I saw that I cannot refuse -credit to the observation quoted by Dr. Erasmus Darwin that the -common crab during the moulting season stations a sentinel, an -unmolted or hard-shelled individual, to prevent marine enemies from -injuring moulted individuals in their unprotected state.’ Walruses -go to the defence of a wounded comrade when summoned by its cries -for help. Romanes tells of a gander who acted as a guardian to his -blind consort, taking her neck gently in his mouth and leading her -to the water when she wanted to take a swim, and after allowing her -to cruise for a time under his guidance and care, conducting her -back home again in the same thoughtful manner. When goslings were -hatched, this remarkable gander seemed to realise the inability of -the mother to look after them, for he took charge of them as if -they were his own, convoying them to the waterside, and lifting -them carefully out of the ruts and pits with his bill whenever they -got into difficulty.<sup><small><a href="#part2-chapter4-footnote1" -id="part2-chapter4-ref1b" name= -"part2-chapter4-ref1b">[1b]</a></small></sup></p> -<p>The disposition to go to the aid of a fellow in trouble is one -of the most characteristic traits in the psychology of the swine. A -single squeal of distress from even the scrawniest member of a -swine herd will bring down on the one who causes this distress the -hair-raising wrath of every porker within hearing. This trait has -been considerably reduced by domestication, and in those varieties -in which degeneracy has gone farthest it scarcely exists. But it is -exceedingly strong in all wild hogs. Animals as low in the scale of -development and as proverbially cold as snakes have been known, -when educated and treated with kindness, to manifest considerable -affection for their friends and masters. Nearly all domestic -animals display a good deal of affection, not only to their young, -but to adult members of their own kind and to their human masters. -The devotion of the dog to man is without a parallel anywhere. It -has been said that ‘the dog is the only thing on this earth that -loves you more than he loves himself.’ When dogs become so much -attached to their masters or mistresses that they pine and die on -being separated from them, they show beyond any question that they -have feelings which, in intensity, are not inferior to those -possessed by the more highly developed men and women. And this has -happened time after time.</p> -<p>A pathetic story of love and of its tragic close came last year -out of the Maine woods. Two moose, who had been tracked all day by -a couple of human tigers, were finally overtaken, when one of them -fell pierced by two rifle-balls. The remaining moose, instead of -dashing off into the forest, stood still, lowered its head, and -sniffed at its fallen companion. Then, raising its antlers high -into the air, it bellowed loudly. As the cry of the great creature -echoed through the forest, it also fell at the discharge of the -rifles. It was found on examination afterwards that the first moose -was blind, and that the second one, which had neglected to leave it -for safety, was its pilot.</p> -<p>My father once owned a cow who contracted a strong affection for -my sister. This cow, who showed on many occasions and in many ways -her highly developed emotional nature, would scarcely allow anyone -else than my sister to milk her. She always presented herself to my -sister as soon as she was let into the lot in order to be milked -first, and she was so jealous of this privilege that if it were not -accorded to her she would stand with her head down and give vent to -her unhappiness in low moans. After she was milked she would follow -her human friend around from one cow to another, in order to be as -near her as possible. She knew my sister’s voice from that of -everyone else, and would always low a response and come to her when -called by name, even though she were a quarter of a mile away in -the pasture. Romanes tells somewhere of a band of apes that were -being pursued by dogs when a young ape was cut off from the rest -and was about to be killed by the dogs. The chief of the band, -seeing the peril of the young one, went deliberately back and -rescued it.</p> -<p>Many animals show that they possess a rudimentary sense of -humour by the pranks and tricks which they play on each other and -on human beings. The monkey is the prince of nonhuman jokers, but -dogs, cats, horses, elephants, and other animals have enough of -this sense to have books written about it. A monkey has been -observed to slyly pass his hand back of a second monkey and tweak -the tail of a third one, and then composedly enjoy himself while -the resentment of the injured monkey expended itself on the -innocent middle one. Many monkeys enjoy entertaining their friends -with grimaces, by carrying a cane, putting a tin dish on their -heads, or other droll antics. These intelligent animals have a -sufficiently high appreciation of the ludicrous to dislike -ridicule. Like human beings, they can’t endure being laughed at, -and get mad if they are made the victims of a joke. Romanes’ monkey -was one day asked to crack a nut for the amusement of a visitor. -The nut turned out to be a bad one, and the melancholy look of -disappointment on the monkey’s face caused the visitor to laugh. -The insulted monkey flew into a rage, and hurled the nut at the -offending scoffer, then the hammer, and finally the coffee-pot -which simmered on the grate fire.<sup><small><a href= -"#part2-chapter4-footnote1" id="part2-chapter4-ref1c" name= -"part2-chapter4-ref1c">[1c]</a></small></sup> Darwin tells of a -baboon in the Zoological Gardens of London who always became -infuriated every time his keeper took out a letter or book and read -aloud to him. On one occasion when Darwin was present the baboon -became so furious that he bit his own leg until it -bled.<sup><small><a href="#part2-chapter4-footnote4" id= -"part2-chapter4-ref4b" name= -"part2-chapter4-ref4b">[4b]</a></small></sup></p> -<p>The emotion variously known as shame, regret, repentance, and -remorse, is not common among the non-human races. It is found -sometimes in dogs and monkeys, and especially in educated -anthropoids. But this emotion is exceedingly rare among savages, -and is not at all universal even among civilised societies of men. -Some animals manifest self-restraint, which is an exceedingly elite -quality of mind, and one not so common as it might be even among -the higher breeds of mankind. By restraint is meant the inhibition -of a desire or instinct in the presence of circumstances tending to -render the desire or instinct active—and this is obedience, and the -beginning of morality. A dog that will not chase a hare in the -presence of his master may do so in his absence. I taught my -guinea-pigs to abstain from certain food in their presence which -they wanted very much, and which they would have eaten if they had -not been educated to let it alone. Sympathy is the most beautiful -of all terrestrial emotions. It is manifested, sometimes to an -exceedingly touching degree, by all the highest races of animals. -No other instances than those already given can be mentioned here. -It is sufficient to say that the difference between the -savage—whose sympathies are so feeble that he has been known to -knock his own child’s brains out for dropping a basket, and who -puts his aged parents to death in order to avoid the burden of -maintaining them, and whose sympathies seldom extend beyond his -family or tribe—and civilised men and women, who feel actual pain -when in the presence of those who suffer, and whose sympathies -sometimes include all sentient creation, is much greater than that -between the savage and many nonhuman animals. The frail, narrow, -fantastic character of human sympathy is the most mournful fact in -human nature. ‘Man’s inhumanity to man makes countless thousands -mourn,’ and his inhumanity to not-men makes the planet a ball of -pain and terror.</p> -<p><em>Volition</em> is the power of the mind to act executively. -Or, perhaps, it is the resultant of the impulses actuating a mind -at any particular instant. Whatever volition is, it is the same -thing in the insect as in the man. Non-human beings have been -observed to pause and deliberate and to make wise and momentous -decisions in the twinkling of an eye. A chased hare will decide to -squat, to go straight ahead, or to do something else which the -emergency demands, just as unmistakably as a human fugitive. In the -sense of being the power to act differently from the manner in -which a being actually does act, there is no such thing as -freewill. The will of the worm is just as free as the will of the -judge—not in the sense that it is as varied in the directions of -its activity, but in the sense that the character of its activities -is determined inevitably by the character of its antecedents. All -will, whether human or non-human, invariably acts in the direction -of the strongest motive, just as a stone or a river invariably -moves, if it moves at all, in the direction of the strongest -tendency or force. It is impossible that this should be otherwise. -For, if the will in any case elects to overthrow this fact by -arbitrarily discarding a stronger motive for a feebler, in the very -motive of the election are concealed elements which transform the -feebler motive into the stronger. All motion, voluntary and -involuntary—the motion of bullets, beings, societies, and -suns—takes place along the lines of least arrest. Every being is -compelled to decide as he does decide and to act as he does act by -the inherited tendencies of his own nature and the tendencies of -the environment in which he exists. And if any being, after having -passed through life, were again placed back at the beginning of -life and endowed with the same nature as before, and were acted -upon through life by surroundings identical with those he had -previously met, he would act—that is, he would exercise his will—in -precisely the same way in every particular as he had previously -done. To deny these things is to assert that the conduct of living -beings is without law, and that psychology and sociology are not -sciences.</p> -<p>Non-human beings, all of the higher ones, have the same brain -and nervous apparatus as man, and in their involuntary phenomena -they closely resemble human beings. Aim a pretended blow near the -eyes of a dog or a horse and it will wink involuntarily, just as a -human being does. Sever the spinal cord of a man or a frog, and -irritate the feet of each, and they will each manifest the same -phenomena of reflex action, drawing their feet away each time from -the stimulus.</p> -<p><em>Instinct</em> and <em>reason</em> are forms of intelligence. -Intelligence is the adaptation of acts to ends. Intelligence is -manifested by all organisms, both plants and animals, and may be -either conscious or unconscious. Plant intelligence and reflex -action are forms of <em>unconscious</em> intelligence. Plant -intelligence, or the adaptation of acts to ends by plants, is -manifested by plants in the shifting of their positions when in -need of light in order to obtain as large a supply as possible of -the essential sunshine; in devices, such as traps and flowers, for -utilising the juices and services of insects; in germinating and -growing away from, instead of toward, the centre of the earth; in -discriminating between this and that kind of food; and in a -thousand other ways. Plant intelligence is all explicable in terms -of chemistry and physics, and is, so far as is known, unaccompanied -by consciousness. Reflex action is chemical affinity aided by the -co-ordinating powers of nerve tissue. The vital processes of all -animals, from the lowest to the highest, and many other highly -habitual and highly essential operations, are carried on by reflex -action. Reflex action in animals, like plant intelligence, is -unconscious.</p> -<p>Instinct and reason are <em>conscious</em>. Instinct is -inherited intelligence—intelligence manifested independently of, -and prior to, experience and instruction. ‘Instinct,’ says Romanes, -‘is reflex action into which has been imported the element of -consciousness’.<sup><small><a href="#part2-chapter4-footnote5" id= -"part2-chapter4-ref5a" name= -"part2-chapter4-ref5a">[5a]</a></small></sup> It is exhibited by -the babe when it nurses the mother’s breast; by the chick when it -pecks its way out through the shell of the egg; by animals -generally, including man, in their solicitude for their young; by -the parent bird in incubation; and by all beings when they seek -food in obedience to the impulse of hunger. Our conception of the -mental processes of non-humans is as yet very primitive, owing to -our limited means of information and the erroneous influence on our -judgments of traditional ways of thinking; and much that is -attributed by us to instinct is not instinct at all, but is -acquired by the young through education imparted by the elders. -Parent birds have often been seen teaching their young ones to fly, -and no doubt a good deal of the migratory acumen manifested by -birds is nothing but custom and tradition handed down to each -younger generation by the old and experienced. A large part of the -knowledge of mankind (or what passes for knowledge) consists of -habits and hobbies, customs and traditions, impressed upon each new -generation by the generation which produced it. Each generation of -men seems to feel that whenever it creates a new generation it has -got to pile on to this new generation all of the fool notions which -have been acquired from the past, amplified by its own inventions. -And when we come to know other animals better, there is practically -no doubt that we shall find that a large part of what we now call -instinct and look upon as congenital will, on closer and more -rational examination, be found to be nothing but the pedagogical -effects of early environment. Professor Poulton, of Oxford, who has -made many experiments on just-born birds, says that young chicks -learn to fear the hawk and to interpret the oral warnings of the -mother. Cats teach their young to play with their prey in that -cruel manner so characteristic of all the Felidae, as I have myself -observed more than once. A mother cat will carry a live mouse into -the presence of her kittens and lie down and play with it, tossing -it playfully into the air, poking it with her paw when it does not -move, and arresting it when it starts to run away, the kittens all -the time looking on, but never once attempting to take the mouse. -After awhile the mother hands the captive over to the kittens, who -go through the same performance one after another. After they have -practised on it until the unfortunate creature is almost dead, the -old cat will probably walk over to where the mouse is and eat it -up. The whole thing is a <em>school</em>. The mouse is obviously -not intended as food for the young, but to be used simply to impart -instruction to them.</p> -<p>‘In popular writings and lectures some or all of the following -activities of ant-life are commonly ascribed to instinct: The -recognition of members of the same nest; powers of communication; -keeping aphides for the sake of their sweet secretions; collection -of aphid eggs in October, hatching them out in the nest, and taking -them in the spring to the daisies on which they feed, for pasture; -slave-making and slave-keeping, which, in some cases, is so ancient -a habit that the enslavers are unable even to feed themselves; -keeping insects as beasts of burden—<em>e.g.</em> a kind of -plant-bug to carry leaves; keeping beetles, etc., as domestic pets; -habits of personal cleanliness—one ant giving another a brush-up, -and being, brushed up in return; habits of play and recreation; -habits of burying their dead; the storage of grain and nipping the -budding rootlet to prevent further germination; the habit of Texan -ants of preparing a clearing around their nest, and, six months -later, harvesting the ant-rice—a kind of grass of which they are -particularly fond—even seeking and sowing the grain which shall -yield the harvest; the collection by other ants of grass to manure -the soil, on which there grows a species of fungus upon which they -feed; the military organisation of the ecitons of Central America; -and so forth. But to class all of these activities of the ant as -illustrations of instinct is a survival of an old-fashioned method -of treatment.</p> -<p>‘Suppose that the intelligent ant were to make observations on -human behaviour as displayed in one of our great cities or in an -agricultural district. Seeing so great an amount of routine work -going on around him, might he not be in danger of regarding all -this as evidence of hereditary instinct? Might he not find it -difficult to obtain satisfactory evidence of the fact that this -routine work has to some extent to be learned? Might he not say -(perhaps not wholly without truth), “I can see nothing whatever in -the training of these beings to fit them for their life-work. The -training of their children has no more apparent bearing upon the -activities of their after-life than the feeding of our grubs has on -the duties of ant-life. They seem to fall into the routine of life -with little or no preparatory training as the periods for the -manifestation of the various instincts arrive. If learning thereof -there be, it has so far escaped our observation. And such -intelligence as their activities evince (and many of them do show -remarkable adaptations to uniform conditions of life) would seem to -be rather ancestral than of the present time, as is shown by the -fact that many of the adaptations are directed rather to past -conditions of life than to those which now hold good. In the -presence of new emergencies to which their instincts have not -fitted them, these poor creatures are often completely at a loss. -We cannot but conclude, therefore, that, although acting under -somewhat different and less favourable conditions, instinct -occupies fully as large a space in the psychology of man as it does -in that of the ant, while human intelligence is far less unerring -and hence markedly inferior to our own.”</p> -<p>‘Are these views much more absurd than the views of those who, -on the evidence which we at present possess, attribute all the -activities of ant-life to instinct?’<sup><small><a href= -"#part2-chapter4-footnote6" id="part2-chapter4-ref6" name= -"part2-chapter4-ref6">[6]</a></small></sup></p> -<p><em>Reason</em> is the power of adapting means to ends which is -acquired from experience or instruction. All animals that profit by -experience, therefore, or that learn from instruction—that is, are -teachable—exercise reason.</p> -<p>The line of demarkation between instinct and reason is a -mezzotint, reason being often instinctive, and instinct being as -frequently flavoured with judgment, ‘Instinct is usually regarded -as a special property of the lower animals, and contrasted with the -conscious reason of man. But just as reason may be looked upon as a -higher form of the understanding or intellect, and not as something -essentially distinct from them, so a closer examination shows that -instinct and the conscious understanding do not stand in absolute -contrast, but rather in a complex relation, and cannot be sharply -marked off from each other.’ It is instinct that urges the bird to -build its nest; but when birds whose habit it is to build on the -ground learn, on the introduction of cats into the neighbourhood, -to change their nesting-places to the tree-tops, intelligence and -thought are necessary. The first time Cavy (one of my guinea-pigs) -smelled a cat, she was almost scared to death. She jumped back from -it as if she had come in contact with a red-hot stove, and screamed -and kept on screaming, and shot down under my coat as if she were -about to be crucified. After a little while I tried to pull her -out, but she refused, and kept hiding. The second time the kitten -was presented to her the result was the same. But after two or -three days of association, she paid little more attention to it -than to the other guinea-pigs. She had never seen a cat before. -<em>It was the odour of the carnivore</em> that terrified her, and -the effect was purely instinctive. But instinct was soon modified -by intelligent experience. (<em>Poor dear little Cavy! I wonder -where she is now!</em>)</p> -<p>Both instinct and reason (and one, too, just as much as the -other) are absolutely dependent upon processes that are purely -mechanical—that is, upon brain processes; and brain processes -depend upon brain structure, which is inherited. Hence, reason is, -in a certain sense, as truly inherited as instinct is. A being must -be born with the particular nervous apparatus by means of which -reasoning is carried on, or with the power or disposition to -develop this apparatus, or he will never reason. The genius of the -partridge in cajoling the passer-by from her nest is called -instinct, but it is not more inherited than was the genius of -Shakspere. Experience simply calls into being that, whatever it is -in each particular being, which is inherited. Sir Isaac Newton took -to philosophy and Ole Bull to music not less inevitably than the -duck takes to water or the hound to hunting. Reason is, hence, -inherited by every man, who has it as truly as his erect posture -and plantigrade feet. There is something in the past of all of us -and of everything which has determined, and which may be used to -account for, everything that to-day exists or happens, even to the -style and behaviour of every leaf that flutters in the forest, and -to the eccentricities of our opinions and handwritings.</p> -<p>Reason, in the sense in which it is here used, is found feebly -in the oyster. Oysters taken from a depth never uncovered by the -sea open their shells, lose their water, and quickly perish. But -oysters taken from the same depths, if kept where they are -occasionally left uncovered for short intervals, learn to keep -their shells closed and to live a much longer period out of the -water. On the coast of France ‘oyster schools’ exist, where oysters -intended for inland cities are educated to keep their shells closed -when out of the water in order to enable them to survive the -desiccating exposures of the overland journey.<sup><small><a href= -"#part2-chapter4-footnote1" id="part2-chapter4-ref1d" name= -"part2-chapter4-ref1d">[1d]</a></small></sup> This act of the -bivalve is probably the result of something like a vague form of -reason. It is an act adapted to the accomplishment of a definite -end, and the adapting power is acquired from experience. It is, -moreover, reason which in its final analysis does not differ from -the reason displayed by the wisest being that thinks. Judgment, -forethought, common-sense, inference, ingenuity, genius, reason, -and abstract thought, are all exercises of the cognitive or -perceptive power of mind, and consist, all of them, in nothing more -nor less than the discerning of relations among stimuli. The dog -who adopts a cut-off in order to intercept a fleeing hare performs -exactly the same kind of intellectual process as the mechanic who -erects a windmill in order to divert the energies of the breeze, or -the politician who adopts a particular platform to catch votes. ‘A -perception is always in its essential nature what logicians term a -<em>conclusion</em>, whether it has reference to the simplest -memory of the past sensation or to the highest product of abstract -thought. For, when the highest product of abstract thought is -analysed, the ultimate elements must always be found to consist in -material given directly by the senses; and every stage in the -symbolic construction of ideas, in which the process of abstraction -consists, depends on acts of perception taking place in the lower -stages’.<sup><small><a href="#part2-chapter4-footnote5" id= -"part2-chapter4-ref5b" name= -"part2-chapter4-ref5b">[5b]</a></small></sup></p> -<p>The difference among the perceptive acts of different -individuals consists, not in the different kinds of intellectual -exercise, but in differences among the <em>materials</em> with -which the perceptive faculty deals. There are perceptions of simple -sensations, and there are perceptions of composite sensations, or -concepts—perceptions of elementary relations, and perceptions of -compound and elaborate relations. But all displays of rational -faculty, from the simple judgment of distance by the dimness and -distinctness of definition and the size of the visual angle, which -all higher animals are compelled to make, to the labyrinthic -abstractions of the logician, consist in nothing in addition to -discriminations among stimuli.</p> -<p>Brehm one day gave one of his apes a paper bag with a lump of -sugar and a wasp in it. The ape in getting the sugar was stung by -the wasp. From that day, whenever Brehm gave that ape, or any other -ape in that cage, a paper package, the animal, before opening it, -took the precaution to shake the package at his ear and listen to -find out whether or not there was a wasp -inside.<sup><small><a href="#part2-chapter4-footnote7" id= -"part2-chapter4-ref7" name= -"part2-chapter4-ref7">[7]</a></small></sup></p> -<p>Now, such an act of intelligence implies several inferences. A -train of thoughts something like this must have passed through this -ape’s mind: ‘Now, if one wasp can sting, so can another; and, if a -man can deceive me once by wrapping a wasp in a paper with a lump -of sugar, he may try it again; and, if one man will attempt such a -thing, so may another; and, if men will attempt it on me, they may -attempt it on my friends; so I will warn my friends to look out for -those villainous chaps outside.’ These inferences of the ape are -the same kind of generalisations exactly as are made by men -everywhere in their daily lives. And the common-sense inferences -made by ordinary people in their every-day affairs are precisely -the same processes of reasoning as those used by scientists and -philosophers. Many people, like the character in Moliere’s plays -who was surprised and delighted to learn that he had been talking -prose all his life, are surprised on hearing for the first time -that they use <em>induction</em> and <em>deduction</em> every hour -almost of their waking lives. They imagine that philosophers must -have some secret and superior way of acquiring their conclusions, -different from what ordinary mortals have. ‘But there is no more -difference,’ says Huxley, ‘between the mental operations of a man -of science and those of an ordinary person than there is between -the operations and methods of a grocer weighing out his goods in -common scales and the operations of a chemist in performing a -difficult and complex analysis by means of his balance and finely -graduated weights. It is not that the scales in the one case and -the balances in the other differ in the principles of their -construction or manner of working; but the beam of the one is set -on an infinitely finer axis than the other, and, of course, turns -by the addition of a much smaller weight’.<sup><small><a href= -"#part2-chapter4-footnote8" id="part2-chapter4-ref8" name= -"part2-chapter4-ref8">[8]</a></small></sup> And the difference in -mental method between the man of learning and the ordinary man or -woman is the same as the difference between mature men and children -and between men generally and other animals. It is one of -<em>degree</em>, <em>not</em> of <em>kind</em>. The philosopher, -the clodhopper, and the ape, all use precisely the same methods of -reasoning, differing only in exactness and in the materials of -consciousness dealt with.</p> -<p>Nearly all animals, from mollusks to men, reason—not once or -twice in a lifetime, but the most of them every day and every hour -of their existence. In fact, it would be impossible for any animal -addicted to moving about, and with a delicate and easily wrecked -organism, to long survive in a world like this without that -elasticity of action which reason alone can impart. Since they live -in the same world-conditions as human beings, and are seeking -providence for substantially the same wants, non-human beings -manifest reason in the same general directions as human beings -do—in the location and construction of their homes and fortresses, -in the arrest of their prey, in circumventing their enemies, in -overcoming obstacles and surmounting dangers, in protecting and -educating their young, in meeting the emergencies of food and -climate, in the wooing of mates and the waging of wars, and in the -thousand other cases where they are called upon in their daily -wanderings and doings to deal with novel and unprecedented -situations.</p> -<p>When wild geese are feeding there is said to be always one of -them that acts as sentinel. This one never takes a grain of corn -while on duty. When it has acted awhile it gives the bird next to -it a sharp peck and utters a querulous kind of cry, and the second -one takes its turn. This is prudence, or forethought, which is a -form of reason. When swans are diving there is generally one that -stays above the water and watches. Sentinels have alarm sounds of -various kinds, which they give to signify ‘enemy.’ ‘Ibex, marmots, -and mountain-sheep whistle; prariedogs bark; elephants trumpet; -wild geese and swans have a kind of bugle call; rabbits and sheep -stamp on the ground; crows caw: and wild ducks utter a low, warning -quack.’</p> -<p>In the <em>Popular Science Monthly</em> for March, 1901, is an -account of a series of experiments on the intelligence of the -turtle made by Professor Yerkes, of Harvard. The turtle was placed -in a labyrinth, at the farther end of which was a comfortable bed -of sand. It took just thirty-five minutes of wandering for the -turtle to reach the nest the first time. But in the second trial -the nest was reached in fifteen minutes, and by the tenth trip the -turtle was familiar enough with the route to go through in three -and one-half minutes, making but two mistakes. The turtle was -afterwards placed in a more complex labyrinth, containing, among -other features, a blind alley and two inclines. The inclines were -puzzles, and it took one hour and thirty-five minutes of aimless -rambling for the wanderer to reach its nest the first time. But the -fifth trip was made in sixteen minutes, and the tenth in four -minutes, which was not far from direct.</p> -<p>These experiments show that animals of almost proverbial density -may learn with surprising quickness. English sparrows and other -avian inhabitants of the city learn to live tranquilly along the -busiest thoroughfares, exposed to all sorts of dangers, and -subjected to what would be to many birds the most terrifying -circumstances. Whizzing trolleys, tramping multitudes, and -screaming engines have no terrors for them. They simply exercise -the caution necessary to keep from being run over. They boldly -build their nests right under passing elevated cars, where the roar -is sufficient to scare the life out of an ordinary country bird. I -have seen these testy little chaps sit and feed and jabber to each -other in a perfectly unconcerned way within ten or fifteen feet of -a thundering express train. They do not do these things from -instinct: they <em>learn</em> to do them. They know that a -diabolical-looking locomotive is harmless, because they have seen -it before; and they know that an insignificant urchin with a savage -heart and a sling is not harmless, and they know it simply because -they have previously had dealings with him. English sparrows will -disappear completely from a neighborhood if a few of them are -killed. Cats, dogs, horses—all animals, in fact—acquire during life -a fund of information as to how to act in order to avoid harm and -extinction. If they did not, they would not live long. And they do -it just as man does it, by memory and discrimination, by retaining -impressions made upon them, and acting differently when an -impression is made a second, third, or thirteenth time.</p> -<p>Animals of experience (including men) are more skilful in -adjusting themselves to environmental exigencies than the young and -inexperienced, because of their store of initial impressions. It is -a matter of common observation that young animals are more easily -caught or killed or otherwise victimised than the old and -experienced. Many animals, however, (and a good many men) are able -to profit by a single impression. One dose of tartar emetic is -generally sufficient to cure an egg-sucking dog, and it is a very -stupid canine indeed that does not understand perfectly after one -or two experiences with a porcupine or an unsavory skunk. ‘The -burnt child dreads the fire,’ but so does the burnt puppy. Rengger -states that his Paraguay monkeys, after cutting themselves only -once with any sharp tool, would not touch it again, or would handle -it with the greatest caution.<sup><small><a href= -"#part2-chapter4-footnote1" id="part2-chapter4-ref1e" name= -"part2-chapter4-ref1e">[1e]</a></small></sup> Older trout are more -wary than young ones, and fishes that have been much hunted and -deceived become suspicious of traps. Rats, martins, and other -animals cannot long be trapped in the same way, and partridges and -other birds seldom fly against telegraph-wires the second season -after the wires are put up. These animals, however, cannot learn to -avoid these dangers from experience, for only a few of them are -ever caught or struck. They must learn it from observing their -unfortunate companions. Everyone who has read the story of Lobo, -the big gray wolf of the Carrumpaw, cannot but wonder at the -remarkable shrewdness shown by this old leader in baffling for -years the tigers that hung upon his tracks.<sup><small><a href= -"#part2-chapter4-footnote9" id="part2-chapter4-ref9" name= -"part2-chapter4-ref9">[9]</a></small></sup> Nansen states that the -seals, before man invaded the Arctics, occupied the inner ice-floes -to avoid the polar bear, but after man came they took to living on -the outer floes in order to escape the persecutions of this new and -more fearful enemy. Domestic animals, when first turned out in new -regions, often die from eating poisonous weeds, but in some way -soon learn to avoid them. Many animals, when pursuing other -animals, or when being pursued, display a knowledge of facts very -little understood by the majority of mankind, such as of places -where scent lies or is obliterated, and the effects of wind in -carrying evidence of their presence to their enemies. The hunted -roebuck or hare will make circles, double on its own tracks, take -to water, and fling itself for considerable distances through the -air as cleverly as if it had read up all the theory of scent in a -book. According to the London <em>Spectator</em> one of the large -African elephants in the Zoological Gardens of that city restores -to its entertainers all the bits of food which on being thrown to -him fall alike out of his reach and theirs. He points his proboscis -straight at the food, and blows it along the floor to the feet of -those who have thrown it. He clearly knows what he is about, for if -he does not blow hard enough to land the food the first time, he -blows harder and harder until he does. The cacadoos (parrots) of -Australia, before descending upon a field or orchard in search of -food, send out a scouting party to reconnoitre the region and see -that ‘all is well.’ Sometimes a second party is sent. If the report -is favourable, the whole band advance and plunder the field in -short order. These birds are exceedingly wary and intelligent, and -seldom make mistakes. But ‘if man once succeeds in killing one of -them, they become so prudent and watchful that they henceforward -baffle all stratagems’.<sup><small><a href= -"#part2-chapter4-footnote3" id="part2-chapter4-ref3c" name= -"part2-chapter4-ref3c">[3c]</a></small></sup> A short time ago a -parrot at Washington, New Jersey, saved the life of its owner by -summoning the neighbours to his relief. Cries of ‘Murder!’ ‘Help!’ -‘Come quick!’ coming from the home of the parrot, attracted the -attention of neighbours, who ran to the house to find out the -cause. ‘They found the owner of the parrot lying on the floor -unconscious, bleeding from a great gash in his neck. He had been -repairing the ceiling, and had fallen and struck his head against -the stove. It required six stitches to close the wound, and the -surgeon said that in only a few minutes the injured man would have -been dead. A few years ago this parrot’s screams awakened its owner -in time to arouse his neighbours and save them from a fire which -started in the house next door.’</p> -<p>A friend of mine, who is thoroughly reliable, tells me that when -he was a student at the University of Michigan a few years ago one -of the professors of zoology there had a dog who was used by the -department for experiments in digestion. The dog was compelled to -wear a tube opening downward out of his stomach, and soon grew very -weak and emaciated from the constant loss of food, which leaked out -through this tube. After a time, however, the dog was observed to -be growing unaccountably hale and strong. He was watched, and the -poor creature was found to have struck upon an ingenious expedient -to save his life. On eating his meal, he would go out to the barn, -and, in order to prevent the artificial escape of the contents of -his stomach, would lie down flat on his back between two boxes and -remain there until his digested food had passed safely beyond the -pylorus.</p> -<p>A few months ago, John, one of the monkeys at Lincoln Park, -Chicago, was suffering from a terrible abscess on the cheek, and an -operation became necessary in order to save the little fellow’s -life. It was a pathetic sight to see the look of trust in the -monkey’s eyes when the surgeon was ready to begin the operation, -and the courage and fortitude displayed by the sufferer were almost -human. At the first touch of the knife the monkey pressed his head -hard against the knee of the assistant and grabbed the forefinger -of each of the assistant’s hands, just as a person does who is -about to undergo a painful operation. The swelling was first cut -open and washed with antiseptic, when the cheek-bone was scraped -and a small piece of it removed. After being again washed in -antiseptic, the wound was sewed up, and John was lifted gently back -into his cage—not, however, until he had licked the hands of the -surgeon and kissed his face in gratitude. The little hero never -uttered a sound from the time the knife first touched his face -until he was put back into his cage. A similar act of intelligence -is recorded of an orang. Having been once bled on account of -illness, and not feeling well some time afterward, this orang went -from one person to another, and, pointing to the vein in his arm, -signified his desire to have the operation repeated. Both of these -instances are examples of reason of a very high order—of a higher -order, indeed, than many children and some grown people exhibit in -similar circumstances. The chimpanzee, Mafuca, learned how to -unlock her cage, and stole the key and hid it under her arm for -future use. After watching the carpenter boring holes with his -brad-awl, she took the brad-awl and bored holes in her table. She -poured out milk for herself at meals, and always carefully stopped -pouring before the cup ran over.</p> -<p>When baboons go on marauding expeditions, they show that they -realise perfectly what they are doing by moving with great stealth. -Not a sound is uttered. If any thoughtless youngster so far forgets -the necessities of the occasion as to utter a single chatter, he is -given a reminder in the shape of a box on the ear. ‘A certain Mr. -Cops, who had a young orang, gave it half an orange one day, and -put the other half away out of its sight on a high press, and lay -down himself on the sofa. But the ape’s movements, attracting his -attention, he only pretended to go to sleep. The creature came -cautiously and satisfied himself that his master was asleep, then -climbed up the press, ate the rest of the orange, carefully hid the -peel among the shavings in the grate, examined the pretended -sleeper again, and then went and lay down on his own bed.’ This -incident is recorded by Tylor in his ‘Anthropology.’ ‘And such -behaviour,’ he adds, ‘is to be explained only by supposing a train -of thought to pass through the brain of the ape somewhat similar to -what we ourselves call reason.’ These instances of undoubted -intelligence and thought might be added to almost without number if -there was room. Every person nearly who has been in the world any -length of time, and has had occasion to associate with these -so-called ‘machines,’ has seen for himself, often unexpectedly, -many flashes of brightness among them.</p> -<p>It has been said that man differs from other animals, and is -superior to them in the fact that he modifies his environment while -other animals do not, but are modified by environment. Mr. Lester -F. Ward makes this distinction in his ‘Pure Sociology.’ The -distinction is no nearer the truth than other distinctions of like -character that have from time to time been drawn between men and -other animals. It is not much more than half true, if it is that, -and does not by any means deserve the italics awarded to it by this -writer. Many races of non-human beings have a far greater influence -on their environment than many races of men have. Many tribes of -men wander about naked, build no habitations, make no weapons, and -feed upon the fruits, roots, insects, and such other chance morsels -as they can pick up from day to day in their wanderings. Such races -are far inferior in constructive activity to the birds, who build -elaborate houses, and to the beavers, who not only construct -substantial dwellings, but dam rivers, and cut down trees and -transport them long distances, and dig artificial waterways, to be -used as aids in their engineering enterprises. Compare the -elaborate compartments of the Australian bower-birds, surrounded -with ornamented and carefully-kept grounds, with the lean-to of -many savage tribes, made by sticking two or three palm-leaves in -the ground and leaning them against a pole. Even ants plant crops, -make clearings, build roads and tunnels, etc. It must be -remembered, too, that, however affirmative and masterful a race of -men may become, it never succeeds, and never can succeed, in -emancipating itself from the influences of environment. It is true -that with the growth of intelligence among organic forms there has -been a constant transfer of influence from the environment to the -organism; but this transfer began, not with man by any means, but -low down in the scale of animal life.</p> -<p>It has been said that man is the only animal that uses tools. -But this is not true either, for animals as low in the scale of -development as insects have been known to use tools. At least two -different observers testify to having seen ground-wasps use small -stones as hammers in packing the dirt firmly over their nests. -Spiders use stones as weights to steady their webs in times of -storm. Orangs throw sticks and stones at their pursuers, and -certain tribes of Abyssinian baboons, when they go to battle with -each other, carry stones as missiles. Monkeys often use stones to -crack nuts with, and tame monkeys know very well how to use a -hammer when it is given to them. In the London Zoological Gardens a -monkey with poor teeth kept a stone hidden in the straw of its cage -to crack its nuts with, and it would not allow any other monkey to -touch the stone. ‘Here,’ says Darwin, in speaking of this case, ‘is -the idea of property.’ Monkeys also use sticks as levers in prying -open chests and lifting heavy objects. Cuvier’s orang used to carry -a chair across the room and stand on it to lift the door-latch. -Chimpanzees, who are very fond of making a noise, have been seen -standing around a hollow log in the forest, beating it with sticks; -and if we are to believe Emin Pasha, these ingenious parodies of -men sometimes carry torches when they go at night on foraging -expeditions. The Indian elephant, when travelling, will sometimes -turn aside and break off a leafy branch from a roadside tree and -carry it along in its trunk to sweep off the flies. As Dr. Wesley -Mills says in his work on ‘The Nature and Development of Animal -Intelligence,’ ‘It was formerly believed that animals cannot -reason, but only those persons who do not themselves reason about -the subject, with the facts before them, can any longer occupy such -a position.’</p> -<p><small id="part2-chapter4-footnote1"><a href= -"#part2-chapter4-ref1a">1a.</a> <a href= -"#part2-chapter4-ref1b">1b.</a> <a href= -"#part2-chapter4-ref1c">1c.</a> <a href= -"#part2-chapter4-ref1d">1d.</a> <a href= -"#part2-chapter4-ref1e">1e.</a> Romanes: <em>Animal -Intelligence</em>; New York, 1899.</small><br /> -<small id="part2-chapter4-footnote2"><a href= -"#part2-chapter4-ref2">2.</a> Cornish: <em>Animals of To-day</em>; -London, 1898.</small><br /> -<small id="part2-chapter4-footnote3"><a href= -"#part2-chapter4-ref3a">3a.</a> <a href= -"#part2-chapter4-ref3b">3b.</a> <a href= -"#part2-chapter4-ref3c">3c.</a> Kropotkin: <em>Mutual Aid a Factor -of Evolution</em>; New York, 1902.</small><br /> -<small id="part2-chapter4-footnote4"><a href= -"#part2-chapter4-ref4a">4a.</a> <a href= -"#part2-chapter4-ref4b">4b.</a> Darwin: <em>Descent of Man</em>, -2nd edit.; London, 1874.</small><br /> -<small id="part2-chapter4-footnote5"><a href= -"#part2-chapter4-ref5a">5a.</a> <a href= -"#part2-chapter4-ref5b">5b.</a> Romanes: <em>Mental Evolution in -Animals</em>; New York, 1898.</small><br /> -<small id="part2-chapter4-footnote6"><a href= -"#part2-chapter4-ref6">6.</a> Morgan: <em>Animal Behaviour</em>; -London, 1900.</small><br /> -<small id="part2-chapter4-footnote7"><a href= -"#part2-chapter4-ref7">7.</a> Brehm: <em>Thierleben</em>; Leipzig, -1880.</small><br /> -<small id="part2-chapter4-footnote8"><a href= -"#part2-chapter4-ref8">8.</a> Huxley: <em>On the Origin of -Species</em>, lecture iii.</small><br /> -<small id="part2-chapter4-footnote9"><a href= -"#part2-chapter4-ref9">9.</a> Thompson: Wild Animals I have Known; -New York, 1900.</small></p> -<h3 id="part2-chapter5">V. Conclusion.</h3> -<p>It is enough. The ancient gulf scooped by human conceit between -man and the other animals has been effectually and forever filled -up. The human species constitutes but one branch in the gigantic -arbour of life. And all the merit and all the feeling and all the -righteousness of the world are not, as we have been accustomed to -aver, congested into this one branch. And all of the weakness and -deformity are not, as we have also been anxious to believe, found -elsewhere. The reluctance of wrinkles and deformities to appear in -the pictures of men, and of strength and beauty to appear in the -representations of the other races of the earth, is to be accounted -for by the highly elucidative fact that man is the universal -portrait-painter. There is no one to tell man what he is and how he -strikes others, and hence he is the ‘paragon of creation’—the -inter-stellar pet, half clay and half halo—the image and pride of -the gods—the flower and gem of the eternal spheres. Man is the only -professional linguist in the universe. And it is fortunate for him -that he is. For, if he were not, his auditories would be compelled -to carry to his perceptive centres a great many sentiments he now -never hears. He would be likely to hear a good deal said, and said -with a good deal of feeling, about perpendicular -brigand—grandiloquent kakistocrat swelling with -self-righteousness—rhetorical hideful wrapped in pillage and gorged -with decomposition—a voluble and sanctimonious squash with two -sticks in it. The definition of man as it appears in the dictionary -of the donkey probably runs something like this: ‘<em>Man</em> is -an animal that walks on its hind-legs, invents adjectives with -which to praise itself, and displays its greatest utility in -proving that all sharks are not aquatic.’ We know what a lion looks -like when painted by a man, but human eyes have never yet been -allumined by the sardonic lineaments of a man painted by a lion. -Being boiled alive in order to look well as corpses in -store-windows, and having wooden pegs thrust into our muscles and -left there to rot for a week or two to keep us in our agony from -doing something desperate—we know what these experiences are like -when they are delegated to lobsters, and we take no more serious -part in them than to insure their infliction, but we are too -fervent barbarians to bother our heads about what they are like -from the crustacean point of view.</p> -<p>Let us be candid. Men are not all gentle men and humane, and -not-men are not all inhuman. There are reptiles in broadcloth, and -there are warm and generous hearts among those peoples who have so -long suffered from human prejudice and ferocity. Let us label -beings by what they are—by the souls that are in them and the deeds -they do—not by their colour, which is pigment, nor by their -composition, which is clay. There are philanthropists in feathers -and patricians in fur, just as there are cannibals in the pulpit -and saurians among the money-changers. The golden rule may -sometimes be more religiously observed in the hearts and homes of -outcast quadrupeds than in the palatial lairs of bipeds. The horse, -who suffers and serves and starves in silence, who endures daily -wrongs of scanty and irregular meals, excessive burdens and mangled -flanks, who forgets cruelty and ingratitude, and does good to them -that spitefully use him, and submits to crime without resistance, -misunderstanding without murmur, and insult without resentment, is -a better Christian, a better exemplar of the Sermon on the Mount, -than many church-goers, in spite of the creeds and interdictions of -men. And the animal who goes to church on Sundays, wearing the -twitching skins and plundered plumage of others, and wails long -prayers and mumbles meaningless rituals, and gives unearned guineas -to the missionary, and on week-days cheats and impoverishes his -neighbours, glorifies war, and tramples under foot the most sacred -principles of morality in his treatment of his non-human kindred, -is a cold, hard-hearted <em>brute</em>, in spite of the fact that -he is cunning and vainglorious, and towers about on his -hinders.</p> -<p>There are lessons that may be learned from the uncorrupted -children of Nature—lessons in simplicity of life, -straightforwardness, humility, art, economy, brotherly love, and -cheerfulness—more beautiful, perhaps, and more true than may -sometimes be learned from the stilted and Machiavellian ways of -men. Would you learn forgiveness? Go to the dog. The dog can stand -more abuse and forgive greater accumulations of wrong than any -other animal, not even excepting a wife. About the only thing in -the universe superior to the dog in willingness to undergo outrage -is the human stomach. Would you learn wisdom and industry? Go to -the ant, that tireless toiler of the dust. The ant can do that -which no man can do—keep grain in a warm, moist atmosphere without -sprouting. Would you learn art? Go to the bee or to the wild bird’s -lodge. The art of the honeycomb and of the hang-bird’s nest -surpasses that of the cranny of the savage as the Cathedral of St. -Peter exceeds the cottage. Would you learn socialism, that dream of -poets and the hope and expectation of wise men? It is actualised -around you in thousands of insect communities. The social and -economic relations existing in the most highly wrought societies of -bees and wasps are fundamentally the ideal relations of living -beings to each other, but it will require millenniums of struggle -and bloodshed for men to come up to them. Would you learn -curiosity—not the curiosity that gossips and backbites, but the -curiosity of the explorer and searcher after knowledge? Go to the -monkey. The monkey has been known to work two hours, without pause, -utterly unconscious of everything but its purposes, trying to open -a fettered trunk lock.<sup><small><a href= -"#part2-chapter5-footnote1" id="part2-chapter5-ref1" name= -"part2-chapter5-ref1">[1]</a></small></sup> Would you learn -sobriety? Go not to the gilded hells of cities, where men die like -flies in gin’s vile miasma. Go to the spring where the antelope -drinks. Would you learn chastity? Go not to the foul dens and fiery -chambers of men. Go to the boudoir of the bower-bird, or to the -subterranean hollow where the wild wolf rears her litter.</p> -<p>Man is not the surpassingly pre-eminent individual he so -actively advertises himself to be. Indeed, in many particulars he -is excelled, and excelled seriously, by those whom he calls -‘lower.’ The locomotion of the bird is far superior in ease and -expedition to the shuffling locomotion of man. The horse has a -sense which guides it through darkness in which human eyes are -blind; and the manner in which a cat, who has been carried in a bag -and put down miles away, will turn up at the back-door of the old -home next morning dumfounds science. The eye of the vulture is a -telescope. The hound will track his master along a frequented -street an hour behind his footsteps, by the imponderable odour of -his soles. The catbird, without atlas or geographic manuals, will -find her way back over hundreds of trackless leagues, season after -season, to the same old nesting-place in the thicket. Birds, -thousands of them, journey from Mexico to Arctic America, from -Algiers and Italy to Spitzbergen, from Egypt to Siberia, and from -Australia and the Polynesian Islands to New Zealand, and build -their nests and rear their young, year after year, in the same -vale, grove, or tundra. The nightingale, who pours out his -incomparable lovesong in the twilight of English lanes during May -and June, winters in the heart of Africa; and some birds nest -within the Arctic Circle and winter in Argentina. Some of the -plovers travel the entire length of the American land mass every -summer, from Patagonia to the Arctic Circle, in order to lay three -or four pale-green eggs, and see them turn to birdlings by the -shores of the Hudson Sea. Many animals have the power to foretell -storms, and man, though he can weigh worlds, is ever glad to profit -by their superior sense. When herons fly high above the clouds, -when sea-birds dip and sport in the water and the bittern booms -from the marshes, when swallows fly low and the sow repairs her -bed, when horses scamper and cattle sniff the air, when ravens beat -the air with their wings, make noises, and flock together, when the -swan raises her eggs by additions to her nest and the prairie-dog -scratches the dirt up around its hole, when beetles are not found -in the air and caterpillars mass in their webs, when bees remain -near their hives and ants carry their eggs to their innermost -abodes, when frogs croak more loudly from their watery retreats and -fishes seek the safety of the unharried deeps—look out for foul -weather! Man has not the sweetness of the song-sparrow, the -innocence of the fawn, nor the high relative brain capacity of the -tomtit and the fice.</p> -<p>Many animals have powers by which they are able to act in -concert at times, vast numbers of them moving in unison over -immense areas by signals or intuitions which man can neither -imitate nor understand. Such are the mysterious migrations of the -Norway lemming and of many birds and insects, and such were the -memorable stampedes of the bison hordes on the American plains in -years gone by. Kropotkin saw on the Siberian steppes one autumn -‘thousands and thousands’ of fallow deer come together from an area -as large as Great Britain at a point on the Amur River in an -unprecedented exodus to the lowlands on the other -side.<sup><small><a href="#part2-chapter5-footnote2" id= -"part2-chapter5-ref2" name= -"part2-chapter5-ref2">[2]</a></small></sup> How these scattered -thousands knew when to start so as to arrive at the river at the -same time, and how they knew the direction to travel and found -their way so well, are mysteries which man can as yet only wonder -at. More marvellous yet—more marvellous, perhaps, than the -concurrent action of any other animal, for it implies the most -accurate time-keeping extending over many years—are the annual -festivals of the <em>palolo</em>, an annelid living among the -interstices of the coral reefs of some of the islands of the South -Pacific. About three o’clock on the morning following the third -quarter of the October moon, these worms invariably appear on the -surface of the sea, swarming in great numbers. Just after sunrise -their bodies begin to break to pieces, and by nine o’clock no trace -of them is left. On the morning following the third quarter of the -November moon they appear again, but usually in smaller numbers. -After that they are seen no more till the next October. This annual -swarming is a phenomenon connected with reproduction, the ova -escaping from the broken bodies of the females and, after being -fertilised by the free-floating sperms, sinking down among the -coral reefs and hatching into a new generation. ‘Year after year -these creatures appear according to lunar time. And yet in the -long-run they keep solar time. They keep two cycles, one of three -and one of twenty-nine years. In the three-year cycle there are two -intervals of twelve lunations and one of thirteen lunations. These -thirty-seven lunations bring lunar time somewhat near to solar -time. But in twenty-nine years there is enough difference to -require the addition of another lunation; the twenty-ninth year is -therefore one of thirteen instead of twelve lunations. In this way -they do not change their season in an entire century. So unfailing -is their appearance that in Samoa they have given their name to the -spring season, which is called “the time of the palolo.”’</p> -<p>Instead of the highest, man is in some respects the lowest, of -the animal kingdom. Man is the most unchaste, the most drunken, the -most selfish and conceited, the most miserly, the most -hypocritical, and the most bloodthirsty of terrestrial creatures. -Almost no animals, except man, kill for the mere sake of killing. -For one being to take the life of another for purposes of selfish -utility is bad enough. But the indiscriminate massacre of -defenceless innocents by armed and organised packs, <em>just</em> -<em>for pastime</em>, is beyond characterisation. The human species -is the only species of animals that plunges to such depths of -atrocity. Even vipers and hyenas do not exterminate for recreation. -No animal, except man, habitually seeks wealth purely out of an -insane impulse to accumulate. And no animal, except man, gloats -over accumulations that are of no possible use to him, that are an -injury and an abomination, and in whose acquisition he may have -committed irreparable crimes upon others. There are no -millionaires—no professional, legalised, lifelong -kleptomaniacs—among the birds and quadrupeds. No animal, except -man, spends so large a part of his energies striving for -superiority—not superiority in usefulness, but that superiority -which consists in simply getting on the heads of one’s fellows. And -no animal practises common, ordinary morality to the other beings -of the world in which he lives so little, compared with the amount -he preaches it, as man.</p> -<p>Let us be honest. Honour to whom honour is due. It will not -emaciate our own glory to recognise the excellence and reality of -others, or to come face to face with our own frailties. We -<em>are</em> our brother’s keeper. Our brethren are they that feel. -Let us universalise. Our thoughts and sympathies have been too long -wingless. <em>The Universe is our Country</em>, and our Kindred are -the Populations that Mount. <em>It is well</em>—it is eminently -well, for it is godlike—<em>to send our Magnanimity to the Dusts -and the Deeps</em>, <em>our Sunrises to the Uttermost Isles</em>, -<em>and our</em> <em>Charity to the Stars</em>.</p> -<p><small id="part2-chapter5-footnote1"><a href= -"#part2-chapter5-ref1">1.</a> Romanes: <em>Animal -Intelligence</em>; New York, 1899.</small><br /> -<small id="part2-chapter5-footnote2"><a href= -"#part2-chapter5-ref2">2.</a> Kropotkin: <em>Mutual Aid a Factor of -Evolution</em>; New York, 1902.</small><br /></p> -</div> -<div id="part3" class="margin-vertical"> -<h2>The Ethical Kinship</h2> -<div class="center"> -<ol> -<li><a href="#part3-chapter1">Human Nature a Product of the -Jungle</a></li> -<li><a href="#part3-chapter2">Egoism and Altruism</a></li> -<li><a href="#part3-chapter3">The Ethics of the Savage</a></li> -<li><a href="#part3-chapter4">The Ethics of the Ancient</a></li> -<li><a href="#part3-chapter5">Modern Ethics</a></li> -<li><a href="#part3-chapter6">The Ethics of Human Beings Toward -Non-human Beings</a></li> -<li><a href="#part3-chapter7">The Origin of Provincialism</a></li> -<li><a href="#part3-chapter8">Universal Ethics</a></li> -<li><a href="#part3-chapter9">The Psychology of Altruism</a></li> -<li><a href="#part3-chapter10">Anthropocentric Ethics</a></li> -<li><a href="#part3-chapter11">Ethical Implications of -Evolution</a></li> -<li><a href="#part3-chapter12">Conclusion</a></li> -</ol> -</div> -<blockquote class="margin-vertical"> -<p>One of the wisest things ever said by one of the profoundest -philosophers of all time was the warning to the seeker after truth -to beware of the influence of the ‘idols (or illusions) of the -tribe’ by which he meant that body of traditional prejudices which -every sect, family, nation, and neighbourhood has clinging to it, -and in the midst of which and at the mercy of which every human -being grows up.</p> -</blockquote> -<h2>The Ethical Kinship</h2> -<h3 id="part3-chapter1">I. Human Nature a Product of the -Jungle.</h3> -<p>The Golden Rule is not exemplified by the conduct of any -considerable number of the inhabitants of the earth. To be -civilised or even half-civilised is, to the children of this world, -neither instinctive nor easy. To preserve a certain pretence or -appearance of virtue, especially when encouraged to do so by an -uplifted cudgel in the hands of the community, is a possible and -not uncommon accomplishment. But to be at heart and in reality as -considerate of others as we are of ourselves is, unfortunately, not -natural. Human beings are not children of the sun, sojourning for a -season on this spheroid of clay, and needing only pinions to be -angels. Human nature did not come, pure and shining, down from the -glittering gods. It came out of the jungle. Civilised peoples are -the not very remote posterity of savages, and savages are the -posterity of individuals who laid eggs and had literally cold blood -in their veins. Civilised men and women are troglodytes with a -veneering of virtue. In the heart of every ‘civilised’ man and -woman is an unconverted core, large or small, of barbarism. -Humanity is only a habit. Against it, and tending ever to weaken -and subvert it, are the powerful inertias of animalism. Like the -ship in Ibsen’s ‘Rhymed Epistle,’ civilisation carries a corpse in -its cargo—the elemental appetites and passions which have been -implanted in all sentient nature by the laws in accordance with -which organic forms have been fashioned. Moral progress is simply -the sloughing off of this inherited animality.</p> -<p>To the initiated, therefore, it is not strange that we civilised -folk in our conduct display so freely the phenomena of the savage. -There is nothing more inevitable in the life of the convert than -the haunting inclination to give way to original impulses. It is -not strange that we are powerless to be as good and beautiful and -true as we would like to be, that our divine efforts are our -half-hearted efforts, and that the only time we get terribly in -earnest and put forth really titanic energies is when we are -dominated directly or indirectly by the instincts of the pack. -Human aspiration is fettered by the fearful facts of human origin. -It is not strange that we are continually conscious of being torn -by contending tendencies, conscious of ghastly masteries, and of -horrible goings on in our innermost beings. The human heart is the -gladiatorial meeting-place of gods and beasts.</p> -<h3 id="part3-chapter2">II. EGOISM AND ALTRUISM.</h3> -<p>Everything has been evolved—<em>everything</em>—from daffodils -to states and from ticks to religion. Every organic thing is the -result of long and incessant survival of the -advantageous—advantageous from the standpoint of the organism -itself or from the standpoint of its kind, not necessarily so from -the standpoint of the universe. That which is true of everything is -true also of egoism and altruism. Egoism and altruism exist as -facts in the natures of human and other beings for the same reason -that the various physical facts exist in the structures of human -and other beings, because they have been advantageous in the -struggle for life. There is just as definite an explanation for the -existence of egoism and altruism in this world, and for their -existence in the particular form and ratio in which they do exist, -as there is for the fact that the human hand has five fingers, the -rose odour, and the eggs of the kildeer the mottled markings of the -clods among which they lie.</p> -<p>Egoism is preference for self, partiality toward that part of -the universe bounded by one’s own skin. It may consist simply of -regard for self, but with regard for self is usually associated -enmity toward others. Egoism manifests itself in such qualities of -mind as selfishness, cruelty, intolerance, hate, hardheartedness, -savagery, rudeness, injustice, narrowness, and the like. It is the -primal impulse of the living heart. Enmity is older and more -universal than love. Enmity constituted the very loins from which -long ago came the original miscreants of this world.</p> -<blockquote> -<p>‘I saw the fishes playing there;<br /> -I saw all that was in the whole world round;<br /> -In wood, and bower, and marsh, and mead, and field,<br /> -All things which creep and fly, And put a foot to earth.<br /> -All these I saw, and say to you,<br /> -That nothing lives among them without hate.’</p> -</blockquote> -<p>Life has been developed through selection. This selection has -been brought about largely through war—war between individuals and -between groups of individuals. War and competition are struggle -between living beings, and the soul of competition is selfishness. -Egoism is the primal and most powerful of terrestrial impulses, -because beings hated and exterminated each other before they -tolerated and loved, and because struggle has far overshadowed -cooperation as a factor in life evolution.</p> -<p>There are those who believe that mutual aid has been a more -dynamic factor in the development of terrestrial life than -competition. Cooperation has been an important element in the -evolution of animal life, and it has operated among nearly all -animals, from the humblest to the highest. Far down near the -beginning of organic existence we find the one-celled forms -huddling together in colonies, giving rise in the course of time to -the many-celled animals. But to conclude that cooperation is the -chief factor in animal development is to shut one’s eyes to one of -the most obvious and overwhelming facts of organic evolution. -Individualism antedates mutualism, both among the one-celled forms -and among the many-celled metazoa. Cooperation everywhere is the -sequence of a long preliminary of individual contention. And -cooperation does not mean cessation of struggle, either among those -co-operating or among the groups themselves, as Kropotkin and other -exaggerators of the mutual aid factor seem to assume. It usually -does little more than transfer the struggle from individuals to -groups. When a lot of pelicans or wolves get together and work -together in order that they may thereby the better defend -themselves or slay others it is hard to see how such facts can be -placed to the credit of cooperation any more than to that of -competition. Then, too, excepting in a few societies of insects, -cooperation has not gone so far as to do more than slightly -alleviate the competition even among the members of a co-operating -group. Competition is a much more common and influential fact in -the phenomena of life than cooperation, for it involves a large -part of the activity of individual life, and is also prominent in -all social activities.</p> -<p>The preponderance of egoism in the natures of living beings is -the most mournful and immense fact in the phenomena of conscious -life. It has made the world the kind of world it would have been -had the gods actually emptied their wrath vials upon it. -Brotherhood is anomalous, and, even in its highest manifestations, -is but the expression of a veiled and calculating egoism. -Inhumanity is everywhere. The whole planet is steeped in it. Every -creature faces an inhospitable universeful, and every life is a -campaign. It has all come about as a result of the mindless and -inhuman manner in which life has been developed on the earth. It -has been said that an individual of unlimited faculties and -infinite goodness and power made this world and endowed it with -ways of acting, and that this individual, as the world’s executive, -continues to determine its phenomena by inspiring the order of its -events. But one cannot help thinking sometimes, when, in his more -daring and vivid moments, he comes to comprehend the real character -and condition of the world, what a discrepancy exists between the -reputation of this builder and his works, and cannot help wondering -whether an ordinary human being with only common-sense and insight -and an average concern for the welfare of the world would not make -a great improvement in terrestrial affairs if he only had the -opportunity for a while.</p> -<p>Altruism is the recognition of, and regard for, others. It shows -itself in feelings of justice, goodwill, tenderness, charity, pity, -public spirit, sympathy, fraternity and love, and in acts of -kindness, humanity, mercy, generosity, politeness, philanthropy and -the like. Altruism is a graft. The stock is selfishness and -brutality. Altruism (the form of altruism to which I here refer: -there are several distinct species of altruism) has come into the -world as a result of cooperation and consanguinity. It has grown -out of the cooperation of individuals in families and tribes -against their cooperating enemies. Altruism—at least, in its -initial stages—is a sort of tribal egoism. Men and other animals -have learned to stand by each other and help each other against -their common foes because it was the only way in which they were -able to stand. Those aggregates that have had strongest this -feeling of fraternity have prospered and prevailed, while the less -fraternal have gone down.</p> -<p>The altruism manifested by men in their relations with each -other is not different in kind from the altruism and cooperation -displayed by other social animals. Human gregariousness—the -gathering together of human beings into tribes and communities for -purposes of companionship and defence—is a part of the phenomena of -animal gregariousness in general. The inhabitants of a human town, -however much they may think so, are not impelled to associate with -each other and to cooperate with each other in the affairs of life -by causes or considerations different from those which actuate a -society of ants or apes, of wasps or wolves, who do the same -things. The antecedents of human ethics and society are, therefore, -to be looked for in the ant-hill and the jungle.</p> -<p>The fact that altruism has been evolved by the cooperation of -individuals <em>with each other</em> and <em>against others</em> is -a significant fact in the analysis and understanding of the ethical -phenomena of the earth. <em>To this fact is due the restricted and -illogical character of all altruism</em>. The ethical systems of -all peoples are, and have always been, to a greater or less extent, -provincial and contradictory. Ethical feeling and practice are not -extended universally—that is, to all beings—but are maintained only -among those associating more or less closely as a group, and having -interests that are more or less nearly the same. Among men of -primitive mind, morality is a thing to be practised toward only a -few thousand or even a few hundred individuals, and then in a very -half-awake and half-hearted manner. But as the perceptions sharpen -and vivify and the horizon of knowledge widens—as commerce and -imagination cause the mind to overflow the narrow bounds of the -community into larger dimensions of time and space—as the myriad -influences operating as race experience and race selection enable -men to realise the wider and wider oneness of their origin, -natures, interests, and destiny—an increasing consistency -characterises the conduct among the members of the group, and an -increasingly larger number of individuals are admitted to ethical -consideration and kinship.</p> -<h3 id="part3-chapter3">III. The Ethics of the Savage.</h3> -<p>The ethics of the savage is, almost without exception, purely -tribal in its extent. A marked distinction is everywhere made by -primitive peoples between injuries to persons <em>inside</em> the -tribe and injuries to those <em>outside</em> the tribe. Crimes -which are looked upon as felonious when committed by a savage -against the members of his own tribe may be regarded as harmless, -or even highly commendable, when perpetrated on those outside the -tribe. Acts are not judged according to their intrinsic natures or -results, but wholly as to whether they are performed on outsiders -or on insiders. The Balantis (Africa) punish with death a theft -committed against a fellow-tribesman, but encourage and reward -thieving from other tribes. The Afridi (Afghanistan) mother prays -that her son may be a successful robber—not a robber of her own -people, but of other peoples—and in order that he may become -proficient in crime teaches him to creep stealthily through a hole -in the wall. By certain Bedouin tribes the ‘strenuous life’ is held -in such high honour that ‘it is considered a disgrace to die in -bed’; and among the man-eating Fijians ‘men who have not slain an -enemy suffer the most degrading of all -punishments’.<sup><small><a href="#part3-chapter3-footnote1" id= -"part3-chapter3-ref1a" name= -"part3-chapter3-ref1a">[1a]</a></small></sup> In the paradise of -the Kukis (India) the cut-throats who have in life killed the -largest number of aliens not only inherit the highest places, but -these adepts of the knife are supposed to be attended in their -celestial comings and goings by their victims as -slaves.<sup><small><a href="#part3-chapter3-footnote1" id= -"part3-chapter3-ref1b" name= -"part3-chapter3-ref1b">[1b]</a></small></sup> In his dealings with -the other members of his tribe, the savage observes a certain rude -code of morals, this code being usually, as in the case of the -civilised code, an inglorious mixture of equity and brutality, -superstition and sanity, honesty and hypocrisy. But the savage -recognises no moral obligations to any being outside of his tribe, -clan, or family. Anthropology teaches nothing more positively than -this. Consanguinity and self-interest are the only bases of savage -friendship. Outsiders are outlaws. They may be attacked, robbed, -deceived, murdered, eaten, or enslaved, with perfect propriety. It -was this general hostility of foreigners that Cain feared when he -was turned out from his countrymen after his crime upon Abel. He -knew that he was liable to be set upon by the first stranger that -came upon him. So the Lord is said to have set a mark upon him, -‘lest any finding him should kill him.’</p> -<p>‘There was no brotherhood recognised by our savage forefathers,’ -says Sir Henry Maine, in speaking of the ancestors of the Aryan and -Semitic races, ‘except actual consanguinity regarded as a fact. If -a man was not of kin to another, there was nothing between them. He -was an enemy to be hated, slain, or despoiled as much as the wild -beasts upon which the tribe made war, as belonging, indeed, to the -craftiest and cruelest of wild animals. It would scarcely be too -strong to assert that the dogs which followed the camp had more in -common with it than the tribesmen of an alien and unrelated -tribe’.<sup><small><a href="#part3-chapter3-footnote2" id= -"part3-chapter3-ref2a" name= -"part3-chapter3-ref2a">[2a]</a></small></sup> Among some tribes of -savage men the ethical code is reversed in dealing with outsiders, -and enmity toward aliens is considered a duty.</p> -<p>This same senseless hostility toward every one from abroad, so -spitefully exhibited by primitive men, is also manifested by ants, -who immediately recognise and pounce upon an individual introduced -from a foreign colony, but welcome with every demonstration of joy, -even after a lapse of weeks or months, a returning member of their -own society. The same spirit of exclusiveness is found also in -elephants. If by accident an elephant becomes separated from his -herd, he becomes an outcast and a fugitive, never being permitted -in any circumstances to attach himself to another -herd.<sup><small><a href="#part3-chapter3-footnote3" id= -"part3-chapter3-ref3" name= -"part3-chapter3-ref3">[3]</a></small></sup></p> -<p>That the savage should entertain feelings of friendship for -those belonging to the same social unit as himself is, considering -the circumstances in which it takes place, a perfectly natural -phenomenon. The members of his tribe are, to the savage, the beings -among whom he has come into existence, and in the midst of whom he -has grown up. He knows and understands them, and is known and -understood by them. They speak the same language as himself, and -cherish the same customs and traditions. They have the same sacred -trees, the same gods, the same experiences day after day, and the -same memories, as he himself. They are his associates in the chase, -his allies in war, and his comrades in sorrow and success. They are -the only beings into whose lives he has ever entered. They -constitute his world, and are to him the only real beings in the -universe.</p> -<p>The members of his tribe are, moreover, to the savage, for the -most part, his kinspeople. If they are not actually related to him -by blood, they are usually conceived by him to be so related. The -co-villagers of an Indian community call each other brothers. It is -a characteristic of all the Aryan and Semitic races when in the -tribal state to conceive that the tribes themselves, and all -subdivisions of them, are descended each from a single male -ancestor. The savage sees the living family of which he forms a -part descended from a single living man and his wife or wives. This -family group with which he is familiar and other similar groups -make up the tribe. And the process by which each family has been -brought about is in his mind identical with the process by which -the community as a whole has been formed.<sup><small><a href= -"#part3-chapter3-footnote2" id="part3-chapter3-ref2b" name= -"part3-chapter3-ref2b">[2b]</a></small></sup> It is a conception of -this kind, handed down as a tradition from ancient tribal times, -which causes the Jews even to-day to regard themselves as the -‘seed’ of that venerable sheik who, so many centuries ago, led them -as a band of nomads in their memorable migration westward from the -plains of Mesopotamia. It is not strange, therefore, considering -all of the circumstances in the midst of which the savage lives and -moves, that he should look upon his fellow-tribesmen as beings to -be distinguished by him from all other beings in the universe.</p> -<p>Nor is it strange, when we consider the mental sterility of the -savage, his lack of travel and imagination, the meagerness of his -experiences, and his utter ignorance of the world beyond the -community in which he lives, that he should look upon and treat all -outsiders as nobodies—as beings without any claims whatever upon -his humanity or mercy. The imagination is the picturing power of -the mind, the power by which beings are able to get out of -themselves and into the places of others, the power which enables -us to view the world comparatively—that is, from different points -of view. This power of mind, which imparts to the higher types of -intelligence their mobility and sympathy, is rudimentary in the -savage. This has been proved by Tylor in his study of the -comparative mythology of savages. It is this lack of imagination in -the savage, combined with his ignorance and his simplicity of life, -which gives to him his ferocity, and which renders him inaccessible -to those higher sentiments of justice and righteousness which -are—well, which are, at least, dreamed about and theorised about by -the more evolved savages of the ‘civilised world.’ The world, to -the simple mind of the savage, is, as it is to the mind of the -child, the world in which he lives and moves—the world which he -feels, hears, tastes, and sees. The horizon is the boundary of the -universe. Beings beyond his tribe are outside of the world. If they -exist at all, it is as a very different order of beings from him -and his people. They are not of kin to him, speak a strange tongue, -and have monstrous customs and superstitions. How could they be in -any way related to him? They are his enemies—vague villainous -apparitions who appear to him only in the horrible ordeals of -battle. His chief occupation is the waging of war against them, and -his keenest gratification is felt in laying them low. The accounts -of all travellers testify that the intertribal relations of savages -are, with few exceptions, those of chronic feud and hostility. The -irreconcilable antagonism between the savage and those around him -begets in the savage nature its dominating impulse—hate, hatred and -hostility toward other men, as well as toward all other beings. In -fact, the savage makes no moral distinction between man and the -other animals, but regards them all indiscriminately as his foes, -whom he must either use or remove from the face of the earth. The -savage hunts men about as he hunts other animals, and for a like -purpose. The Troglodytes hunted the Ethiopians in four-horse -chariots with as little compunction as Americans hunt antelopes -to-day.</p> -<p><small id="part3-chapter3-footnote1"><a href= -"#part3-chapter3-ref1a">1a.</a> <a href= -"#part3-chapter3-ref1b">1b.</a> Spencer: <em>Principles of -Ethics</em>, vol. i.; New York, 1893..</small><br /> -<small id="part3-chapter3-footnote2"><a href= -"#part3-chapter3-ref2a">2a.</a> <a href= -"#part3-chapter3-ref2b">2b.</a> Maine: <em>Early History of -Institutions</em>; New York, 1869.</small><br /> -<small id="part3-chapter3-footnote3"><a href= -"#part3-chapter3-ref3">3.</a> Tennent: <em>Natural History of -Ceylon</em>; London, 1861.</small><br /></p> -<h3 id="part3-chapter4">IV. The Ethics of the Ancient.</h3> -<p>But the doctrine that each petty tribe is the centre of the -world and the only real and important people in the universe, and -that all others are mere nobodies, is not peculiar to primitive -peoples. Ethnocentric ethics—the ethics of amity toward their own -tribe or state, their own clique or kind, and the ethics of enmity -toward outsiders—has been manifested to a greater or less extent by -the peoples of all times and of all degrees of enlightenment. Every -people that has ever existed has had its own particular point of -view, its own bias, its own knot-hole, large or small, through -which it has looked at life and the world. This is inevitable. It -arises as a necessary sequence out of the fact that all peoples -above savages are the descendants of savages, and as such have -inherited the limitations, mental and environmental, of those from -whom they have evolved.</p> -<p>Aliens had no legal rights in ancient times—none whatever. -International cooperation, such as exists among the political -societies of Europe and America to-day, was absolutely unknown. -International relations were everywhere those of hostility. States -and races looked upon each other as foes, as objects of plunder and -victimisation, not as friends.</p> -<p>Caesar says of the ancient Germans that depredations committed -beyond the boundaries of each state bore no infamy, and that -stealing from aliens was even encouraged as a means of teaching -their young men adroitness.</p> -<p>The ancient Jews are an excellent illustration of a narrow and -self-centred people. Notwithstanding their insignificance, -politically and intellectually, as compared with the Egyptians, -Greeks, and Persians, the Jews believed themselves to be the only -people of the first class inhabiting the earth. They conceived that -they had been selected as favourites by the gods themselves, and -that around their little district in half-arid Palestine revolved -the interests of the entire world. Their chief city was supposed to -be the sacred and central city of the world, and heaven itself only -a new and idealised edition of their metropolis. Every Jew was -bound to every other Jew by high-wrought ceremony and obligation. -But all non-Jews were ‘Gentiles,’ chaff-like ‘pagans,’ who -possessed no rights which a ‘child of Abraham’ was bound to -respect. Their tribal god is said to have been so indulgent toward -them as his ‘chosen people’ that he allowed them to exact usury -from foreigners, to sell them diseased meats, and to borrow jewels -from them and afterwards run away with them. He even permitted them -to make war upon weak peoples and dispossess them of their lands. -‘Whomsoever the Lord our God shall drive out from before us, them -will we possess’ (Judg. xi. 24).</p> -<p>The kings of the ancient Assyrians were so accustomed to -cruelties upon non-Assyrians, and were so proud of these cruelties, -that they recorded them in stone as a claim to immortality among -men. Assurbanipal, in speaking of the conquered, says: ‘I pulled -out their tongues and cut off their limbs, and caused them to be -eaten by dogs, bears, eagles, vultures, birds of heaven.’ -Assur-natsir-pal, another wonderful fellow, boasts similarly: ‘I -flayed the nobles and covered the pyramid with their skins, and -their young men and maidens I burned as a holocaust.’ ‘Their -carcasses covered the valleys and the tops of the mountains,’ says -Tiglath-Pileser in his account of the slain Muskayans; and -Sennacherib informs us proudly that he drove his chariot over the -dead bodies of his victims until ‘its wheels were clogged with -flesh and blood.’ ‘Evidently’ remarks Spencer, in speaking of these -monstrous inscriptions, ‘the expectation was that men of -after-times would admire these merciless destructions; for we -cannot assume that these Assyrian kings intentionally made -themselves eternally infamous’.<sup><small><a href= -"#part3-chapter4-footnote1" id="part3-chapter4-ref1" name= -"part3-chapter4-ref1">[1]</a></small></sup></p> -<p>To the ancient Greeks there were two classes of human beings in -the world: Greeks and ‘barbarians.’ The Greeks were the inhabitants -of Hellas, which was believed to be the central region of the -world, and the ‘barbarians’ were the godless denizens of the -less-favoured and less centrally located remainder of the earth. -The world was believed to be flat or shield-shaped, and in its -exact centre stood Mount Olympus in northern Thessaly. This -mountain, which is 9,700 feet high, was supposed to be the highest -elevation on the earth, and was the awful abode of the gods. The -Greeks called themselves Hellenes. According to their fabled -genealogy, they were the descendants of Hellen, son of Deucalion, -the Greek Noah. While they were often at war with each other, they -spoke a common language, and always regarded themselves as members -of a single family. All non-Greeks were ‘barbarians,’ including the -Romans, who were called ‘barbarians’ down to the time of Augustus. -While the Greeks themselves traced their ancestry back to the -bright blood of the gods, the ‘barbarians’ were generally supposed -to have originated from stones and trees. The ‘barbarians’ were -looked upon and treated by the Greeks everywhere as a different -order of beings from themselves. Those taken by them in war were -regularly reduced to slavery. The slave population created in this -way was increased by the slave traffic carried on with the East -until the slave population of Greece was several times as great as -the free population. The whole Hellenic world, in fact, even in the -days of its greatest magnificence, was one vast pen of slaves. -Almost every freeman of Attica was a slave-owner. Out of a -population of about five hundred thousand, four hundred thousand -were slaves. It was considered a real hardship by the Greeks to be -compelled to get along with less than a half-dozen slaves. In -Corinth and Aegina there were ten slaves to one freeman. In Sparta -the slaves were the vanquished Helots, the original inhabitants of -the Peloponnesus, whom the Spartans had conquered and reduced to -chains in early times. Their lot was particularly horrible. They -were the property of the state, and were distributed to the Spartan -lords by lot. ‘They practically had no rights which their masters -felt bound to respect. If one of their number displayed unusual -powers of either body or mind, he was secretly assassinated, as it -was deemed unsafe to allow such qualities to be fostered in the -servile class. It is affirmed [by Thucydides] that, when the Helots -grew too numerous for the supposed safety of the state, their -numbers were thinned by deliberate massacre of the surplus -population’.<sup><small><a href="#part3-chapter4-footnote2" id= -"part3-chapter4-ref2" name= -"part3-chapter4-ref2">[2]</a></small></sup> The conception of human -slavery entertained by the common mass of Greeks may be inferred -from the fact that philosophers like Aristotle taught that ‘slaves -were simply domestic animals possessed of intelligence.’ It is this -fact, this utter lack of justice and humanity manifested by the -Greeks in their treatment of non-Hellenic mankind, which gives to -Greek ‘civilisation’ its seamy side. Greek society has been -appropriately likened to a pyramid, its apex gleaming with light -and splendour, while its base was sunk in darkness.</p> -<p>Non-Romans were called ‘barbarians’ also by the Romans, and were -considered by the Romans to be an entirely different order of -beings from themselves. Any splinter of a Roman was, according to -the Romans, superior to the most illustrious ‘barbarian.’ Men were -not treated nor estimated according to their intrinsic qualities, -but wholly as to whether they were or were not ‘Roman citizens.’ To -be a ‘Roman citizen’ was to be entitled to everything; to be a -‘barbarian’ was not to be entitled to anything necessarily, except -to serve in some way the all-glorious Romans. The elaborate legal -and ethical codes formulated by these masters of the Mediterranean -were reserved religiously for themselves. The business of the -‘barbarians’ was to furnish fields for pillage and conquest, to -impart magnitude to triumphal pageants, to act as slaves, and to -die by ignominiously butchering each other for the amusement of -their bloodthirsty masters. ‘Barbarian’ lands were looked upon -simply as game-preserves where ambitious captains from the Tiber -went to refresh their reputations by hunting and victimising the -inhabitants. The history of Rome is the history of infamy on a -colossal, almost world-wide, scale. There has never been displayed -by any people pretending to be civilised such shameless savagery as -that displayed by the Romans in their gladiatorial arenas, where -men (generally the captives of war) were ‘butchered to make a Roman -holiday.’ These tragedies, in their magnitude and atrocity, seem -almost frightful when we read of them on the pages of history. They -were generally celebrated by victorious captains and emperors at -the close of some unusual outrage against the ‘barbarians,’ or upon -the departure of Roman legions for the field of activity. The -celebrations sometimes lasted weeks, or even months. The Emperor -Trajan celebrated his victories over the Dacians with shows that -lasted more than a hundred days. During this horrible festival ten -thousand men fought upon the arena, and more than ten thousand wild -animals were slain. The gladiators in these ancient combats fought -in chariots, on horseback, on foot—in all the ways in which -soldiers fought in actual battle. They fought with swords, lances, -daggers, tridents, and every other manner of weapon. Some had nets -and lassoes with which they entangled their adversaries, and then -slew them. The life of a wounded gladiator was in the hands of the -spectators, who showed their clemency or their lack of it by -turning their thumbs respectively down or up. The thirst of the -populace for blood was sometimes such that the dying were aroused -and forced on to the fight by burning with a hot iron. The dead -bodies were dragged from the arena with hooks, like the carcasses -of animals, and the pools of blood soaked up with dry -sand.<sup><small><a href="#part3-chapter4-footnote3" id= -"part3-chapter4-ref3a" name= -"part3-chapter4-ref3a">[3a]</a></small></sup> There was an -occasional Roman, like Seneca, sane enough to realise the real -character of these performances, and brave enough to denounce them -as crimes. But by the great mass of all classes of Romans, even by -those who pretended to think, they were regarded with perfect moral -indifference. The excuse offered by Pliny was generally concurred -in by his countrymen, that these bloody shows were necessary for -the cultivation of manliness and for keeping awake the strenuous -and red-handed instincts in the young.</p> -<p>Scarce less revolting than the gladiatorial arena, in its -violation of every principle of humanity, was the institution of -human slavery. During the later republic and the earlier empire, -one-half the population of the Roman state was slaves. The slave -population was recruited chiefly, as in Greece, by war and by -slave-hunting. Slave-traders and slave-markets flourished both in -the capital itself and in all the great ports visited by Roman -ships. Some of the outlying provinces of Asia and Africa were -almost depopulated by the slave-hunters. Greek slaves were the -highest-priced, because the most intelligent. Among the wealthy, -who, like the illiterate rich of every age, dawdled their time in -ostentation, there were slaves for each different function in the -household. There were the <em>cubicularii</em>, who acted as -housemaids; the <em>triclinarii</em>, who waited at table; the -<em>culinarii</em>, who acted as kitchen drudges; and the -<em>balnearii</em>, who looked after the baths. Then there were -<em>tonsores</em> or barbers; <em>criniflores</em>, or -hair-crimpers; <em>calceatores</em>, who took care of the feet; and -<em>lectores</em>, whose business it was to read aloud to their -masters at meals, in the bath, or in bed. The <em>ostiarius</em>, -who was sometimes chained in the vestibule like a dog, was the -porter; the <em>invitator</em> summoned the guests; and the -<em>servus ab hospitiis</em> looked after their lodgment. There was -the slave called the <em>sandalio</em>, whose sole duty was to care -for his master’s sandals; and another, called the -<em>nomenclator</em>, whose exclusive business it was to accompany -his master when he went upon the street, and give him the names of -such persons as he ought to recognise. The common punishment for a -refractory slave was beating. If the runaway were caught, as he -could hardly fail to be, since there were extremely heavy penalties -for harbouring or assisting him, he was either branded or had an -iron collar like a dog’s welded around his neck, or his legs were -fettered, or, in exaggerated or repeated cases of offence, he was -at once turned into the arena or otherwise put to death. If he -attempted to take personal vengeance upon his master for any wrong -whatsoever, his whole family shared his fate, and the regular form -of capital punishment for a slave was crucifixion under the most -ignominious and agonising circumstances.<sup><small><a href= -"#part3-chapter4-footnote4" id="part3-chapter4-ref4" name= -"part3-chapter4-ref4">[4]</a></small></sup></p> -<p>‘In many cases, as a measure of precaution, the slaves were -forced to work in chains and to sleep in subterranean prisons. The -feeling entertained toward this unfortunate class in the later -republican period is illustrated by Varro’s classification of -slaves as “vocal agricultural implements,” and by Cato the Elder’s -recommendation that old and worn-out slaves be sold, as a matter of -economy. Sick and hopelessly infirm slaves were taken to an island -in the Tiber, and there left to die of starvation and -exposure’.<sup><small><a href="#part3-chapter4-footnote3" id= -"part3-chapter4-ref3b" name= -"part3-chapter4-ref3b">[3b]</a></small></sup> Slaves were -practically without any rights whatever to the world in which they -lived. A Roman could take the life of his Gallic slave with as -complete impunity as an American can slay his bovine servant -to-day. Romans, in short, looked upon and treated non-Romans about -as human beings to-day look upon and treat non-humans—<em>as mere -prey</em>.</p> -<p><small id="part3-chapter4-footnote1"><a href= -"#part3-chapter4-ref1">1.</a> Spencer: <em>Principles of -Ethics</em>, vol. i.; New York, 1893.</small><br /> -<small id="part3-chapter4-footnote2"><a href= -"#part3-chapter4-ref2">2.</a> Myers: <em>Ancient History</em>, part -i.; Boston, 1899.</small><br /> -<small id="part3-chapter4-footnote3"><a href= -"#part3-chapter4-ref3a">3a.</a> <a href= -"#part3-chapter4-ref3b">3b.</a> Myers: <em>Ancient History</em>, -part ii.; Boston, 1899.</small><br /> -<small id="part3-chapter4-footnote4"><a href= -"#part3-chapter4-ref4">4.</a> Preston and Dodge: <em>The Private -Life of the Romans</em>; Boston, 1896.</small><br /></p> -<h3 id="part3-chapter5">V. Modern Ethics.</h3> -<p>But the peoples of the ancient world are not the only human -beings who have suffered from the psychological bequests of -savages. Modern states and peoples, notwithstanding their far-flung -professions of righteousness, manifest, though in a somewhat -weakened form, the same ethnic prejudices and the same senseless -antipathies as those displayed by the ancients. Remnants of the -primitive tribal morality are found in the moral habits and -conceptions of every people, however emancipated they may imagine -themselves to be. Many a person who would not think of swindling -one of his neighbours will not hesitate to swindle a foreigner, -especially if the foreigner happens to be of a nationality much -removed in language, colour, manners, or interests from his own. -Morality is genetic. It is not a consistent something—something -reasoned out and framed according to the facts. It has grown up. It -is essentially tribal—whether it is confined to a family, as is -done by some, to a corporation or trade, to a nation, to an -artificial fraternity, or to a species. We are, in fact, all of us, -even the broadest and most illuminated, simply savages more or less -leafed out. We all suffer, as men have always suffered, from the -over-vividness of the presentative powers of the mind (sensation -and perception) compared with the representative powers (memory and -imagination). We all exaggerate out of their proper perspective in -the phenomena of a universe the things that are around us and about -us—the events we witness or take part in, the things that are ours, -and the affairs of the street, city, state, neighbourhood, world, -and time, in which we live. Every human being (the sage less than -the savage, but the sage to some extent) is inclined to lump -together as foreign to him, and as more or less useless and shadowy -in themselves, the things, beings, and events that are distant, and -to consider them, of less reality than those with which he is -directly concerned, and of which his knowledge is immediate. -<em>The evolution of consciousness in its social and ethical -aspects consists in the evolution of the ability to make real and -vivid the phenomena that are more and more</em> <em>distant in both -space and time</em>.</p> -<p>The Chinese call their country ‘the flower of the middle,’ and -believe it to be the central and choicest portion of the earth’s -surface. All those beyond the bounds of ‘The Heavenly Flower -Kingdom’ are, by those on the inside, venomously lumped together as -‘foreign devils.’ The people of Spain look upon themselves in much -the same way as the Chinese look upon themselves, although they are -in reality the most belated of all peoples to-day pretending to be -civilised. There are a few travelled and educated Spaniards who -realise the pitiful place held by their country in the family of -reputable states. ‘But the great mass of the people are not only -perfectly satisfied with their condition, but consider themselves -the most fortunate of all God’s creatures. They never go outside of -their country and never read a foreign newspaper or book. Like the -Chinese, they consider other nations barbarians, and point to -Madrid as the centre of civilisation.’ The French, down to the -nineteenth century, confiscated the property of all aliens who died -within the realm; and the savage practice of punishing one alien -for the crimes of another alien was sanctioned by the laws of -England down to the middle of the fourteenth century. It has been -only a day in the history of the world since Caucasians hunted -their dusky brothers in Africa like ‘wild animals,’ and sold and -loaned and lashed them as we do horses to-day. Men now living can -remember when it made no difference how exalted in character men -might be: if a certain pigment of their bodies was dark, they were -‘niggers.’ They had no ‘souls’ as pale men had, and no more chance -of paradise than cattle. At the beginning of the nineteenth -century, incredible as it may seem, every country of Europe and -America held slaves, and was engaged in the soulless avocation of -man-hunting in Africa. Tens of thousands of Africa’s children were -annually seized by prowling pirate bands and exported to distant -lands to wear their lives out in disgrace and drudgery. It was not -until the latter part of the nineteenth century that civilised -nations, following the initiative of England, finally abolished -human slavery, the United States and Brazil being the last to act. -The Christian sneers at all who do not bow down to his deities and -worship according to his ritual, as ‘heathens’ or ‘freethinkers,’ -and to the Moslem all who are not followers of ‘the True Prophet’ -are ‘infidel dogs.’ The history of these two religions is a -chronicle of almost unparalleled crimes upon disbelievers.</p> -<p>But it is not necessary to go to Arabia or Cathay, nor even -necessary to read history, in order to find examples of bigotry and -provincialism. It is only necessary to open our eyes. Americans are -not a peculiar people—unless it be in the unbridled character of -their conceit. All the barbarism is not behind us nor around us. -History looks dark and discouraging to us, as we turn its terrible -pages, but we would see something just as discouraging if we would -look into a mirror. The old savage spirit still circulates in our -veins. The ‘foreigner’ is not an enemy, but he is still an -individual whose chief significance is in his ‘fleece.’ If the -‘foreigner’ did not ease our economic theories by benevolently -‘paying the tax,’ it would be hard to tell what would become of -him. Those who suffer from a different government, speak a -different language, or laud other gods are regarded by us as -distinctly inferior to ourselves. Millions of dollars are annually -squandered by self-righteous societies in sending missionaries to -the other side of the planet to peoples who need evangels of mercy -and humanity far less than we do ourselves. In these times of -ecclesiastical enterprise, however, missionaries are being -superseded, as agents of evangelisation, by the more effective -inventions of Messrs. Maxim and Krupp. ‘American’ is regarded by us -as the synonym of perfection, and to be ‘patriotic’ is to give -unthinking enthusiasm to every scheme incubated by wolfish -spoilsmen. Crimes of conquest carried on by others become, when -undertaken by us, shining masterpieces of ‘benevolent -assimilation.’ We are not so far from the naked and unkempt -contemporaries of the cave-bear and sabre-toothed lion as we -imagine we are. To carry a bayonet, and especially to redden it -with an alien’s blood, is here in this degenerate land of -Jefferson, more glorious than to create a book. Captains -particularly competent as butchers, though their characters be as -coarse as a savage chief’s, are hailed as heroes by thousands -besides silly women, and held up, like the cutthroats of the Kukis, -as the highest exemplars of right-doing. Old Rameses, holding by -their hair a half-dozen dwarfs, and ostentatiously cutting off -their heads with a single sweep of his sword, finds his modern -counterpart in miserable Americans pompously gloating over the -offhand slaughter of the children of distant archipelagoes.</p> -<h3 id="part3-chapter6">VI. The Ethics of Human Beings Toward -Non-human Beings.</h3> -<p>But the most mournful instance of provincial ethics afforded by -the inhabitants of the earth is not that furnished by the varieties -of the human species in their conduct toward each other, but that -afforded by the human race as a whole in its treatment of the -non-human races. Human nature is nowhere so hideous, and human -conscience is nowhere so profoundly inoperative, as in their -disregard for the life and happiness of the non-human animal world. -With the development of the representative powers of the mind, the -widening and mutualising of human activities, and the consequent -enlargement of the human horizon, the feeling of amity has spread -and intensified, until to-day, notwithstanding all that is true of -human sectionalism, the ethical systems of civilised peoples -include, theoretically at least, and more or less seriously, all -human beings whatsoever. Ethical consciousness has extended from -individual to family, from family to clan, from clan to tribe, from -tribe to confederacy, from confederacy to kingdom, from kingdom to -race, from race to species, until, in the case of many millions of -men, ethical feeling has reached, with greater or less vividness -and consistency, the anthropocentric stage of evolution. The fact -that an individual is a <em>man</em>—that is, that he belongs to -the human species of animals—entitles him in all civilised lands to -the fundamental rights and privileges of existence. The rights to -life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness are believed to-day, by -all exalted minds, to be the inalienable properties of every -<em>human</em> being who comes into the world.</p> -<p>But, except by occasional individuals here and there whose -emotions are more civilised than the rest, or whose conceptions are -more ample and clear, ethical relations are not extended by human -beings beyond the bounds of their own species. Non-human millions -are <em>outsiders</em>. They are looked upon and treated by human -beings as if they were an entirely different order of existences, -with entirely different purposes and susceptibilities, from human -beings. They are not considered to be living beings at all, as -human beings are, who are here in the world to enjoy life and all -that life holds that is dear to a living being. They belong to the -same class of existences as the waves of the sea and the weeds of -the field. They are looked upon as mere <em>things</em>—mere -moving, multiplying objects, without the slightest equity in the -world in which they find themselves. They may be set upon, beaten, -maimed, starved, assassinated, eaten, insulted, deceived, -imprisoned, robbed, tormented, skinned alive, shot down for -pastime, cut to pieces out of curiosity, or compelled to undergo -any other enormity or victimisation anybody can think of or is -disposed to visit upon them. It is enough almost to make knaves -shudder, the cold-blooded and business-like manner in which we cut -their throats, dash out their brains, and discuss their flavour at -our cannibalistic feasts. As Plutarch says, ‘Lions, tigers, and -serpents we call savage and ferocious, yet we ourselves come behind -them in no species of barbarity.’ Accustomed from our cradle up to -look upon violence and assassination, we have become so habituated -and hardened to these things that we perpetrate them and see them -perpetrated with the same indifference as that with which we watch -waves die on the beach. Human beings are, in fact (‘paragons’ -though they pretend to be), the most predatory and brutal of all -animals—the great bone-breakers and bone-pickers of the planet.</p> -<p>It is scarcely possible, astounding as it is, to commit crimes -upon any beings in this world, except men. There are no beings in -the universe, according to human beings, except themselves. All -others are commodities. They are of consequence only because they -have thighs and can fill up the unoccupied places of the human -alimentary. Human beings are ‘persons,’ and have souls and gods and -places to go to when they die. But the hundreds of thousands of -other races of terrestrial inhabitants are mere ‘animals,’ mere -‘brutes,’ and ‘beasts of the field,’ ‘livestock’ and ‘vermin.’ -Every crime capable of being perpetrated by one being upon another -is day after day rained upon them, and with an equanimity that -would do honour to the managers of an inferno. Human beings preach -as the cardinal rule of morality—and they seem never to tire of its -reiteration—that they should do unto others as they would that -others would do unto them; but they hypocritically confine its -application to the members of their own crowd, notwithstanding -there are the same reasons identically for extending it to all -creatures. The happiness of the human species is assumed to be so -much more precious than that of others that the most sacred -interests of others are unhesitatingly sacrificed in order that -human desires may all be fastidiously catered to. Even for a tooth -or a feather or a piece of skin to wear on human vanity, forests -are depopulated and the land filled with the dead and dying. -Assassination is the commonest and most fashionable of human -pastimes. Jaded systems are regularly recuperated by massacre. Men -arm themselves—men who roar about ‘rights,’ and even ministers of -mercy—and go out on killing expeditions with as little compunction -as savages put on war-paint. They come back from their campaigns of -crime like the cut-throats of old Rome, trailing their victims as -trophies, and expecting to be hailed as heroes for the hells they -have established. Barbarians preponderate, and morality is turned -inside out. Cruelty is lionised, and broad-mindedness is rewarded -with a sneer. Compassion is a disease, and to be fashionable is to -be a fiend. If non-human peoples had no nerves and no choice of -emotions, and were utterly indifferent to life, they could scarcely -be treated more completely as personal nonentities.</p> -<p>The denial by human animals of ethical relations to the rest of -the animal world is a phenomenon not differing either in character -or cause from the denial of ethical relations by a tribe, people, -or race of human beings to the rest of the human world. The -provincialism of Jews toward non-Jews, of Greeks toward non-Greeks, -of Romans toward non-Romans, of Moslems toward non-Moslems, and of -Caucasians toward non-Caucasians, is not one thing and the -provincialism of human beings toward non-human beings another. They -are all manifestations of the same thing. The fact that these -various acts are performed by different individuals and -<em>upon</em> different individuals, and are performed at different -times and places, does not invalidate the essential sameness of -their natures. Crimes are not classified (except by savages or -their immediate derivatives) according to the similarity of those -who do them or those who suffer from them, but by grouping them -according to the similarity of their intrinsic qualities. All acts -of provincialism consist essentially in the disinclination or -inability to be universal, and they belong in reality, all of them, -to the same species of conduct. There is, in fact, but one great -crime in the universe, and most of the instances of terrestrial -wrong-doing are instances of this crime. It is the crime of -<em>exploitation</em>—the considering by some beings of themselves -as <em>ends</em> and of others as their <em>means</em>—the refusal -to recognise the equal, or the approximately equal, rights of all -to life and its legitimate rewards—the crime of acting toward -others as one would that others would <em>not</em> act toward him. -For millions of years, almost ever since life began, this crime has -been committed, in every nook and quarter of the inhabited -globe.</p> -<p><em>Every being</em> is an <em>end</em>. In other words, every -being is to be taken into account in determining the ends of -conduct. This is the only consistent outcome of the ethical process -which is in course of evolution on the earth. This world was not -made and presented to any particular clique for its exclusive use -or enjoyment. The earth belongs, if it belongs to anybody, to the -beings who inhabit it—to <em>all</em> of them. And when one being -or set of beings sets itself up as the sole end for which the -universe exists, and looks upon and acts toward others as mere -means to this end, it is usurpation, nothing else and never can be -anything else, it matters not by whom or upon whom the usurpation -is practised. A tyrant who puts his own welfare and aggrandisement -in the place of the welfare of a people, and compels the whole -people to act as a means to his own personal ends, is not more -certainly a usurper than is a species or variety which puts its -welfare in the place of the welfare of all the inhabitants of a -world. The refusal to put one’s self in the place of others and to -act toward them as one would that they would act toward him does -not depend for its wrongfulness upon who makes the refusal or upon -whether the refusal falls upon this or that individual or set. -Deeds are right and wrong in themselves; and whether they are right -or wrong, good or evil, proper or improper, whether they should be -done or should not be done, <em>depends upon their effects upon the -welfare of the inhabitants of the universe</em>. The basic mistake -that has ever been made in this egoistic world in the judging and -classifying of acts has been the mistake of judging and classifying -them with reference to their effects upon some particular fraction -of the inhabitants of the universe. In pure egoism conduct is -judged as good or bad solely with reference to the results, -immediate or remote, which that conduct produces, or is calculated -to produce, on the <em>self</em>. To the savage, that is right or -wrong which affects favourably or unfavourably <em>himself</em> or -his <em>tribe</em>. And this sectional spirit of the savage has, as -has been shown, characterised the moral conceptions of the peoples -of all times. The practice human beings have to-day—the practice of -those (relatively) broad and emancipated minds who are large enough -to rise above the petty prejudices and ‘patriotisms’ of the races -and corporations of men, and are able to view ‘the world as their -country’ (the world of <em>human</em> beings, of course)—the -practice such minds have of estimating conduct solely with -reference to its effects upon the human species of animals is a -practice which, while infinitely broader and more nearly ultimate -than that of the savage, belongs logically in the same category -with it. The partially emancipated human being who extends his -moral sentiments to all the members of his own species, but denies -to all other species the justice and humanity he accords to his -own, is making on a larger scale the same ethical mess of it as the -savage. The only consistent attitude, since Darwin established the -unity of life (and the attitude we shall assume, if we ever become -really civilised), is the attitude of <em>universal gentleness and -humanity</em>.</p> -<p>‘The world is my country,’ said Thomas Paine, and every man, -woman, and child capable of appreciating the exalted sentiment -applauded. But ‘the world’ of the great freethinker was inhabited -by <em>men only</em>.</p> -<p>The following lines were written by Robert Whitaker, and first -printed in a San Francisco newspaper:</p> -<blockquote> -<p>‘My Country is the world! I count<br /> -No son of man my foe,<br /> -Whether the warm life currents mount<br /> -And mantle brows like snow,<br /> -Or whether yellow, brown, or black,<br /> -The face that into mine looks back.<br /> -<br /> -‘My Native Land is Mother Earth,<br /> -And all men are my kin,<br /> -Whether of rude or gentle birth,<br /> -However steeped in sin;<br /> -Or rich or poor, or great or small,<br /> -I count them brothers one and all.<br /> -<br /> -‘My Flag is the star-spangled sky,<br /> -Woven without a seam,<br /> -Where dawn and sunset colours lie,<br /> -Fair as an angel’s dream,<br /> -The Flag that still unstained, untorn,<br /> -Floats over all of mortal born<br /> -<br /> -‘My Party is all humankind,<br /> -My Platform, brotherhood;<br /> -I count all men of honest mind<br /> -Who work for human good,<br /> -And for the hope that gleams afar.<br /> -My comrades in the holy war.<br /> -<br /> -‘My Country is the world! I scorn<br /> -No lesser love than mine,<br /> -But calmly wait that happy morn<br /> -When all shall own this sign,<br /> -And love of country, as of clan,<br /> -Shall yield to love of Man.’
</p> -</blockquote> -<p>Robert Whitaker, you are a grand improvement on the ‘jingo.’ But -you are still too small. There are conceptions as much more -prophetic and exalted than yours as your conception is superior to -that of the Figian.</p> -<p>Broad as he is who can look upon all men as his brethren and -countrymen—broad as he is compared with those groundlings called -‘patriots,’ who can see nothing clearly beyond the bounds of the -political unit to which they belong—he is not broad enough. He is -still a <em>sectionalist</em>, a <em>partialist</em>. He represents -but a <em>stage</em> in the process of ethical expansion. He is, in -fact, small compared with the <em>universalist</em>, just as the -savage is small compared with the philanthropist. ‘Mankind,’ -‘humanity,’ ‘all men,’ ‘the whole human family’—these are big -conceptions, too big for the poor little nubbins of brains with -which most millions make the effort to think. But they are -pitifully small compared with that grand conception of kinship -which takes in all the races that live and move upon the earth. -Smaller yet are these conceptions compared with that sublime and -supreme synthesis which embraces not only the present generation of -terrestrial inhabitants, but which extends longitudinally as well -as laterally, extends in time as well as in space, and embraces the -generations which shall grow out of the existing generation and -which are yet unborn—<em>that conception which recognises -earth-life as a single process, world-wide and immortal, every part -related and akin to every other party and each generation linked to -an unending posterity</em>.</p> -<p>Every individual, therefore, emancipated enough to judge of acts -of conduct according to their intrinsic natures and consequences -rather than according to some local or traditional bias, cannot -help knowing that the exploitation of birds and quadrupeds for -human whim or convenience is an offence against the laws of -morality, not different in kind from the offences denounced in -human laws as robbery and murder. The creophagist and the hunter -exemplify the same somnambulism, are the authors of the same kind -of conduct, and belong literally in the same category of offenders, -as the cannibal and the slave-driver. To take the life of an ox for -his muscles, or to kill a sheep for his skin is <em>murder</em>, -and those who do these things or cause them to be done are -<em>murderers</em> just as actually as highwaymen are who blow off -the heads of hapless wayfarers for their guineas. If these things -<em>seem untrue</em> it is not because they <em>are</em> untrue, -but because those to whom they seem so <em>are unable to judge -conduct from the quadrupedal point of view</em>. If there were in -this world beings as much more clever than Caucasians as Caucasians -are more clever than cows and sheep, and these beings should regard -themselves as the darlings of the gods and should attach a -fictitious dignity and importance to their own lives, but should -look upon Caucasians as simply so much ‘beef’ and ‘mutton,’ these -bleached terrorists of the world would in the course of a few -generations of experience probably become sufficiently illumined to -realise that current human conceptions of cows and sheep are not -only preposterous, but fiendish.</p> -<h3 id="part3-chapter7">VII. The Origin of Provincialism.</h3> -<p>Human provincialism, all of it, is the consequence of a common -cause—<em>the provincialism of the savage</em>. Back of the -provincialism of the savage is, of course, the antecedent fact of -primordial egoism. The savage is the common ancestor of all men, -and as such has imparted to all men their general characters of -mind and heart. Everything that grows, whether it be a tree, a -human being, a grass blade, or a race, grows from something. This -something, this germ or embryo from which each thing springs, -imparts to the thing its fundamental characters. However far -anything may evolve, and however much it may come to differ -superficially from its original, it will always remain at heart -more or less faithful to the facts of its genesis. This hereditary -tendency of everything, this tendency toward invariability, is the -conservative, or inertial tendency of the universe. All races, -colours, and conditions of men—civilised, slightly civilised, and -barbarous—extend back to, and take root in, savages, just as all -savages have probably sprung in some still more remote period of -the past from a single stirp of anthropoids. The savage is, -therefore, the author of human nature and philosophy. Just as the -fish, which is the common ancestor of all amphibians, reptiles, -birds, and mammals, has predetermined the general structural style -of all subsequently evolved vertebrates, so the savage, as the -original ancestor of mankind, has predetermined the general mental -and dispositional make-up of all higher men. That civilised and -semi-civilised men are naturally narrow and revengeful, selfish and -superstitious, and find it next to impossible to feel and act -toward others as they would like to have others feel and act toward -them, is, therefore, not more mysterious than that vertebrates have -red blood, two eyes, two pairs of limbs, and a backbone with a -bulging brain-box at the hither end of it. Just as the habits, -beliefs, and conceptions of the child persist, often but slightly -modified, in the full-grown man or woman, so the habits, beliefs, -and conceptions, formed by the race in its childhood, continue, -under the influence of the same laws of inertia, on into the more -mature stages of racial development. Human nature changes with -great reluctance, and only in its superficial aspects at that. -There are cave-men, men with the primitive ideas and practices of -the Stone Age, and men in the pastoral and hunting stages of -mankind, in all the highest societies of men. There is scarcely a -habit, vice, occupation, amusement, crime, or trait of character, -found among men of the past but may be seen still among our -contemporaries.</p> -<p>Altruism (other-love) is just as natural as egoism (self-love) -is. There is not so much of it in the world as there is of egoism. -But that is simply the misfortune of our place of existence. There -is no reason why there might not have been as much, or even more, -under different conditions. With the same antecedents, nothing can, -of course, happen differently from what does happen. But with -different antecedents, different causes, the results are bound to -be different. Civilised men are not beings of altruism, because -they are not the <em>effects</em> of that kind of <em>causes</em>. -But there is no reason why there might not be a world—several of -them, in fact, or even a universeful—where the inhabitants have -never known or heard of such an indelicate thing as of beings -preferring themselves to others—where it is as natural for them to -act toward each other according to what we call the Golden Rule as -it is for us terrestrial heathens to violate it. It is possible to -conceive of beings with even too much altruism. The ideal condition -is one of balanced egoism and altruism—one in which each thinks as -much of others as he does of himself, no more and no less. And if -beings were endowed with natures rendering them not only willing -but <em>determined</em> to act primarily in the interests of -others, and this condition of things were universal, there would be -about as much discord and strife as if everyone acted in the -interest of himself. The Golden Rule among a lot of hypothetical -otherists like this would be the opposite of ours, for, instead of -emphasising the importance of others as we do, they would need to -encourage regard for self. Wouldn’t it seem original to live in a -world where men were sent to gaol for over-benevolence, and where -sermons had to be preached on such texts as, ‘Love thyself as thy -neighbour’; ‘It is more blessed to receive than to give’; ‘Avoid -doing to yourself that which you do not like when done to others’; -‘The Lord loves a cheerful taker’; and the like?</p> -<p>The persistence with which savage ideas and instincts continue -to influence men long after those ideas and instincts have really -become anachronistic and vestigial is well illustrated by civilised -men and women everywhere. The sun continues to ‘rise’ and ‘set’ in -all civilised lands just as it used to do to the savage, although -men have long since learned that it does not do either. Hell, as -originally conceived, was an actual subterranean region, and heaven -was an abode located a few hours’ journey above the supposedly flat -earth. To-day we continue to say ‘<em>up</em> to heaven,’ and -‘<em>down</em> to hell’ (never ‘down to heaven’ and ‘up to hell’), -and always think of these places as being thus relatively located, -although it is extremely doubtful whether any really sane mind -continues to believe that hell is on the inside of the earth (or -any place else, for that matter), and although <em>up</em> means -simply away from the centre of the earth, and away from the centre -of a ball means literally every possible direction. The theological -theories of the origin, nature, and destiny of man and of the -universe in general, all of which originated in savage or -semi-savage minds, and all of which bear the unmistakable traces of -their origin, continue to cling to the minds of the masses of -civilised men, notwithstanding the inherent absurdity of these -theories, and notwithstanding the fact that their unsoundness is -vouched for by the most positive and unanimous assurances from the -scientific world. Why should civilised men and women, any of them, -be indifferent to the sufferings of others, or find delight in such -loathsome avocations as the fishing and hunting of their -fellow-creatures? Because their ancestors were savages, and they -are not yet sufficiently evolved to be independent of the instincts -of their savage sires. There is no other explanation. No human -being could enjoy seeing a pack of hounds hunt down and rend to -pieces a poor harmless hare—unless he were a savage. No human being -could go out to the abodes of the squirrel and quail, and shoot -murderous balls into their beautiful bodies for food or fun—unless -he were a savage. No human being would lounge all day about the -margins of a brook, blind to the beauties of the stream and the -glories of forest and sky, in order to thrust brutal hooks into the -lips of those whom he deceives, and drag them from their waters to -suffocate in the sun—unless he were a savage. No human being would -have palaces and parks and yachts and equipages, townships of -lands, packs of hounds, and studs of horses, troops of lackeys and -nothing to do, when all around him are the men and women who made -this wealth, half clad and half starved, suffocating in shanties -and working like wretches from morning till night—unless he were a -savage. All of these deeds are savage deeds, deeds of exceeding -thoughtlessness and brutality, and, instead of being enjoyable, are -to every emancipated mind positively painful.</p> -<p>Hunting, fishing, and fighting are the chief occupations of -savage life. Back of the activities displayed in these occupations -are powerful instincts prompting and sustaining them. Civilised -peoples are devoted primarily to the arts of industry and peace. -But there are enough savages in every civilised society, and enough -of the savage spirit in those who pretend to approximate the -civilised state, to give to civilised life a decidedly barbaric -aspect. War is a more or less regular exercise, and killing and -competing and torturing enter largely into the pastimes of all -peoples. Next to eating, fighting, in one form or another, is the -favourite pursuit of men nearly everywhere on holy days and days of -leisure. Whenever human beings have any energy or time left over -from what they are required to spend in maintaining their -existence, they use it in fighting somebody or in watching somebody -else fight. And generally the more brutal and sanguinary the -conflict, the more popular and satisfying it is. Witness the -bull-fights and cock-fights of Spain and Mexico, the fisticuffs of -Anglo-Saxons, and the baseball and slugball battles of the -Americans, where eager thousands gather and roar for hours like -hysterical idiots simply to see one animal or set of animals punish -or discredit another. If there are no pigeons to shoot, or if the -community is ruled by men and women who are too emancipated to -allow such things, we make glass birds and heroically bang away at -them, supplying by our imaginations the blood and agony of real -carnage. And if we can’t do anything else, we take some poor pig, -that never did anyone any harm in the world, and grease it and turn -it loose, and then take after it with knives, as Chicago butchers -do on vacation days, and see who can cut its throat the quickest. -This amusement, in pure barbarity, certainly stands pretty near the -top in the list of human pastimes so far invented. Maybe it is -outclassed by that other contest sometimes advertised as a feature -of butchers’ barbecues, in which a band of professional cutthroats -compete to see who can kill, skin, and eviscerate the largest -number of their fellow-beings in a given time.</p> -<p>Games and other performances in which interest is aroused by -contending or killing are all of them entertainments gotten up -primarily for the amusement of the under-exercised savage within -us. The bloody carnivals of the ancient Romans, which seem so -incomprehensible to the people of to-day, find their diabolical -parallels right here in our high-sniffing civilisation. The -bull-pen, where poor quadrupeds are baited by gorgeous assassins -for the amusement of Castilian communities, and the cockpit and the -prize-ring, where irate fowls and naked thugs peck and pound each -other to insensibility for the entertainment of blood-loving mobs, -are the legitimate successors of the gladiatorial arena of the -Romans. The gladiatorial horror is not changed, either in its -nature or functions, by changing the combatants to cocks and bulls. -The ringside roars that rise to-day beside the Tagus and the Hudson -over the fatal thrust of the matador or the knockout lunge of the -pugilist are howls of barbaric elation arising from the -satisfaction of the same instincts as those which seventeen -centuries ago made amphitheatres thunder at the spectacle of gutted -Gauls. The ability to enjoy strife and suffering in one form is not -different in kind from the ability to be entertained by strife and -suffering in any other form. Beings who can follow in riotous glee -the terrified form of a fleeing stag, or shout ecstatically at -sight of the death-stagger of a mangled ox, are psychologically -equipped to go into raptures over the blood-curdling combustions of -a literal hell.</p> -<p>Few pastimes indulged in by civilised peoples are more horrible -to an emancipated mind than that of bull-fighting. It is the -national amusement of Spain, and is carried on among all peoples -who have acquired their natures and institutions from the Spanish. -‘Every Sunday afternoon, whenever the weather permits, 14,000 or -15,000 men and women, representing every class of society, mothers -and grandmothers, priests and monks, assemble at the Plaza de Toros -in Madrid to witness the most brutal spectacle the human taste -approves. Six bulls are tortured and worried until they are -exhausted. Then they are killed by the thrusts of the sword of a -matador, who is the most popular person in the community and makes -more money than any other man. Often as many as twelve horses are -ripped open by the horns of the infuriated bulls, and are allowed -to die in the presence of the audience, with blood gushing from -their wounds and their entrails dragging upon the ground. This sort -of thing is carried on not only in Madrid, but is a regular weekly -festival in all the cities of Spain. The horses are blindfolded, so -they cannot even see what attacks them. The men who torture the -bulls have wooden screens behind which they can dodge when pursued, -and if one of the baited creatures crowds too closely upon any of -its tormentors, the other matadors throw a blanket over its head. -It is not sport, for the poor bulls have no chance whatever to -escape or to fight back. It is simply slow butchery, an exhibition -of unmitigated cowardice and cruelty. And yet, although the Spanish -people are the most religious people of Europe, 95 per cent, of the -population approve this atrocious barbarism—not only approve it, -but demand that the King shall appear in the royal box at every -bull-fight, or have his throne upset.’</p> -<p>The notorious ‘Juke’ family of criminals, who sprang from a -single ruffian who lived in 1720, has cost the State of New York -millions of dollars in money and incalculable misery and crime. But -the initial savage progenitors of the human species have stocked -the earth with the most stupendous array of wrong-doers—knaves, -felons, kings, warriors, barbarians, butchers, brutalitarians, -kleptomaniacs, and thugs—that has ever (let us hope) brought -damnation to a world.</p> -<h3 id="part3-chapter8">VIII. Universal Ethics.</h3> -<p>There are the same reasons for the recognition by human beings -of ethical relations to non-human beings as there are for the -recognition by human beings of ethical relations among themselves -Analyse the reasons for being considerate toward men, any variety -of men, and you will find the same reasons to exist for being -considerate toward all men. And analyse the reasons for being -altruistic toward men—for being kind and sympathetic toward -them—and you will find the same reasons to exist for being -altruistic toward those who are not men. The doctrine that we human -beings may perform upon the other inhabitants of the earth all -sorts of injurious acts, and that these acts when so performed by -us are perfectly right and proper, but that these same things when -done by others to us are crimes, is the logic of pure -brutalitarianism. It is a doctrine utterly without intelligence, at -variance with every sentiment of justice and humanity, and has no -legitimate existence outside the fibrous brains of ruffians.</p> -<p><em>Right</em> and <em>wrong</em> are qualities belonging to two -diverse kinds of conduct. They are the qualities which render -conduct respectively proper and improper. All terrestrial races -(unless the very lowest) have the power of experiencing two kinds -of conscious states—the desirable (pleasurable) and the undesirable -(painful). Now, if beings were indifferent as to what sort of -conscious states entered into and made up their experiences, there -would manifestly be no such thing as propriety and impropriety in -the causing of these states. But they are not indifferent. The -pleasurable experiences are the experiences all beings are seeking, -and the painful ones are the ones they are all seeking to avoid. -Those acts which help or tend to help beings to those experiences -for which they are striving are, therefore, right and proper, and -are, they and their authors, called <em>good</em>. While those acts -which compel beings to undergo that which they are striving to -avoid are improper and wrong, and are, they and their authors, -called <em>bad</em>. Kindness, courtesy, justice, mercy, -generosity, sympathy, love, and the like, are good, and -selfishness, cruelty, deceit, pillage, injustice, and murder, are -bad, because they are respectively the promoters and destroyers of -wellbeing and happiness in the world.</p> -<p>But these two kinds of conduct produce the same respective -effects upon non-human beings as they do upon human beings. The -emotion of a mangled sensory—is it not the same terrible thing -whether the sensory hang to the brain of a quadruped or a man? Do -shelter and food not affect shivering and empty cattle, horses, and -fowls, precisely as they do human beings? Thunder harsh words at -your dog. Will he not shrink and suffer, just as your child or -hired hand will under like acts of terrorisation? Speak kindly to -him, love him, and accord to him a quarter of the consideration you -claim for yourself. Is he not caused to be one of the happiest and -most devoted of associates? To take squirrels or song-birds, the -most active of animals, and shut them up in narrow cages, and keep -them there shut off from their companions and their own green world -their whole lives long; to take an animal as sensitive and -high-minded as the horse and put a pack on his back and a bit in -his mouth, and then strike him dozens of times a day with a lash -whose touch is like fire; to shoot off the legs and wings of birds -and fill their vitals with lead, and leave them to flounder out a -lingering death in the reeds and grasses—do these things not cause -misery and desolation in the world? To place temptations in the way -of fur-bearing animals and induce them to enter carefully concealed -traps, and then allow them to remain in the villainous clutches of -these devices, not minutes, but hours, perhaps days, until it suits -the convenience of the ensnarer to knock out their brains, or -until, crazed by pain, the poor wretches eat off their own limbs -and escape—is not this a <em>monstrous</em> thing to do?</p> -<p>Oh that men everywhere were moved by the deep tenderness and the -all-embracing sympathy of poor Robert Burns, who could apologise -with real feeling to a frightened field-mouse whom he had -accidentally upturned with his plough.</p> -<blockquote> -<p>‘Wee, sleekit, cow’rin’, tim’rous beastie,<br /> -O, what a panic’s in thy breastie!<br /> -Thou needna start awa’ sae hasty,<br /> -Wi’ bick’ring brattle!<br /> -I had be laith to rin and chase thee,<br /> -Wi’ murd’rous pattle!<br /> -‘I’m truly sorry man’s dominion<br /> -Has broken nature’s social union,<br /> -And justifies that ill opinion<br /> -Which makes thee startle<br /> -At me, thy poor, earth-born companion,<br /> -And fellow-mortal.’</p> -</blockquote> -<p>Long ago it was said, and truthfully, that the merciful man is -merciful to his ox. The truly kind man, the truly honest and the -truly humane man, is not kind and honest and humane to men only, -but to <em>all</em> beings—to the humble and lowly as well as to -the proud and powerful—<em>to all that have the misfortune to feel -and mourn</em>. Benevolence is the same beautiful thing whether it -pour sunshine into the dark and saddened souls of men or into the -dark and saddened souls of other beings. John Howard never -hearkened to a nobler duty when he lifted the darkness that hung -over English gaols than will some inflamed soul some day who hears -the cry of the lonely captives who to-day languish in menagerial -dungeons to satisfy human curiosity. He who will emancipate horses -from the hell in which they pass their lives—make them the -associates of men instead of their slaves—will deserve to stand in -the constellation of the world’s redeemers beside Garrison and -Garibaldi. Is there he who holds in his heart-cups the love and -compassion of Buddha? Let him go where the dagger drips and the -heartless pole-axe crashes, and the meek-eyed millions of the -meadows pour out their innocent existences in the soulless houses -of slaughter. Let him lift from off the races the hounding incubus -of fear, give back to them their birthright—the right to a free, -unhunted life—and make the great monster (man) to be their -high-priest and friend.</p> -<blockquote> -<p>‘Among the noblest in the land,<br /> -Though he may count himself the least,<br /> -That man I honour and revere<br /> -Who, without favour, without fear,<br /> -In the great city dares to stand<br /> -The friend of every friendless beast,<br /> -And tames with his unflinching hand<br /> -The brutes that wear our form and face,<br /> -The were-wolves of the human race.’</p> -</blockquote> -<p>If to do good is to generate welfare, then to cause welfare to a -horse, a bird, a butterfly, or a fish, is to do good just as truly -as to cause welfare to men. And if to do evil is to cause -unhappiness and illfare, then to cause these things to one -individual or race is evil just as certainly as to cause them to -any other individual or race. And if to put one’s self in the place -of others, and to act toward them as one would wish them to act -toward him, is the one great rule—the Golden Rule—by which men are -to gauge their conduct when acting toward each other, then this is -also the one great rule—the Golden Rule—by which men are to -regulate their conduct toward all beings. There is no escape from -these conclusions, except for the savage and the -fool.<sup><small><a href="#part3-chapter8-footnote1" id= -"part3-chapter8-ref1" name= -"part3-chapter8-ref1">[1]</a></small></sup></p> -<p><small id="part3-chapter8-footnote1"><a href= -"#part3-chapter8-ref1">1.</a> The deliberate causing of misery and -death to criminals, whether they be human or non-human beings, -individuals or species, is not, as is sometimes supposed, a -violation or reversal of the general theory of ethics. When they -are prompted by a spirit of tenderness and universal goodness -rather than by a spirit of revenge, penalties are justifiable by -the everyday assumption that it is sometimes wise to inflict or -undergo a certain amount of illfare in order to avoid or forestall -a larger amount. The problems of universal penology are not -different from those of human penology, practically the same cases -and perplexities being presented by all delinquents. See -‘Better-World Philosophy,’ by the author, pp. 218-227, for a -discussion of the function of punishment.</small></p> -<h3 id="part3-chapter9">IX. The Psychology of Altruism.</h3> -<p>The growth of altruism in the world has been largely -cotemporaneous with the growth of the power of <em>sympathy</em>. -Sympathy is the emotion a being has when by means of his -imagination he gets so actually into the place of another that his -own feelings duplicate more or less the feelings of that other. It -is the ability or the impulse to weep with those who weep, and -rejoice with those who are glad. Sympathy is the substance and the -only sure basis of morality—the only tie of sincere and lasting -mutualism. Men have always been to a considerable extent, and are -yet, disposed to think about and act toward each other from motives -of mutual fear or advantage. But such motives are not the highest -nor the most reliable bonds of fellowship and unity. True altruism -and solidarity—true expansion and universalisation of the self—are -found in sympathy. It is impossible for one individual to do in his -heart to another as he would that another should do to him, unless -he is at all times able and willing to get into the place of that -other, and to realise in his own consciousness the results to the -other of his acts. It is only when there is such an intertwining of -the consciousnesses that the joys and sorrows of each individual -consist to a greater or less extent of the reflexes of the joys and -sorrows around him that there exists true social oneness. The great -task of reforming the universe is, therefore, since the world is so -steeped in selfishness and hate, the task of endowing beings, or -the task of stocking the universe with beings, with dispositions to -get out of themselves. If the far-away first parents of men and -women had been broad-minded beings instead of narrow—had been -beings whose most natural impulse was to be kind to others, and -whose sympathies were as far-reaching as feeling—terrestrial life -would not to-day present to the all-seeing understanding the -disheartening spectacle it does present, and the long struggle for -justice and amelioration would not have been.</p> -<p>The primary fact prompting and underlying the exploitation of -one being or set of beings by another is, and has always been. -<em>Selfishness</em>. Whenever and wherever one people have -exploited another—whether the exploiters have been savages, Jews, -Romans, Caucasians, or men—they have done so primarily because the -act of exploitation was a convenience and pleasure to them and in -harmony with their natures. This selfishness, in the case of -civilised peoples, has been acquired by them through inheritance -from the savage tribes from whom they have severally evolved; and -the selfishness of the savage is a legacy from the animal forms -from whom the savage has come. Human selfishness is simply an eddy -of an impulse that is universal—an impulse that has been implanted -in the nature of the life-process of the earth by the manner in -which life has been evolved.</p> -<p>But there is another fact which has generally, if not always, -contributed to every act of exploitation in this world, and that is -<em>Ignorance</em>—ignorance on the part of those who have executed -the exploitation: not ignorance of grammar or geography or any -other particular branch of human information or philosophy, but -ignorance regarding those upon whom they have worked their -will—unconsciousness on the part of the exploiters of the -similarity which actually existed between themselves and their -victims. However free an individual may be from naturally selfish -impulses, he will never act in an altruistic manner toward others -unless he is able to realise that these others, are similar to -himself, and that acts toward them produce results of good and -evil, of welfare and suffering, similar to what these same acts -produce when done to himself. Altruistic conduct implies not only -altruistic impulses, but altruistic conceptions as well. Tyrants -hold, and have always held, themselves to be an entirely different -order of beings from their subjects, and far more deserving. Read -history—it is a tale told over and over. Between those who have -ruled and those who have served—between the Ends and the Means—has -ever yawned a chasm, wide, deep, and impassable. The exploited have -always been, according to their masters, a fibrous set, unfavoured -and unthought of by the gods, endowed with little feeling or -intelligence, and brought into existence more or less expressly as -adjuncts to their masters. This is the theory of the savage, and it -is the theory of all those who have inherited his narrow and -unfeeling philosophy. The Gentile had no rights because he was a -‘pagan.’ He was a human being, it is true, and had come forth from -the womb of woman, just as the Jew had. But he spoke a different -language from the Jews, had his own ways of life, belonged to a -different order of things, and was irritatingly unconcerned about -the gods and traditions of the ‘chosen people.’ The Gaul had no -rights that were inconvenient to Romans, because he was a -‘barbarian.’ The fact that he had blood, and brains, and nerves, -and love of life, and ambitions, and that he suffered when he was -subjected to humiliation, hard treatment, and death, just as Romans -did, was never really thought of by the arrogant and reckless -Romans. Romans never realised in their minds what it meant for -non-Romans to be treated as they were treated; and one reason why -they never realised it was because it was convenient for them not -to do so. To kill or enslave a Gaul or German we now know, who are -able to judge these acts from an un-Roman and unprejudiced point of -view, was practically the same crime as to kill or enslave a Roman. -But it was not so to Romans. The most trifling offence against a -Roman citizen was enough, according to Roman law, to condemn the -offender to execution. But the most horrible outrages, when -committed by Romans upon non-Romans, were nothing. Romans always -thought and felt <em>from the standpoint of Romans</em>. They never -got over into the world of the ‘barbarians,’ and really pictured to -themselves—<em>really felt</em>—the misfortunes of their victims. -It was the same way with the black man in the eyes of the white man -a generation or two ago; it is the same way with the brown man -to-day. The black man had no rights that were inconvenient for the -white man to respect, because he was a ‘nigger,’ and had no ‘soul,’ -and was the offspring of Ham. This spirit of unconsciousness, which -has been so prominent throughout the history of mankind, still -survives in the minds of civilised men and women to-day, as is -shown by the conception (or <em>mis</em>conception) cherished by -the Caucasian toward the ‘nigger,’ by the Christian toward the -‘heathen,’ by the Moslem toward the ‘infidel,’ by the Protestant -toward the Catholic, and <em>vice versâ</em>, by the plutocrat -toward the proletarian, by men toward women, and by the human being -toward the ‘animal.’</p> -<p>The psychology of the exploitation of nonhuman beings by human -beings is not different in kind from the psychology of any other -act of exploitation. The great first cause of man’s inhumanity to -not-men is the same precisely as the great first cause of man’s -inhumanity to man—<em>Selfishness</em>—blind, brutal, -unconscionable egoism. Monopolist-like man thinks and cares only -about himself. He has the heart of the bully—deriving from the -contemplation of his fiendish supremacy a sort of monstrous -satisfaction. But there is also present in this case the same -half-sincere, half-fostered nescience as in all other cases of -exploitation. The ox, the hare, the bird, and the fish have no -rights in the world in which they live other than those that are -convenient for men to allow to them, because they are ‘animals.’ -They are assumed to belong to an order of beings entirely different -from that to which human beings belong. They are filled with -nerves, and brains, and bloodvessels; they love life, and bleed, -and struggle, and cry out when their veins are opened, just as -human beings do; they have the same general form and structure of -body, their bodies are composed of the same organs busied with the -same functions; and they are descended from the same ancestors and -have been developed in the same world through the operation of the -same great laws as we ourselves have. But all of these things, and -dozens of others just as significant, are disregarded by us in our -hard-hearted determination to exploit them. We have a set of words -and phrases which we use in speaking of ourselves, and another very -different set for other beings. The very same things are called by -different names with wholly different connotations depending on -whether it is a man that is referred to or some other being. It is -‘murder’ to take the life of a human being, but to take the life of -a sheep or a cow is only ‘knocking it on the head.’ A man may -murder squirrels or birds all day—that is, he may do that which -when done to human beings is called murder—but it is only ‘sport’ -when done to these humble inhabitants of the wilds. The dead body -of a man is a ‘corpse’; the dead body of a quadruped is only a -‘carcass.’ A race of horses or dogs is a ‘breed’; but a breed of -men and women is always respectfully referred to as a race. We -perpetuate our blindness by the use of words. We accommodate our -consciences by inventing ways of looking at things that will bring -out our own lustre and relieve us from the ghastly faces of our -crimes. For the human race to rob and kill other races is the same -kind of activity exactly as it is for human beings to rob and kill -each other. But it is not considered so to-day—except by a few -lost-caste ‘visionaries’ scattered here and there over Christendom, -and some millions of ‘heathens’ in Asia.</p> -<p>A short time ago a series of letters came into my hands written -from Burmah by an American missionary in that country. According to -this writer, one of the greatest obstacles the missionaries have to -contend with in their work there is the hostility aroused in the -people by the killing and flesh-eating habits of the missionaries -themselves. The native inhabitants, who are the most compassionate -of mankind, look upon the Christian missionaries, who kill and eat -cows and shoot monkeys for pastime, as being little better than -cannibals. Contemplate the presumption necessary to cause an -individual to leave behind him fields white for mission-work, and -travel, at great expense, halfway round the earth in order to -preach a narrow, cruel, anthropocentric gospel to a people of so -great tenderness and humanity as to be kind even to ‘animals’ and -enemies!</p> -<p>We human beings feel at liberty to commit any kind of outrage -upon other races, and these outrages are looked upon by us as -nothing. But the most trifling annoyances of other races are deemed -by us of sufficient consequence to justify us in visiting upon them -the most fearful retributions. We can break up the laboriously -built home of a mother mouse in the rubbish-heap of our back yard, -scatter the pink babies of that mother over the ground to die of -cold and starvation, and cause the frightened mother to flee at the -risk of her very life—all to give to the terrier and ourselves a -little moment of savage pastime. But if that same mother, some hard -winter’s night, when she has failed in her search elsewhere for -something to stay her hunger, comes into our larder and nibbles a -bit of cheese or a few mouthfuls of crust from our pie, although -she takes but a crumb in all, and is as dainty in her feeding as a -lady, we immediately get out our traps and poisons and storm around -as if a murder or some other irreparable wrong had been committed. -We think of our acts toward non-human peoples, when we think of -them at all, <em>entirely from the human point of view</em>. We -never take the time to put ourselves in the places of our victims. -We never take the trouble to get over into their world, and realise -what is happening over there as a result of our doings toward them. -It is so much more comfortable not to do so—<em>so much more -comfortable to be blind and deaf and insane</em>. We go on quieting -our consciences, as best we can, by the fact that everybody else -nearly is engaged in the same business as we are, and by the fact -that so few ever say anything about the matter—anaesthetised, as it -were, by the universality of our iniquities and the infrequency of -disquieting reminders.</p> -<p>Many years ago an eccentric but gifted Englishman had a dream in -which he saw the fortunes of the world reversed. Man was no longer -master, but victim. The earth was ruled by the birds and -quadrupeds, the mice and monkeys, who proceeded to inflict upon -their erstwhile tyrant the same cruelties he had hitherto inflicted -upon them. ‘Multitudes of human beings were systematically fattened -for the carnivora. They were frequently forwarded to great -distances by train, in trucks, without food or water. Large numbers -of infants were constantly boiled down to form broth for invalid -animals. In over-populous districts babies were given to malicious -young cats and dogs to be taken away and drowned. Boys were hunted -by terriers and stoned to death by frogs. Mice were a good deal -occupied in setting mantraps, baited with toasted cheese, in poor -neighbourhoods. Gouty old gentlemen were hitched to night-cabs, and -forced to totter, on their weak ankles and diseased joints, to -clubs, where fashionable young colts were picked up, and taken, at -such speed as whipcord could extract, to visit chestnut fillies. -Flying figures in scarlet coats, buckskins, and top-boots were run -down by packs of foxes that had nothing else to do. Old cock-grouse -strutted out for a morning’s sport, and came in to talk of how many -brace of country gentlemen they had bagged. Gamekeepers lived a -precarious life in holes and caves. They were perpetually harried -by game and vermin; held fast in steel traps, their toes were -nibbled by stoats and martens; and finally, their eyes picked out -by owls and kites, they were gibbeted alive on trees, head -downwards, until the termination of their martyrdom. In one -especially tragic case, a naturalist in spectacles dodged about -painfully among the topmost branches of a wood, while a mias -underneath, armed with a gun, inflicted on him dreadful wounds. A -veterinary surgeon of Alfort was stretched on his back, his arms -and legs secured to posts, in order that a horse might cut him up -alive for the benefit of an equine audience; but the generous -steed, incapable of vindictive feelings, with one disdainful stamp -on the midriff, crushed the wretch’s life out’.<sup><small><a href= -"#part3-chapter9-footnote1" id="part3-chapter9-ref1" name= -"part3-chapter9-ref1">[1]</a></small></sup></p> -<p>The following is from the Chinese. The speaker is an ox:</p> -<p>‘I request, good people, that you will listen to what I have to -say. <em>In the whole world there is no distress equal to that of -the ox</em>. In spring and summer, autumn and winter, I diligently -put forth my strength; during the four seasons there is no respite -to my labours. I drag the plough, a thousand-pound weight fastened -to my shoulders. Hundreds of thousands of lashes are, by a leather -whip, inflicted upon me. Curses and abuses, in a thousand forms are -poured upon me. I am driven, with threatenings, rapidly along, and -not allowed to stand still. Through the dry ground or the deep -water I with difficulty drag the plough, with an empty belly; the -tears flow from both my eyes. I hope in the morning that I shall be -early released, but I am detained until the evening. If, with a -hungry stomach, I eat the grass in the middle of the field, the -whole family, great and small, insultingly abuse me. I am left to -eat any species of herbs among the hills, but you, my master, -yourself receive the grain that is sown in the field. Of the -<em>chen paddy</em> you make rice; of the <em>no paddy</em> you -make wine. You have cotton, wheat, and herbs of a thousand -different kinds. Your garden is full of vegetables. When your men -and women marry, amid all your felicity, if there be a want of -money, you let me out to others. When pressed for the payment of -duties, you devise no plans, but take and sell the ox that ploughs -your field. When you see that I am old and weak, you sell me to the -butcher to be killed. The butcher conducts me to his home and soon -strikes me in the forehead with the head of an iron hatchet, after -which I am left to die in the utmost distress. My skin is peeled -off, my bones are scraped, and my skin is taken to cover the drum -by which the country is alarmed.’</p> -<blockquote> -<p>‘Witness the patient ox, with stripes and yells<br /> -Driven to the slaughter, goaded as he runs<br /> -To madness, while the savage at his heels<br /> -Laughs at the frantic sufferer’s fury.’<br /></p> -</blockquote> -<p>The angler brags about his ‘haul’ and the hunter about his ‘bag’ -and his ‘big game’ with as little realisation of what these things -mean as the slave-master boasts of his ‘niggers.’ Men talk of -‘chops’ and ‘steaks’ and ‘roasts’ with the same somnambulism, the -same profound unconsciousness of what these things really signify -in the psychic economies of the world, as the conqueror -contemplates his ‘captives,’ the robber his ‘spoil,’ or the savage -his ‘scalps.’ If before the eyes and in the mind of each individual -who sits unconcernedly down to a parsleyed ‘steak’ could rise the -facts in the biography of that ‘steak’—the happy heifer on the far -western meadows, the fateful day when she is forced by the drover’s -whip from her home,<sup><small><a href="#part3-chapter9-footnote2" -id="part3-chapter9-ref2" name= -"part3-chapter9-ref2">[2]</a></small></sup> the arduous ‘drive’ to -the village and her baffled efforts to escape, the crowding into -cars and the long, painful journey, the silent heartaches and the -low, pitiful moans, the terrible hunger and thirst and cold, her -arrival, bruised and bewildered, in the city, her dazed mingling -with others, the great murder-house, the prods and bellowings, the -treacherous crash of the brain-axe, the death drop and shudder, the -butcher’s knife, the gush of blood from her pretty throat, and the -glassy gaze of her dead but beautiful eyes—there would be, in spite -of the inherent hardness of the human heart, a great drawing back -from those acts which render such fearful things necessary. If -human beings <em>could only realise</em> what the hare suffers, or -the stag, when it is pursued by dogs, horses, and men bent on -taking its life, or what the fish feels when it is thrust through -and flung into suffocating gases, no one of them, not even the most -recreant, could find pleasure in such work. <em>How painful</em> to -a person of tenderness and enlightenment is <em>even the -thought</em> of rabbit-shootings, duck-slaughterings, bear-hunts, -quail-killing expeditions, tame pigeon massacres, and the like! And -yet with what light-hearted enthusiasm the mindless ruffians who do -these atrocious things enter upon them! One would think that grown -men would be ashamed to arm themselves and go out with horses and -hounds and engage in such babyish and unequal contests as sportsmen -usually rely on for their peculiar ‘glory.’ And they would be if -grown men were not so often simply able-bodied bullies. <em>If -human beings could only realise what it means to live in a world -and associate day after day with other beings more intelligent and -powerful than themselves, and yet be regarded by these more -intelligent individuals simply as merchandise to be bought and -sold, or as targets to be shot at, they would hide their guilty -heads in shame and horror</em>.</p> -<p>The Being from whose breaking heart gushed these lines of sorrow -and sympathy on seeing a wounded hare was a god:</p> -<blockquote> -<p>‘Inhuman man! curse on thy barbarous art,<br /> -And blasted be thy murder-aiming eye:<br /> -May never pity soothe thee with a sigh,<br /> -Nor ever pleasure glad thy cruel heart!<br /> -<br /> -‘Go, live, poor wanderer of the wood and field<br /> -The bitter little that of life remains;<br /> -No more the thickening brakes and verdant plains<br /> -To thee shall home, or food, or pastime yield.<br /> -<br /> -‘Seek, mangled one, some place of wonted rest,<br /> -No more of rest, but now thy dying bed;<br /> -The sheltering rushes whistling o’er thy head.<br /> -The cold earth with thy bloody bosom pressed.<br /> -<br /> -‘Oft, as by winding Nith I, musing, wait<br /> -The sober eve or hail the cheerful dawn,<br /> -I’ll miss thee sporting o’er the dewy lawn.<br /> -And curse the ruffian’s aim and mourn thy hapless fate.’</p> -</blockquote> -<p>We human beings, in our conduct toward the races of beings -associated with us on this planet, are almost pure -<em>savages</em>. We are not even half civilised. And this fact is -certain to bring upon us the criticism and condemnation of the more -enlightened generations to come. The fact is apparent to-day, -however—just as apparent as the barbarity of the Romans—to everyone -who will take the trouble to rid himself of the prejudices which -enslave and blind him, and view human phenomena from an un-human, -extra-terrestrial point of view.</p> -<p>To most persons—to all except to a few—everything is simply a -matter of habit and education. And a majority of persons, too, can -become educated to one thing about as easily and completely as they -can to another. In Mr. Huxley’s ‘Man’s Place in Nature’ there is -reprinted from an old volume the picture of a butcher’s shop as it -is said to have existed among the savage Anziques of Africa in the -sixteenth century. Mr. Huxley says that the original engraving -claims to represent an actual fact, and that he has himself no -doubt but it does really stand for just what it purports to -represent, especially since the fact has been corroborated by Du -Chaillu in comparatively recent times. The fact for which this old -picture stands is a good illustration of the power of custom in -shaping human ideas. In this savage ‘market’ pretty much the same -line of goods appears as is found in modern ‘markets,’ except that, -instead of the quartered corpses of sheep and bullocks, there hang -the shoulders, thighs, and gory heads of men. The butcher is -represented as standing beside the chopping-block in the act of -cutting up the leg of a man. A child’s head and other fragments of -the human body are piled up on another block, and behind these on -pegs are ranged the more pretentious wares of the establishment. -‘Presently we passed a woman,’ says Du Chaillu, in speaking of the -cannibalism of the Fans, who were probably identical with those -referred to two centuries earlier as Anziques. ‘She bore with her a -piece of the thigh of a human body, just as we should go to market -and carry thence a roast of steak.’ We can easily imagine (by the -help of the sights we see every day) the anthropophagous crowd -standing around giving their early morning orders, and the -enterprising assassin hustling about to wait on them. One of them -wants an arm, another wants a leg, another a liver, another a -half-dozen nice fat ribs. One fellow wants a tender ‘cut’ of young -girl’s sirloin, and another would like an old man’s calf for soup. -A little naked urchin, who has had to wait a long time in order to -get a chance to buy anything at all, exchanges a few shells for a -section of human bologna. One fellow wants to know the price of the -boy’s head which lies on the neighbouring block, and a woman -complains that the baby’s brains which she bought the day before, -and which were recommended as being especially ‘fresh and nice,’ -turned out to be ‘bad.’ We can see them go home with their gruesome -purchases, cook them, and sit down and eat them, discussing their -flavour or their lack of it, and remarking their tenderness, -toughness, or juiciness, and finally throwing the bones out to the -dogs—all with as little thought of the immorality of it as -‘Thanksgiving’ gluttons have to-day at their feasts of blood. There -may have been an occasional ‘visionary’ among these people -fanatical enough to ‘refuse to eat meat,’ or even to protest -against the practice. Probably there was. There generally are a few -such discordants in every generation of vipers. But ‘fanatics’ in -those days were in all likelihood, as they are to-day, too few to -be troublesome.</p> -<p>To anyone familiar with the pliability of the human conscience, -or with the soundness and depth of intellectual sleep, these things -are neither impossible nor strange. There is so little looking into -the essence of things, so little looking at things as they are, and -so much thinking and doing as we are accustomed or told to think -and do—there are, in fact, so few who can really think at all—that -if we had been accustomed and taught to do so from childhood, and -the world were practically unanimous in its conduct and teachings -on the matter, very few of us indeed would not sit down to a -breakfast of scrambled infant’s brains, a luncheon of cold boiled -aunt, or a dinner of roast uncle, with as little compunction, -perhaps with the same horrible merriment, as we to-day attend a -‘barbecue’ or a ‘turkey.’ Why should we not make hash and sausages -out of our broken-down grandfathers and grandmothers just as we do -out of our worn-out horses, and help out the pigeons at our killing -carnivals with a few live peasants? How much more artistic and -civilised to pile our tables on holy days with the gold and crimson -of the fields and orchards than to load them with the dead! And yet -how strangely few are mature enough to care anything at all about -the matter.</p> -<p>Oh, the helplessness and irresponsibility of the human mind! -There is no spontaneity, no originality, only the dead level of the -machine. How impossible it is for us to think, to discover anything -unassisted, to perceive anything after it has been pointed out to -us even, if it is a little different from what we are used to! -This, it seems to me, is one of the most pathetic things in all -this world—this illimitable impotence, this powerlessness to -inspect things from any other point of view than the one we inherit -when we come into the world; to be a knave or lunatic (or the next -thing to it), and never have the slightest suspicion of the fact. -The human mind will certainly not always be this way. It will -surely be different some time. It seems incredible that the planet -will drag along in disgrace this way forever. The men of Europe and -America are not so primitive as the junglemen, and the junglemen -are superior in some respects to the quadrupeds and reptiles, and -this gives reason for a little hope. <em>But when that is the -question, when will it be? In what distant time will the Golden -Dream of our prophetic hours come to this poor darkened larva of a -world?</em> Ages upon ages after our little existences have gone -out, and the detritus of our wasted bodies has wandered long in the -labyrinths of the sod or been sown by aimless gusts over our native -hills.</p> -<p><small id="part3-chapter9-footnote1"><a href= -"#part3-chapter9-ref1">1.</a> Hamley: <em>Our Poor Relations</em>; -Boston, 1872.</small><br /> -<small id="part3-chapter9-footnote2"><a href= -"#part3-chapter9-ref2">2.</a> I have many times seen cows chased -all over their native premises, round and round, through fields and -barnyards, across streams and over fences—chased until the poor -things were utterly exhausted, and whipped and beaten until their -faces and backs were covered with wounds—before they could be -compelled to leave for ever the old farm where they had been born -and raised.</small><br /></p> -<h3 id="part3-chapter10">X. Anthropocentric Ethics.</h3> -<p>Anthropocentricism, which drifted down as a tradition from -ancient times, and which for centuries shaped the theories of the -Western world, but whose respectability among thinking people has -now nearly passed away, was, perhaps, the boldest and most -revolting expression of human provincialism and conceit ever -formulated by any people. It was the doctrine that man was the -centre about whom revolved all facts and interests whatsoever; and -Judaism and its two children, Christianity and Mahometanism, were -responsible for it. Everything, according to this conception, was -interpreted in terms of human utility. Everything was made for -man—including women. The sun and moon were luminaries, not worlds, -hung there by the fatherly manufacturer of things for the -convenience and delight of his children. The stars were -perforations in the overarching concave through which eavesdropping -prophets peered into celestial secrets, and errand-angels came and -went with messages between gods and men. Not only the spheres in -space, but the earth and all it contained—the rivers, seas, and -seasons, all the plants that grow, and all the flowers that blow, -and all the millions that swim and suffer in the waters and -skies—were, according to this remorseless notion, the soulless -adjuncts of man. Intrinsically they were meaningless. They had -significance only as they served the human species. The hues and -perfumes of flowers, the songs of birds, the dews, the breezes, the -rains, the rocks, the ‘beasts of the field and the fowls of the -air,’ the great forests, the mighty mountains, the fearful -solitudes, even famine and pestilence, were all made for the being -with the reinless imagination. Luther believed that the fly—festive -little <em>Musca domestica</em>, who inhabits our homes, and -sometimes unwittingly wanders over our tender places—was a -pestiferous invention of the devil, maliciously sent to annoy him -in his meditations. Garlic grew on the swamp brim as a handy -antidote for human malaria. Fruits ripened in the summertime -because the acids and juices which they contained were believed to -be necessary for man’s health and refreshment. The great muscles of -the ox were made to provide men with delicacies and leisure. The -cloak of the ewe was made without any special thought, or without -any thought at all, of the comforts of the ewe. It was placed there -on the ewe by an all-tender creator, to be torn by his images from -her bleeding back and worn. The fossil forms found in the rocks -were not the <em>bonâ fide</em> remains of creatures that had lived -and perished when the calcareous foundations of the continents were -forming in ancient sea-beds. They were counterfeits, slyly designed -by a suspicious providence, and sandwiched among the strata ‘to -test human faith.’ The rainbow was a phenomenon with which the laws -of reflection and refraction had nothing whatever to do. It was a -sign or seal stamped on the retreating storms as a pledge that -submersion would not be again used as a punishment for sinners. The -universal ruler was conceived to be an individual of transcendent -power and respectability, but was supposed to spend the most of his -time and a good deal of anxiety on the regulation and repair of his -illustrious likenesses.</p> -<p>The history of intellectual evolution is the history of -disillusionment. The stars, we now know, are not hatchways, but -worlds. They burn because they are fire. They blaze and circle in -obedience to their own unchangeable inertias, just as the earth -does. They blazed and wheeled when the elemental matters of the -earth mingled indistinguishably with the vapours of the sun, and -they will blaze and wheel when the last inhabitant of this clod has -dissolved into the everlasting atoms. The earth is not the capital -of cosmos nor the subject of celestial anxiety. The earth is a -satrap of the sun—a subordinate among servants, not a sovereign -with a retinue of stars. The earth and its contents were not made -for man. They were not made at all. They were evolved. The concaves -of the sea have been hollowed, the mountains upheaved, and the -continents planted and peopled, by the same tendencies as those -that hold the universes in their grasp. The primal matters of the -earth came out of the substance of the sun, and by the play and -activity of these elements and the play and activity of their -derivatives were evolved all the multitudinous forms of land, -fluid, plant, animal, and society. The flowers that ‘blush unseen’ -do not necessarily ‘waste their sweetness on the desert air,’ as -the poet so melodiously imagines. The colours and scents of flowers -serve their purposes—which are to secure the services of insects in -fertilisation—quite as well when unperceived, as when perceived by -human senses. The non-human races of beings were not made for human -beings. They were evolved—the higher forms from the lower forms, -and the lower forms from still lower—just as the higher societies -of men have been evolved, under the eye of history, out of -barbarism and savagery. They are our ancestors. They have made -human life and civilisation possible. They made their homes on -primeval land patches when the continents we creep over were -sleeping in the seas. They lived and loved and suffered and died in -order that a being intelligent enough to analyse himself and -recreant enough to pick their bones might come into the world.</p> -<p>There are supposed to be something like a million (maybe there -are several million) species of inhabitants living on the earth. -The human species is one of these. Not more than a few thousand of -these species are seriously advantageous to men. The harmful and -useless species are many times more numerous than the helpful. Now, -if the 999,999 non-human species were made for the human species, -why were the hundreds of thousands of species made that are of no -possible human importance, and the hundreds of thousands of other -species that are a positive injury? And if by some miraculous -stretch of imagination the 999,999 species now living on the earth -are conceived to have been made for man, why were the 10,000,000 or -15,000,000 of species made that lived and passed away before there -was a human being in existence. Perhaps the traditionist will -say—accustomed as he is to treat syllogisms with contempt—that they -were made to invigorate human ‘faith.’</p> -<p>If the age of the human species be estimated at 50,000 years and -the age of the life-process at 100,000,000 years, the time during -which man has been on the earth is, when compared with the entire -period during which the planet has been tenanted, as 1 to 2,000. -And the time during which the earth has been inhabited—immense as -that time is when compared with the little span of human history—is -also insignificant when compared with the enormous lapse of time -during which the planet was slowly cooling and solidifying -preliminary to the existence of life. And the entire life of the -planet—inconceivably vast as it is—is as nothing compared with that -eternity, that duration without beginning or close, during which -the sidereal millions have undergone, and are destined to continue -to undergo, their countless and immeasurable transformations.</p> -<p>It is about as profound to suppose that the earth and its -contents, and the suns, stars, and systems of space, were all made -for a single species inhabiting an obscure ball located in a remote -quarter of the universe as it is to suppose that the gigantic body -of the elephant was made for the wisp of hair on the tip of its -tail. <em>Man</em> is <em>not</em> the <em>end</em>, he is but an -<em>incident</em>, of the infinite elaborations of Time and -Space.</p> -<h3 id="part3-chapter11">XI. Ethical Implications of -Evolution.</h3> -<p>The doctrine of organic evolution, which forever established the -common genesis of all animals, sealed the doom of -anthropocentricism. Whatever the inhabitants of this world were or -were thought to be before the publication of ‘The Origin of -Species,’ they never could be anything since then but a -<em>family</em>. The doctrine of evolution is probably the most -important revelation that has come to the world since the -illuminations of Galileo and Copernicus. The authors of the -Copernican theory enlarged and corrected human understanding by -disclosing to man the comparative littleness of his world—by -discovering that the earth, which had up to that time been supposed -to be the centre and capital of cosmos, is in reality a satellite -of the sun. This heliocentric discovery was hard on human conceit, -for it was the first broad hint man had thus far received of his -true dimensions. The doctrine of evolution has had, and is having, -and is destined to continue to have, a similarly correcting effect -on the naturally narrow conceptions of men. It tends to fry the -conceit out of us. It has been impossible since Darwin for any sane -and honest man to go around bragging about having been ‘made in the -image of his maker,’ or to successfully lay claim to a more -honourable origin than the rest of the creatures of the earth. And -if men had accepted the logical consequences of Darwin’s teachings, -the world would not to-day—a half-century after his revelation—be -filled with practices which find their only support and -justification in out-of-date traditions. But logical consequences, -as Huxley observes, are the official scarecrows of that large and -prolific class of defectives usually known as fools. The doctrine -of evolution is accepted in one form or another by practically all -who think. It is taught even in school primers. But while the -<em>biology</em> of evolution is scarcely any longer questioned, -the <em>psychology</em> and <em>ethics</em> of the Darwinian -revelation, though following from the same premises, and almost as -inevitably, are yet to be generally realised. Darwin’s revelation, -like every other revelation that has come to the world, is -perceived most tardily by those working in departments where the -phenomena are the most intangible and complicated.</p> -<p>Darwin himself called ‘the love for all living creatures the -most noble attribute of man.’ Giant as he was, he perceived more -clearly than any of his contemporaries, more clearly even than his -successors, the ultimate goal of evolving altruism. For he says: -‘As man advances in civilisation, and small tribes are united into -larger communities, the simplest reason would tell each individual -that he ought to extend his social instincts and sympathies to all -members of the same nation, though personally unknown to him. There -is, then, only an artificial barrier to prevent his sympathies -extending to the men of all nations and races. Experience, however, -shows us how long it is, if such men are separated from him by -great differences of appearance or habits, before he looks upon -them as his fellow-creatures. Sympathy beyond the confines of man -is one of the latest moral acquisitions. It is apparently unfelt by -savages, except for their pets. The very idea of humanity, so far -as I could observe, was new to most of the Gauchos of the Pampas. -This virtue seems to arise from our sympathies becoming more tender -and more widely diffused, until they are extended to all sentient -beings.’<sup><small><a href="#part3-chapter11-footnote1" id= -"part3-chapter11-ref1" name= -"part3-chapter11-ref1">[1]</a></small></sup></p> -<p>The influences of a doctrine old enough and precious enough to -have become embodied in the life and institutions of a race persist -generally, through mere momentum, long after the substance of the -doctrine has passed away. This is eminently true of that -misconception which has come down to us regarding the nature and -origin of man and his relations to the rest of the universe. Darwin -has lived, shed his light over the world, and passed back to the -dust whence he came. Men no longer believe that other races and -other worlds were really made for them. But they continue to -<em>act</em> in about the same manner as they did when; they -<em>did</em> believe it. This assertion applies not simply to those -half-baked intelligences who have only the rudest and most -antiquated notions about anything but also to thousands of men and -women who pretend to have up-to-date conceptions of themselves and -the universe—men and women noted even for their activity in -reminding others of their inconsistency—men and women who</p> -<blockquote> -<p>‘Compound for sins they are inclined to,<br /> -By damning those they have no mind to.’</p> -</blockquote> -<p>The doctrine of Universal Kinship is not a new doctrine, born -from the more brilliant loins of modern understanding. It is as old -almost as human philosophy. It was taught by Buddha twenty-four -hundred years ago. And the teachings of this divine soul, spreading -over the plains and peninsulas of Asia, have made unnumbered -millions mild. It was taught also by Pythagoras and all his school -of philosophers, and rigidly practised in their daily lives. -Plutarch, one of the grandest characters of antiquity, wrote -several essays in advocacy of it. In these essays, as well as in -many passages of his writings generally, he demonstrates that he -was far ahead of his contemporaries in the breadth and intensity of -his moral nature, and in advance even of all except a very few of -those living to-day, 2,000 years after him. Shelley among the poets -of modern times, and Tolstoy in these latter days, are others among -the eminent adherents of this holy cause.</p> -<p>Wherever Buddhism prevails, there will be found in greater or -less purity, as one of the cardinal principles of its founder, the -doctrine of the sacredness of all Sentient Life. But the Aryan race -of the West has remained steadfastly deaf to the pleadings of its -Shelleys and Tolstoys, owing to the overmastering influence of its -anthropocentric religions. Not till the coming of Darwin and his -school of thinkers was there a basis for hope of a reformed world. -To-day the planet is <em>ripe</em> for the old-new doctrine. -Tradition is losing its power over men’s conduct and conceptions as -never before, and Science is growing more and more influential. A -central truth of the Darwinian philosophy is the unity and -consanguinity of all organic life. And during the next century or -two the ethical corollary of this truth is going to receive -unprecedented recognition in all departments of human thought. -Ignorance and Inertia are fearful facts. They endure like granite -in the human mind. But the tireless chisels of evolution are -invincible. And the time will come when the anthropocentric customs -and conceptions, which are to-day fashionable enough to be -‘divine,’ will have nothing but a historic existence. The movement -to put Science and Humanitarianism in place of Tradition and -Savagery, which is so weak, languishing, and neglected to-day, is a -movement which has for its ultimate destiny the conquest of the -Human Species.</p> -<p><small id="part3-chapter11-footnote1"><a href= -"#part3-chapter11-ref1">1.</a> Darwin: <em>Descent of Man</em>, 2nd -edit.; London, 1874.</small></p> -<h3 id="part3-chapter12">XII. Conclusion.</h3> -<p><em>All beings are ends;</em> <em>no</em> creatures are -<em>means</em>. All beings have not equal rights, neither have all -men; but <em>all have rights</em>. The <em>Life Process</em> is the -<em>End</em>—<em>not man</em>, nor any other animal temporarily -privileged to weave a world’s philosophy. Nonhuman beings were not -made for human beings any more than human beings were made for -nonhuman beings. Just as the sidereal spheres were once supposed by -the childish mind of man to be unsubstantial satellites of the -earth, but are known by man’s riper understanding to be worlds with -missions and materialities of their own, and of such magnitude and -number as to render terrestrial insignificance frightful, so the -billions that dwell in the seas, fields, and atmospheres of the -earth were in like manner imagined by the illiterate children of -the race to be the mere trinkets of men, but are now known by all -who can interpret the new revelation to be beings with -substantially the same origin, the same natures, structures, and -occupations, and the same general rights to life and happiness, as -we ourselves.</p> -<p>In their phenomena of life the inhabitants of the earth display -endless variety. They swim in the waters, soar in the skies, -squeeze among the rocks, clamber among the trees, scamper over the -plains, and glide among the grounds and grasses. Some are born for -a summer, some for a century, and some flutter their little lives -out in a day. They are black, white, blue, golden, all the colours -of the spectrum. Some are wise and some are simple; some are large -and some are microscopic; some live in castles and some in -bluebells; some roam over continents and seas, and some doze their -little day-dream away on a single dancing leaf. But they are all -the children of a common mother and the co-tenants of a common -world. Why they are here in this world rather than some place else; -why the world in which they find themselves is so full of the -undesirable; and whether it would not have been better if the ball -on which they ride and riot had been in the beginning sterilised, -are problems too deep and baffling for the most of them. But since -they are here, and since they are too proud or too superstitious to -die, and are surrounded by such cold and wolfish immensities, what -would seem more proper than for them to be kind to each other, and -helpful, and dwell together as loving and forbearing members of One -Great Family?</p> -<p class="small-caps">Act toward others as you would act toward a -part of your own self.</p> -<p>This is <em>The Great Law</em>, the all-inclusive gospel of -social salvation. It is the rule of social rectitude and perfection -which has been held up in greater or less perfection in all ages by -the sages and prophets of the human species.</p> -<p>Hear Confucius, the giant of Mongolia, and the idol and -law-giver of one-third of mankind:</p> -<p>‘What you do not like when done to yourself do not do to -others.’</p> -<p>And again he says:</p> -<p>‘Do not let a man practise to those beneath him that which he -dislikes in those above him.’</p> -<p>Over and over again the illustrious master repeats these -precepts to his disciples and countrymen.</p> -<p>In the Mahabharata, the great epic of the Sanskrit, written by -Indian moralists in various ages, and representing the accumulated -wisdom of one of the most marvellous of all peoples, we find these -words:</p> -<p>‘Treat others as thou wouldst thyself be treated.’</p> -<p>‘Do nothing to thy neighbour which thou wouldst not hereafter -have thy neighbour do to thee.’</p> -<p>‘A man obtains a rule of action by looking upon his neighbour as -himself.’</p> -<p>These same truths were also taught by Jesus, that godlike -Galilean, the great teacher and saviour of the Western world:</p> -<p>‘Love thy neighbour as thyself.’</p> -<p>‘Do unto others as you would have others do unto you.’</p> -<p>Oh that these words were etched in fire, and stamped in -scorching characters on the dull, cold hearts of this world!</p> -<p class="small-caps">Act toward others as you would act toward a -part of your own self.</p> -<p>Look upon and treat others as you do your own hands, your own -eyes, your very heart and soul—with infinite care and compassion—as -suffering and enjoying members of the same Great Being with -yourself. This is the spirit of the ideal universe—the spirit of -your own being. It is this alone that can redeem this world, and -give to it the peace and harmony for which it longs. Yes,</p> -<blockquote> -<p>‘So many gods, so many creeds,<br /> -So many paths that wind and wind,<br /> -While just the art of being kind<br /> -Is all the sad world needs.’</p> -</blockquote> -<p>Oh the madness, and sorrow, and unbrotherliness of this -mal-wrought world! Oh the poor, weak, poisoned, monstrous natures -of its children! Who can look upon it all without pain, and -sympathy, and consternation, and tears? What an opportunity for -philanthropy, if the ‘All-mighty One’ of our traditions would only -set about it!</p> -<p>Yes, do as you would be done by—and <em>not</em> to the dark man -and the white woman alone, but to the sorrel horse and the gray -squirrel as well; <em>not</em> to creatures of your own anatomy -only, but to all creatures. You cannot go high enough nor low -enough nor far enough to find those whose bowed and broken beings -will not rise up at the coming of the kindly heart, or whose souls -will not shrink and darken at the touch of inhumanity. Live and let -live. Do more. Live and <em>help</em> live. <em>Do to beings below -you as you would be done by beings above you</em>. Pity the -tortoise, the katydid, the wild-bird, and the ox. Poor, -undeveloped, untaught creatures! Into their dim and lowly lives -strays of sunshine little enough, though the fell hand of man be -never against them. They are our fellow-mortals. They came out of -the same mysterious womb of the past, are passing through the same -dream, and are destined to the same melancholy end, as we -ourselves. Let us be kind and merciful to them.</p> -<blockquote> -<p>‘Wilt thou draw near the nature of the gods?<br /> -Draw near them, then, in being merciful;<br /> -Sweet mercy is nobility’s true badge.’</p> -</blockquote> -<p>Let us be true to our ideals, true to the spirit of Universal -Compassion—whether we walk with the lone worm wandering in the -twilight of consciousness, the feathered forms of the fields and -forests, the kine of the meadows, the simple savage on the banks of -the gladed river, the political blanks whom men call wives, or the -outcasts of human industry.</p> -<p>Oh this poor world, this poor, suffering, ignorant, fear-filled -world! How can men be blind or deranged enough to think it is a -good world? How can they be cold and satanic enough to be unmoved -by the groans and anguish, the writhing and tears, that come up -from its unparalleled afflictions?</p> -<p>But <em>the world is growing better</em>. And in the Future—in -the long, long ages to come—<span class="small-caps">it will be -redeemed</span>! The same spirit of sympathy and fraternity that -broke the black man’s manacles and is to-day melting the white -woman’s chains will to-morrow emancipate the working man and the -ox; and, as the ages bloom and the great wheels of the centuries -grind on, the same spirit shall banish Selfishness from the earth, -and convert the planet finally into one unbroken and unparalleled -spectacle of <span class="small-caps">Peace</span>, <span class= -"small-caps">Justice</span>, and <span class= -"small-caps">Solidarity</span>.</p> -</div> - - - - - - - -<pre> - - - - - -End of Project Gutenberg's The Universal Kinship, by J. Howard Moore - -*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE UNIVERSAL KINSHIP *** - -***** This file should be named 61363-h.htm or 61363-h.zip ***** -This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: - http://www.gutenberg.org/6/1/3/6/61363/ - -Produced by L. Reeves from scans generously made available -by the Internet Archive. - -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-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for the eBooks, unless you receive -specific permission. If you do not charge anything for copies of this -eBook, complying with the rules is very easy. You may use this eBook -for nearly any purpose such as creation of derivative works, reports, -performances and research. They 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-tm 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-tm License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license. - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -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-tm electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg-tm 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-tm 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-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm -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-tm 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-tm mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg-tm 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-tm 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-tm work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country outside 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-tm License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm 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'll have to check the laws of the country where you - are located before using this ebook. - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm 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-tm -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm 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-tm 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-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -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-tm 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-tm work in a format -other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site -(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-tm 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-tm 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-tm electronic works -provided that - -* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm 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-tm - 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-tm - 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-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and The -Project Gutenberg Trademark LLC, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm -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-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm -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-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm 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-tm electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm -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-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm 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-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm 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-tm 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 principal office is in Fairbanks, Alaska, with the -mailing address: PO Box 750175, Fairbanks, AK 99775, but its -volunteers and employees are scattered throughout numerous -locations. Its 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 web site and -official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact - -For additional contact information: - - Dr. Gregory B. Newby - Chief Executive and Director - gbnewby@pglaf.org - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide -spread 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-tm electronic works. - -Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support. - -Project Gutenberg-tm 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 Web site which has the main PG search -facility: www.gutenberg.org - -This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -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. - - - -</pre> - -</body> -</html> |