diff options
Diffstat (limited to '78443-h/78443-h.htm')
| -rw-r--r-- | 78443-h/78443-h.htm | 11000 |
1 files changed, 11000 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/78443-h/78443-h.htm b/78443-h/78443-h.htm new file mode 100644 index 0000000..af187e0 --- /dev/null +++ b/78443-h/78443-h.htm @@ -0,0 +1,11000 @@ +<!DOCTYPE html> +<html lang="en"> +<head> + <meta charset="UTF-8"> + <title> + Adventures in Error | Project Gutenberg + </title> + <link rel="icon" href="images/cover.jpg" type="image/x-cover"> + <style> + +body { + margin-left: 20%; + margin-right: 20%; +} + + h1,h2,h3 { + text-align: center; /* all headings centered */ + clear: both; +} + +h1 {font-weight: normal; + font-size: 160%; + margin-top: 1em; + margin-bottom: 2em; + word-spacing: 0.3em; + } + +h2 {font-weight: normal; + font-size: 130%; + margin-top: 2em; + word-spacing: 0.3em; + } + +p { + margin-top: .51em; + text-align: justify; + margin-bottom: .49em; +} + +.p2 {margin-top: 2em;} + + +hr { + width: 33%; + margin-top: 2em; + margin-bottom: 2em; + margin-left: 33.5%; + margin-right: 33.5%; + clear: both; +} + + +hr.full {width: 95%; margin-left: 2.5%; margin-right: 2.5%;} + +hr.r5 {width: 10%; margin-top: 0em; margin-bottom: 0em; margin-left: 45%; margin-right: 45%;} + + +div.chapter {page-break-before: always;} + + + + + +.pagenum { /* uncomment the next line for invisible page numbers */ + /* visibility: hidden; */ + position: absolute; + left: 92%; + font-size: small; + text-align: right; + font-style: normal; + font-weight: normal; + font-variant: normal; + text-indent: 0; +} /* page numbers */ + + +.blockquot { + margin-left: 5%; + margin-right: 10%; + font-size: 95%; +} + + +.xxlarge {font-size: 260%;} +.up {font-size: 160%;} +.xlarge {font-size: 140%;} +.large {font-size: 120%;} +.less {font-size: 90%;} +.more {font-size: 80%;} + + +.c {text-align: center;} + +.sp {word-spacing: 0.3em;} + +.lsp {letter-spacing: 0.2em;} + +.pad {padding-top: 1em; + padding-bottom: 1em;} + +.pad2 {padding-left: 7em;} + +.pad3 {padding-left: 15em;} + +.pad4 {padding-left: 12em;} + +.gtb +{ + letter-spacing: 2em; + font-size: 155%; + text-align: center; + margin-right: -2em; + font-weight: bold; +} + +.r {text-align: right; + margin-right: 2em;} + +.r2 {text-align: right; + margin-right: 8em;} + + + +.smcap {font-variant: small-caps;} + +.allsmcap {font-variant: small-caps; text-transform: lowercase;} + +/* Images */ + +img { + max-width: 100%; + height: auto; +} +img.w100 {width: 100%;} + + +.figcenter { + margin: auto; + text-align: center; + page-break-inside: avoid; + max-width: 100%; +} + +.figcenter1 { + padding-top: 4em; + margin: auto; + text-align: center; + page-break-inside: avoid; + max-width: 100%; +} + +.figcenter2 { + padding-top: 1em; + margin: auto; + text-align: center; + page-break-inside: avoid; + max-width: 100%; +} + +.figcenter3 { + padding-top: 3em; + margin: auto; + text-align: center; + page-break-inside: avoid; + max-width: 100%; +} + +/* Footnotes */ +.footnotes {border: 1px dashed;} + +.footnote {margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%; font-size: 0.9em;} + +.footnote .label {position: absolute; right: 75%; text-align: right;} + +.fnanchor { + vertical-align: super; + font-size: .8em; + text-decoration: + none; +} + +/* Poetry */ +.poetry-container {display: flex; justify-content: center;} +.poetry-container {text-align: center;} +.poetry {text-align: left; margin-left: 5%; margin-right: 5%; font-size:90%;} +.poetry .stanza {margin: 1em auto;} +.poetry .verse {text-indent: -3em; padding-left: 3em;} + +/* Transcriber's notes */ +.transnote {background-color: #E6E6FA; + color: black; + font-size:small; + padding:0.5em; + margin-bottom:5em; + margin-top:3em; + font-family:sans-serif, serif; + border: .3em double gray; + padding: 1em; +} +.poetry .indent0 {text-indent: -3em;} + + </style> +</head> +<body> +<div style='text-align:center'>*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 78443 ***</div> + +<div class="figcenter"> +<img src="images/cover.jpg" alt="cover"> +</div> + + + +<div class="chapter"> +<div class="figcenter1"> +<img src="images/fig1.jpg" alt="decoration"> +</div> +</div> + +<h1>ADVENTURES IN ERROR</h1> + + +<div class="chapter"> +<div class="figcenter1"> +<img src="images/fig1.jpg" alt="decoration"> +</div> +</div> + +<p class="c sp lsp xxlarge"> +ADVENTURES</p> + +<p class="c sp xlarge"> +<i>in</i></p> + +<p class="c sp lsp xxlarge"> +ERROR</p> + +<p class="c sp p2"> +<i>By</i></p> + +<p class="c sp xlarge"> +VILHJALMUR STEFANSSON</p> + +<div class="figcenter1"> +<img src="images/fig3.jpg" alt="decoration"> +</div> + +<p class="c sp p2"> +<i>New York</i></p> + +<p class="c sp large lsp"> +ROBERT M. McBRIDE & COMPANY +</p> + +<div class="figcenter2"> +<img src="images/fig2.jpg" alt="decoration"> +</div> + + +<div class="chapter"> +<p class="c sp p2 more lsp"> +ADVENTURES IN ERROR</p></div> + +<p class="c sp more lsp"> +COPYRIGHT 1936<br> +BY VILHJALMUR STEFANSSON</p> + +<p class="c sp more lsp"> +PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES<br> +OF AMERICA</p> + +<p class="c sp more lsp"> +FIRST EDITION +</p> + + +<div class="figcenter2"> +<img src="images/fig1.jpg" alt="decoration"> +</div> + +<p class="c large lsp"><span class="smcap">Acknowledgments</span></p> + + +<p>Chapters I. and II. are, with alterations, from my short +book <i>The Standardization of Error</i>, published some years +ago by W. W. Norton & Company and now out of print. +Chapter III. is but slightly changed from an article that +originally appeared in <i>The American Mercury</i>, May, 1927. +Chapter IV. is adapted from an address which I gave before +the American Philosophical Society of Philadelphia, January +2, 1931. About the first ten thousand words of Chapter V. +appeared in <i>The American Mercury</i> of July, 1927, but much +additional information has been added. Chapter VI. is published +with slight changes from an article entitled, <i>That +‘Frozen’ North</i> which appeared in <i>Maclean’s Magazine</i>, +Toronto, November 15, 1929.</p> + + +<p>The publishers regret that owing to Mr. +Stefansson’s sudden departure on an extended +journey he was unable to read the proofs of this +manuscript.</p> + + + + +<div class="chapter"> +<div class="figcenter2"> +<img src="images/fig1.jpg" alt="decoration"> +</div> + + +<p class="c large lsp p2"><span class="smcap">Contents</span></p> + + + + +<p class="c"> +<span class="large"><a href="#c1">I.</a></span><br> +<br> +<span class="less">THE STANDARDIZATION OF ERROR</span><br> +<br> +<span class="more">PAGE</span> 3<br> +<br> +<br> +<span class="large"><a href="#c2">II.</a></span><br> +<br> +<span class="less">THE PLEASURES OF BUNCOMBE</span><br> +<br> +<span class="more">PAGE</span> 16<br> +<br> +<br> +<span class="large"><a href="#c3">III.</a></span><br> +<br> +<span class="less">ARE EXPLORERS TO JOIN THE DODO?</span><br> +<br> +<span class="more">PAGE</span> 67<br> +<br> +<br> +<span class="large"><a href="#c4">IV.</a></span><br> +<br> +<span class="less">TRAVELERS’ TALES</span><br> +<br> +<span class="more">PAGE</span> 88<br> +<br> +<br> +<span class="large"><a href="#c5">V.</a></span><br> +<br> +<span class="less">STANDARDIZED WOLVES</span><br> +<br> +<span class="more">PAGE</span> 136<br> +<br> +<br> +<span class="large"><a href="#c6">VI.</a></span><br> +<br> +<span class="less">BEYOND THE FRONTIER</span><br> +<br> +<span class="more">PAGE</span> 223<br> +<br> +<br> +<span class="large"><a href="#c7">VII.</a></span><br> +<br> +<span class="less">OLOF KRARER</span><br> +<br> +<span class="more">PAGE</span> 243<br> +<br> +<br> +<span class="large"><a href="#c8">VIII.</a></span><br> +<br> +<span class="less">HISTORY OF THE BATHTUB IN AMERICA</span><br> +<br> +<span class="more">PAGE</span> 279 +</p></div> + + + +<div class="chapter"> +<div class="figcenter2"> +<img src="images/fig1.jpg" alt="decoration"> +</div> +</div> + +<p class="c up sp p2">ADVENTURES IN ERROR</p> + + +<div class="chapter"> +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_3">[Pg 3]</span></p> + +<div class="figcenter3" id="c1"> +<img src="images/fig1.jpg" alt="decoration"> +</div> +</div> + +<h2>CHAPTER I.</h2> + +<p class="c large sp"><span class="smcap">The Standardization of Error</span></p> + + +<p><span class="more">IT IS SAID THAT BACON CONSIDERED ALL KNOWLEDGE HIS PROVINCE</span>. +But the sciences of today are so many and complex +that a single Baconian view of them is no longer possible, +and perversions of thought and action result because our intellectual +horizon has been narrowed to a part of the field. +From a realization of this have come various attempts to +co-ordinate the sciences to permit a unifying view of the +whole. Comte made one of these a century ago in his +<i>Positive Philosophy</i>. There have been many since.</p> + +<p>But if we pause to state clearly the case against the standardization +of knowledge, the essential absurdity becomes so +patent that we have to recall the numerous failures to convince +ourselves that anyone was ever foolish enough even to +try it.</p> + +<p>Consider for instance the physiology of the human skin or +the composition of a dust nebula. In these fields, among +others, the accepted facts of a dozen years ago have become +the error and folklore of today. You standardize knowledge, +and while you are at the job the knowledge changes. Long<span class="pagenum" id="Page_4">[Pg 4]</span> +before the thing can be done adequately it has ceased being +worth doing at all.</p> + +<p>Then why are we continually attempting this hopeless +task? Partly, let us say, from irrepressible human optimism, +which leads us to think that any desirable thing is possible. +Partly, also, because of unclear analogizing from fields that +seem related but are not. One of these analogies is from business. +If you have on hand, on July 1st, a pair of socks, assuming +honest and successful management, you will have them +still on hand on August 1st, or else cash in your till to correspond. +But, in spite of unlimited honesty and efficiency, you +have no guarantee that an idea on hand on July 1st may not +have been simply removed by August 1st without any equivalent +remaining. You may have discovered that month, for +instance, reasonable assurance that the moon is <i>not</i> made of +green cheese, without being able to get any clear idea as to +what it <i>is</i> made of.</p> + +<p>The reader may here jump to the conclusion that we are +arriving at a philosophy of pessimistic hopelessness. That is +not the way of the true philosopher. His ideal is the <i>tabula +rasa</i>. He sweeps away the systems of others, that he may +build his own on a smooth foundation.</p> + +<p>Realizing simultaneously the insatiable craving of the +human mind for order and the impossibility of bringing +order into the chaos of knowledge, we appear to be faced +with a dilemma no less distressing than insoluble. But on +looking deeper we find the dilemma apparent only. This +will become clear when we consider the essential nature of +knowledge.</p> + +<p>The thoughtless among us may speak, for instance, of a<span class="pagenum" id="Page_5">[Pg 5]</span> +red cow, and naïvely imagine we could prove our point with +the testimony of a witness or two. But the philosophers have +long ago made it clear that a cow would not be red but for +the presence of someone to whom it looks red. Having established +that point, the deeper of the philosophers go on to +prove that the cow would not only not be red, but would not +even exist, were it not for the presence of someone who thinks +he sees a cow. In our argument the position is even stronger +than this, for we have two lines of defense. First, we agree +with the philosopher that you cannot prove of any given cow +that it is red, or even that it exists; and then we point out +that an idea is so much less stable than a cow that, even were +the philosophers wrong about the cow not being red, they +might easily be right about an idea not being right, or not +existing.</p> + +<p>Take an example: The philosophers of the Middle Ages +demonstrated both that the earth did not exist and also that +it was flat. Today they are still arguing about whether the +world exists, but they no longer dispute about whether it is +flat. This shows the greater lasting power of a real thing +(whether it exists or not, for that point has not yet been settled) +as compared with an idea, which may not only not +exist, but may also be wrong even if it does exist.</p> + +<p>We have now come in our discussion to the point where +we see the absurdity of supposing ourselves to have any +knowledge, as knowledge is ordinarily defined—or at least +we would have come to that point but for lack of space +which prevents us from making the subject really clear. +However, it doesn’t matter from a practical point of view +whether you have followed this philosophical reasoning.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_6">[Pg 6]</span> +Perhaps you are not a philosopher. In that case, and in the +homely phrase of the day, I ask you, what’s the good of an +Englishman’s learning, first, that all Americans speak +through their noses and, secondly, why they do so, when he +has to find out eventually that they do not? What’s the good, +again, of knowing that central Australia is a desert and that +certain principles of physiography make it so, when you may +have to listen to an after-dinner speech by someone telling +that it is not a desert?</p> + +<p>Such things do not always go in triplets of (1) so it is, +(2) why it is, and (3) it is not—but that is a common order.</p> + +<p>The reader may here protest that we are not getting much +nearer our promised emancipation from the dilemma between +our passion for system and the impossibility of +systematizing knowledge. We have hinted above that the +solution lies in finding a new basis for knowledge, and this +we now proceed to do.</p> + +<p>So long as you believe in them, the nasality of American +speech and the desert nature of central Australia are fragments +of knowledge capable of being arranged in a system. +The trouble comes when you discover that they are “untrue.”</p> + +<p>This gives the solution of our problem. We must have +knowledge that is incapable of being contradicted. On first +thought this seems impossible, but on second thought we +realize that such facts do exist in the domain of mathematics. +Two and two make four.</p> + +<p>But why do two and two make four? Obviously because +we have agreed that four is the name for the sum of two and +two. That principle has been applied in mathematics to such +advantage that it is rightly called the science of sciences;<span class="pagenum" id="Page_7">[Pg 7]</span> +and this is the principle which, now at length, we propose +to apply to all knowledge. Through it every science will become +a pure science, and all knowledge as open to systematization +as mathematics.</p> + +<p>The trouble with facts, outside mathematics, has been inherent +in the method of gathering information. We call +these methods <i>observation</i> and <i>experiment</i>, and have even +been proud of them—not realizing their clumsy nature, the +unreliability of the findings, the transient character of the +best of them, and the essential hopelessness of classifying +the results and thus gratifying the passion of the human intellect +for order and symmetry in the universe.</p> + +<p>Take an example: A man comes from out-of-doors with +the report that there is a red cow in the front yard. Neglecting +for the moment the philosophical aspect of the case—as +to whether the cow would be red if there were no one to +whom she seemed red, and also the more fundamental problem +of whether there would have been any cow at all if no +one had gone out to look—neglecting, as I say, the deeper +aspects of the case, we are confronted with numerous other +sources of error. The observer may have confused the sex of +the animal. Perhaps it was an ox. Or if not the sex, the age +may have been misjudged, and it may have been a heifer. +The man may have been color-blind, and the cow (wholly +apart from the philosophical aspect) may not have been red. +And even if it was a red cow, the dog may have seen her the +instant our observer turned his back, and by the time he +told us she was in the front yard, she may in reality have +been vanishing in a cloud of dust down the road.</p> + +<p>The trouble lies evidently in our clumsy system of observing<span class="pagenum" id="Page_8">[Pg 8]</span> +and reporting. This difficulty has been obviated in the +science of mathematics. A square is, not by observation but +by definition, a four-sided figure with equal sides and equal +angles. No one has denied that and no one can, for the simple +reason that we have all agreed in advance that we will never +deny it. Nay more, we have agreed that if anyone says that +a square has three or five sides we will all reply in a chorus: +“If it has three or five sides it is not a square!” That disposes +of the matter forever.</p> + +<p>Why not agree similarly on the attributes of a front yard?—making +it true by definition that, among other things, it +contains a red cow. Then if anyone asserts, for reasons of +philosophy, color-blindness, or the officiousness of dogs, +that there is no red cow in the yard, we can reply, as in the +case of the square: “If it does not contain a red cow, it is +not a front yard!”</p> + +<p>The author feels at this point a doubtless unwarranted concern +that he is not being taken seriously. Or perhaps the plan +proposed is not considered practical. But the proof of the +pudding is in the eating. The thing has been tried, and successfully—not +in the systematic way now proposed, but sporadically. +Some instances are well-known and convincing.</p> + +<p>Take the assertion that a Christian is a good man. If you +attempt to deny this on the ground that Jones, a deacon in +the church, ran off with some public funds, your stricture is +at once shown to have been absurd by the simple reply: “If +Jones was a thief, he was <i>not</i> a Christian.” A Christian is, not +by observation but by definition, a good man; if you prove +that a certain man was not good you merely show that he<span class="pagenum" id="Page_9">[Pg 9]</span> +was not a Christian. Thus we have established that a Christian +is a good man. It is like a square having four sides.</p> + +<p>But if someone asserts that a Bolshevik, a Conservative, or +a chemist is a good man, you can soon confute him; for the +members of these classes have neglected to define themselves +as good. Thus their attributes have to be determined by observation +and experiment. It is highly probable that evidence +could be brought against many Bolsheviks, and even some +Conservatives, to show that they are not good men. At any +rate we have here no such clarity of issue as in things that +are true by definition—as the four-sidedness of a square or +the goodness of a Christian.</p> + +<p>Through some experience of arguing this case in the abstract +I have learned that its essential reasonableness can best +be established from concrete examples. Let us, then, take +cases at random from various fields of knowledge.</p> + +<p>Consider first the ostriches of Africa. These birds have +been studied in the wild by sportsmen and zoologists, and +as domestic animals by husbandmen who tend them in flocks +like sheep. There are accordingly thousands of printed pages +in our libraries giving what purports to be information upon +their habits. Besides being indefinite and in many other ways +faulty, this alleged information is in part contradictory.</p> + +<p>Having studied the bird of Africa, let us turn next to the +ostrich of literature, philosophy, and morals. Instead of confusion, +we now have clarity and precision. This is because +the ostrich of literature exists by definition only. He is a bird +that hides his head when frightened. You may too precipitately +object that men would not accept universally this definition +of the ostrich of literature if it did not also fit the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_10">[Pg 10]</span> +zoological ostrich. The answer is that the definition has never +received any support from zoologists, hunters, or owners of +the domesticated birds, and yet it has been accepted universally +throughout Europe since Pliny’s time (about 50 <span class="allsmcap">B.C.</span>). +It has survived all attacks from science and from the bigoted +commonsense of those who did not recognize its true nature. +Like the definition of a four-sided square or a good Christian, +it has survived because it was useful. Can you imagine any +real attribute more instructive than the head-burying of the +ostrich-by-definition? As a text for moralists, as an epithet +that politicians use for their opponents, as a figure of speech +generally, what could serve as well? Our literature is richer, +our vocabulary more picturesque through this beneficent bird +of hypothesis. He has many inherent advantages that no real +bird could have. Since his habits are defined we need not +waste time studying him first hand, nor in trying to adjudicate +at second hand between books about him that disagree. +Since he never existed as a beast he is in no danger of the +extinction that is said to threaten the lion and swan.</p> + +<p>Consider next what trouble we should get into if we did +not have the literary ostrich and wanted to convey picturesquely +the idea of that sort of wilful blindness from +which we ourselves never suffer but which curiously afflicts +our opponents. In pursuit of suitable analogy we might +vainly canvass the whole animal kingdom. The ostrich-by-definition +is, therefore, not only less trouble to deal with than +a real bird; he is actually more useful and instructive than +any real bird or beast. When we consider how often he has +been used in sermon and precept we must admit that this +model creature has contributed substantially not only to the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_11">[Pg 11]</span> +entertainment and instruction of nations but also to the +morality and general goodness of the world.</p> + +<p>The ostrich is but one of several useful birds of definition. +But we must be careful not to confuse these with real birds +or their value is lessened. An example is the stork that brings +babies. By a confusion of thought which identifies this stork +with real storks, and through the pernicious birth control +propaganda which insists on rationalizing everything, the +baby-bringing stork has ceased to be useful except in conversation +with children, in the symbolism of the movie, and +in the picture postcard industry.</p> + +<p>The wolves of literature are among the most picturesque +and useful of our definitions. Zoological wolves go in pairs +or families, never above a dozen. It is clear how inadequate +this would be for movie purposes, where they should run in +packs of scores or hundreds. Even in a novel or short story +of Siberia or Canada you need packs large enough for the +hero to kill fifteen or twenty, with enough left over to eat, +or to be about to eat, his sweetheart. This is readily accomplished +by using a wolf of the general type we advocate—having +no relation to the so-called realities but possessing +by definition all the required characteristics (habit of running +in packs of any desired size, willingness to eat, or attempt +to eat, the heroine, etc.).</p> + +<p>Another useful definition has long been that of Arctic, +Canadian, and Siberian cold. The danger and disadvantage +of confusing this hypothetical with a so-called real climate +are best seen if we compare the facility with which people +who have never been in these countries use the weather in +conversation, speeches, and books, and contrast that facility<span class="pagenum" id="Page_12">[Pg 12]</span> +with the awkwardness of travelers and natives. An example +is a story by Tolstoi. Great as he was, he failed to realize the +advantage in simplicity and vividness of postulating that +Siberia is always cold, and actually allowed himself to be +led into the artistic blunder of having the convicts in one +of his novels die of sunstroke. An acquaintance of mine was +filming this story. He realized the pictorial ease of “putting +over” drifting snow as compared with heat waves—the snow +could be managed with confetti and an aeroplane propeller, +but how would one photograph heat waves? He realized +still more clearly that the public is wedded to the defined, as +opposed to the “real” climate of Siberia, and did what Tolstoi +would have done in the first place had he been a Californian—he +changed the scene from summer to winter, and then +froze to death as many convicts as the picture required.</p> + +<p>These few examples from among many are enough to +show not only that the method of knowledge-by-definition +is and long has been in standard use, but also that it has the +advantages of being easily grasped, picturesque, and of a +higher average moral value than the so-called “real” knowledge. +It is inherent in the genesis and nature of defined facts +that they can be made picturesque in proportion to the ingenuity +of the one who defines them, and as moral as necessary. +This is a striking advantage over empirical knowledge, +which cannot always be relied on to support the fashion of +the time or even the moral system of the community.</p> + +<p>It is from this last point of view that there has grown up +in many countries of recent years a profound distrust of +“facts” and the theories deduced from them. In England +the situation is dealt with by the simple and adequate means<span class="pagenum" id="Page_13">[Pg 13]</span> +of paying little attention to the exposition of “new” things. +In the United States it has been found that the public listens +even to the newest views, and sometimes actually wants to +act upon them. This has necessitated the expedient of passing +laws prescribing what may and may not be advocated and +believed. These American laws are a step in the right direction, +but inadequate because they have back of them only +specific considerations. Few people as yet realize the general +reasons of expediency and broad sanity that underlie the +scheme we are here proposing.</p> + +<p>Let us consider next a sample or two of knowledge-by-definition +that could well be added to our present stock. +Just as artificial tongues are built upon spoken tongues but +avoid their mistakes, so may we conveniently base our knowledge-by-definition, +or absolute knowledge, on what is already +believed by some.</p> + +<p>Assume, for instance, that all Irishmen are peasants holding +land by insecure tenure from grasping landlords, that +each has a pig under his bed, that everyone carries shillalahs, +that kissing the <i>Blarney Stone</i> is the chief national occupation. +Having agreed on these things, we could teach them in +the schools of all countries. We should then presently all +agree (on the basis of common facts) as to what our attitude +toward Ireland should be, and the troublesome <i>Irish Question</i> +would disappear from politics and history.</p> + +<p>Think, too, what a charm the new system would lend to +travel in Ireland! As soon as you landed you would note the +rarity or absence of all the things you had expected. You +would meet surprise after surprise, which would not only +delight you at the time but give you material for endless<span class="pagenum" id="Page_14">[Pg 14]</span> +letters home and for endless stories to tell when you got back. +Thus would be built up an increasing tourist traffic, a source +of revenue to Ireland itself and to the shipping and tourist +companies of the various nations.</p> + +<p>You may think such tourists, on coming home, would +upset our system of facts-by-definition about Ireland. Not +if that system is once thoroughly established. Consider in +that relation the Greek pronouncement that at any time of +year it becomes colder the farther north you go. North America +is in language and civilization a homogeneous country +in which one might think knowledge would therefore spread +rapidly, and in which Atlanta, Richmond, New York, and +Montreal are, and have been for a century, large and well-known +cities that are by observation about equally hot in +July. Yet there is even today practically unanimous adherence +in all these cities to the Greek definition (“the farther +north the colder at any time of year”), and each city believes +those farther south to be hotter and those farther north to be +colder, though thousands of travelers for a hundred years +have found it to be uniformly otherwise. The ostrich with +his head in the sand has survived two thousand years and +is still going strong. No human being can retain oil, but the +hypothetical Eskimo drinks it by the flagon in our books +and belief, and is none the worse for it. Then why should +not all the world forever believe that every Irishman has a +pig under his bed? All parties would benefit. It would be +only the hypothetical Irishman that has the pig, and we +could by hypothesis arrange that he should thoroughly enjoy +it. The real Irishman would get the benefit of the increased +tourist trade and surely he ought to be grateful. The tourist<span class="pagenum" id="Page_15">[Pg 15]</span> +would make facile discovery of the non-existence of the pig; +that would please him and interest all his friends forever +after as a sort of occult knowledge, like knowing privately +that Indian fakirs are really no more clever than our conjurers, +a pleasing secret now possessed and highly valued +by many without detriment to the fakirs or to those who +prefer to say they have seen them do marvels. Thus would +everyone be the gainer.</p> + + +<div class="chapter"> +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_16">[Pg 16]</span></p> + +<div class="figcenter2" id="c2"> +<img src="images/fig1.jpg" alt="decoration"> +</div> +</div> + +<h2>CHAPTER II.</h2> + +<p class="c large sp"><span class="smcap">The Pleasures of Buncombe</span></p> + + +<p><span class="more">THE MOST STRIKING CONTRADICTION OF OUR CIVILISATION IS THE</span> +fundamental reverence for truth which we profess and the +thorough-going disregard for it which we practice. This is +the veriest commonplace. The lowest journalism fattens on +pointing it out and the highest clergy prosper in the same +occupation. According to them all, the world is rotten to the +core with hypocrisy and falsehood.</p> + +<p>But while they agree on the condition, the physicians of +the world order hopelessly differ on the remedy. Without +disagreeing on the condition, either, we want to suggest +nevertheless that it is a bit naïve of the philosophers to +diagnose from the mere scarcity of truth that the world is +sick with an incurable malady. Is it not just possible that +they cannot cure us for the basic reason that we are not ill?</p> + +<p>And if we are not ill, the worries of the moralists should +dissolve into good cheer. Can we, then, be well though the +truth be not in us? Strangely late in the history of philosophy, +we now for the first time address ourselves to that problem.</p> + +<p>God and Truth have from the earliest times been the two +ideas that have commanded the greatest reverence. They have<span class="pagenum" id="Page_17">[Pg 17]</span> +been much argued by the philosophers, with many curious +parallels and one striking contrast. Typical of the parallels +are the long disputes about whether there can reasonably be +supposed to exist either an absolute god or an absolute truth. +The one contrast is that while the philosophers have discussed +at great length whether God is good, they have never +discussed whether Truth is good. Is it not a bit suspicious +that this is the one thing they have always assumed? And +in a world of chaotic philosophies that get us nowhere, is it +not high time to ask if there be any sound reason why Truth +should be exempted from that fundamental scrutiny to +which even the gods have had to submit?</p> + +<p>In addressing ourselves to this hitherto neglected question, +as to whether truth is good, we adopt in the first instance a +test which has long appealed to the common sense of mankind: +<i>By their fruits shall ye know them.</i></p> + +<p>In defining our subject, we admit at once that the truth +may have effects outside of the immediate field in which we +shall study it, that of human affairs. It is like the question of +soul. For thousands of years the civilization which is intellectually +descended from the lands around the Mediterranean +has agreed that all men have souls. Usually those who speculated +have considered that women have souls also, a few that +horses and dogs have souls, and the most generous that all +animals have them. But it is only the highest intellectuals +and the most benighted savages who have ever conceded +souls to plants and sticks and stones. We shall ignore, for +the time being, such possible extensions of our subject, and +discuss Truth solely in its relation to men (including +women).</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_18">[Pg 18]</span></p> + +<p>As both definition and defense of our method, we premise, +further, that mankind frequently does much better than it +knows. Nearly all of us, for instance, can keep in balance as +we walk along upright, though the physiologists are still +arguing about exactly how we do it. Similarly, the biologists +tacitly agree that we know what life is; for they test their +definitions of life by measuring them against the reality +which they feel they know, though they cannot define it +quite successfully.</p> + +<p>Go through any considerable number of examples like +the preceding, selecting them, if you like, from every sphere +of life, and you will gradually reach a firm confidence in the +reasonableness of human actions as compared with the flightiness +of our theories and the contradictions so frequently +involved in our explanations. That may be because (admitting +the evolutionary theory and the geological time scale) +we, and the pre-human ancestors from which we inherit our +traits, have been acting so as to save our bodies and reach our +desires for a good many million years longer than we have +been speculating on how to save our souls and protect our +reputations. And practice makes perfect.</p> + +<p>We arrive then at a simple problem: If we ignore all +theories and study those instances where mankind has preferred +truth or falsehood the one to the other, we shall be +in a position to determine which set of choices has been of +the greater benefit.</p> + +<p>In a later and more rigorous inquiry we may go in for +objective proofs, like statistics. Here we shall use only such +examples as are well-known to everyone, so that the conclusions<span class="pagenum" id="Page_19">[Pg 19]</span> +we state will certainly be merely the equivalent of +the reader’s own verdict, set before him in print.</p> + +<p>Few things are more generally admitted than that parents, +in most cases, love their children and desire their greatest +good. These parents may be in error as to what constitutes +good, but this is beside the mark, for we are at the moment +merely trying to find out what it is they think is for the +children’s welfare. Of course, if you ask them, they will +quote you Truth with a capital, or more likely TRUTH all +in capitals. For so have they been taught to protest. But study +their actions, which are a surer guide than their words.</p> + + +<p class="c less pad">THE CASE OF INFANTS</p> + +<p>To put it bluntly, most loving parents take the greatest +care to surround children not with truth but with deception.</p> + +<p>We cannot deceive children before they are born, so we +do the next best thing and practice every deception about +them. We conceal, not only from children but also from +grown persons so far as possible, how babies come into the +world. The marriage is announced, and even made a public +occasion, but thereafter everything is mystery. Pregnancy is +concealed by an artful dress, the expectant mother hides or +goes to a remote place. In some classes of society it is rather +a breach of etiquette if the doctor talks openly about whom +he is going to attend that night. There is a blare of publicity +after the birth, in which, however, only a few things may +be told—the weight and sex of the child, whom it resembles, +and in a very general way how the mother is progressing. +But the fact that the child looks red and wrinkled, that its<span class="pagenum" id="Page_20">[Pg 20]</span> +eyes do not focus, and several other details about it, are of +so private a nature that many mothers discover these and +other more “intimate” things only in their own children. +And certainly to most fathers the new-born looks as surprising +as it looks unpleasant. That, by the way, is a fact +every parent must conceal—it would be dreadful if anyone +were ever to find out what a disagreeable shock his first-born +was to him.</p> + +<p>The reader may here want to stop and argue with the +author that all this is but decent and proper reticence—which +if he does he pleases the author very much. For there would +be nothing to argue about. The author, too, feels that this +is how all these things should be. He certainly would hate to +break any such taboos. But let us not argue one way or the +other. To do so would be unscientific. We should pursue our +inquiry with a steady view to just one thing: Is it true that +the majority of people feel and do as stated? From that survey +will emerge a general conclusion as to which it is that +men really prefer in practice, truth or falsehood.</p> + +<p>The systematic deception of the child usually begins +almost at the moment of birth. The instrument is speech, +most fittingly, since our studies will show that this is the +favorite means of deception throughout life. At first, the +child does not understand any words, and balks the mother +thereby. However, she makes capital of this dilemma by seeing +to it that her baby shall chiefly hear (and therefore +learn) only incorrect speech. This is known as teaching the +child “baby talk.”</p> + +<p>There are certain standard forms of baby talk which, +through wide usage, are not completely deceptive; as when<span class="pagenum" id="Page_21">[Pg 21]</span> +the child is taught to say that papa has gone bye-bye when +the meaning is that papa has gone out. Accordingly, most +mothers invent a special jargon so that each child grows up +with several dozen sounds or combinations of sounds which +are either not words of any language or else are real words +with perverted meanings.</p> + +<p>As the child grows up he discovers that he has been deceived +in the first speech taught him; and thus he gets an +early and practical lesson in one of the main concerns of life—how +to deceive others.</p> + +<p>As soon as the child has acquired a vocabulary by which +he can be misled, people begin to deceive him in ways that +increase in complexity with his growing faculties. Many of +these are specially devised by his mother and family and do +not lend themselves to sociological study, for they are seldom +placed on record. But there is a general system, one broad +aspect of which is stories, especially classics, that fall under +the heads of fairy tales and folklore.</p> + +<p>There has come to my attention a very practical way of +determining what people really think of the place of folklore +in the education of the young. As there has been prejudice +to guard against, I need to describe the manner of my +investigation before I come to the matter of it.</p> + +<p>In a very tentative and general conversation I casually introduce +the subject of bolshevism. In three cases out of four +there is an immediate hostile reaction, and then I go no further, +for my desire has been to get an opinion on a reported +bolshevik undertaking, and a person who bristles at their +very name is certain to be opposed to anything they sponsor. +Correspondingly I get in some cases reactions of favorable<span class="pagenum" id="Page_22">[Pg 22]</span> +enthusiasm, and these are equally hopeless, for they would +naturally support any part of the bolshevik program.</p> + +<p>In the few cases of seeming freedom from bias, I proceed +to retail, without vouching for it, what I have heard about +certain educational experiments conducted in the Soviet +Union. It really makes no difference about the truth of these +reports, for a person scientific enough to be neither strongly +pro- nor strongly anti-bolshevik is also intelligent enough to +consider a hypothetical case and give the same sort of verdict +he would if it were a real one.</p> + +<p>It is said, then, that the Soviet powers believe in the maxim +of Paul about proving all things and accepting only those +that can stand the most rigid investigation. I do not know (I +must say, since the subject has been brought up) whether the +bolsheviks are trying to discourage baby-talk, insisting that +mothers shall speak a real language even to the youngest +child; but it has been represented to me that from the time +the child begins to speak the government makes an effort +to see that it is told only the truth.</p> + +<p>One of the first things western mothers tell their children +is about Jack and the Beanstalk. The Russians feel reasonably +certain that there never was such a Jack or Beanstalk. Accordingly, +neither that fabled youngster nor the fabled plant +is ever mentioned, I am told, to the up-to-date bolshevik-sponsored +child.</p> + +<p>But, says the Russian, there are in real life things quite as +interesting and marvelous as Jack and his stalk; for instance, +a child named Tom instead of Jack, and surnamed Edison. +Nothing very marvelous is reported about this Tommy while +he was small. But when he became a sizable boy, or perhaps<span class="pagenum" id="Page_23">[Pg 23]</span> +even later, he got an idea about how a string could be heated +till it became red and even white, and how this string could +be put in a glass bottle and hung up to give a light much +brighter than any lamp that ever existed up to that time.</p> + +<p>The Soviet educators are said to maintain that by applying +the same ability and ingenuity to telling the story of Tom +and the glowing string that has been used in popularizing +the adventures of Jack and his Beanstalk, you could create an +equally vivid story, equally entertaining and, they contend, +more beneficial since it is “true.”</p> + +<p>In the case of a child taught to believe in the Beanstalk, +it becomes necessary to tell him later (or else to let him find +out for himself) that it never existed. Some psychologists +claim that there is an injurious mental shock involved when +a child’s faith is shattered. What the Soviets emphasize is +that if Jack had been real the child’s interest would not have +had to cease at the age of five or six, but might have continued +growing until the larger boy gradually mastered all +the history and later grasped the achievements of Jack. If, +then, instead of Jack and the Beanstalk, you begin with Tom +and the red-hot string, there is no shock, they argue, no dead +halt, no shifting of interest from one thing to another, but +instead a growing delight in the whole adventurous life of +Thomas Alva Edison that finally develops into a grasp of all +the sciences with which he was concerned.</p> + +<p>I seldom get this far in my second-hand explanation before +my listeners stop me with rhapsodies on the glories of the +imagination and diatribes against the bolsheviks who now +for the first time are seen by these previously impartial people +to be insidious foemen of the soul.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_24">[Pg 24]</span></p> + +<p>This counterblast used to floor me and I would stop at that +point; but more recently I have developed a flanking operation. +People strong on the beauties of the soul are nearly +always great admirers of Maeterlinck. So I apparently change +the subject, falling in with their praise of the imagination +and asking if they think its subtle beauties are anywhere +more evident than in the great son of Belgium. There is usually +agreement, and soon we are communing ecstatically together +about his book on the bee.</p> + +<p>The next step is to ask the champions of the imagination +whether they remember that Maeterlinck says near the beginning +of that book (which we have just agreed is one of +his greatest works) that he has long since given up trying to +invent anything half so marvelous as the truth. Oh, yes, they +remember that, but they always understood it to mean Truth +with a capital letter, which is something very different from +a fact, and apparently means anything you are so fond of +that you are prepared to stick to it whether it is true or not. +But a little discussion about the sort of truth which Maeterlinck +says he is trying to present in the Bee, and the sort +which the bolsheviks say they are trying to present about +Edison, shows that both are of the same kind. This conclusion +results in no increase of admiration for the bolsheviks +but a noticeable decrease of liking for Maeterlinck, who apparently +has been cheating some of his readers into thinking +that he was telling them Truths when he was only telling +facts.</p> + +<p>Usually the outcome of the conversation is a feeling of +how blessed are we whose imaginations have been stimulated +and delighted by Little Red Riding Hood, Bluebeard with<span class="pagenum" id="Page_25">[Pg 25]</span> +his many wives, and tales of that sort, and what an eclipse +of the imagination is spreading its shadow over Russia, where +even little children have to be told the truth.</p> + +<p>The Soviet campaign against folklore in general has been +paralleled by an American campaign for Santa Claus in +particular, which shows the differing temper of the two +countries. Santa, it is well known, drives reindeer. Now it +happens that some friends of mine own a hundred thousand +reindeer in Alaska and have been trying to find a market +for them. Other friends of mine own and edit <i>The Kansas +City Star</i>, one of the most respectable and respected newspapers +in the United States. Theodore Roosevelt, after he +had been President, thought it an honor to be one of its +editors: and the standards of personnel, management and +policy are quite as high now as then. My Alaskan friends are, +in ideals and character, not below the level of even the <i>Star</i>. +However, they were not at that time as well-known, nor was +their standing in the community possibly of as direct business +value to them. You might, therefore, suspect them of +using Santa Claus to help them find a reindeer market, no +matter what they thought of the Saint himself. But surely +the <i>Star</i>, whose business sense is as keen as its ethics are +scrupulous, would not touch the enterprise unless its editors +were sure of two things: that Santa was all right, for +otherwise the <i>Star</i> would not associate with him even for +profit; and that nearly everybody else thought Santa all +right, for otherwise the <i>Star</i> would not profit by associating +with him.</p> + +<p>The campaign was planned to deceive the children of +Kansas City into believing that the real Santa with his real<span class="pagenum" id="Page_26">[Pg 26]</span> +gift-bearing reindeer had entered into an arrangement to arrive +in Kansas City some weeks before Christmas and to be +on exhibition there. The <i>Star</i> organization were his alleged +representatives and the part for which I was requisitioned by +the Lomen Reindeer Corporation was to write to the kiddies +a letter telling how I had visited Santa in his northern home +and what message he had sent by me to the children of the +United States. My letter would be printed on dozens of front +pages, aggregating millions in circulation, for this was a +nation-wide campaign handled by newspapers or department +stores in many of the larger cities, such as Cleveland, +Brooklyn, Denver, Oklahoma City, and I have forgotten +what other places. The letter I wrote was deceptive, though +not literally untruthful. It was printed by all the papers engaged +in the Real Santa campaign, and between me and a +thousand other willing collaborators who all felt we were +doing the nation’s children a real service, we fooled them so +thoroughly that the <i>Star</i> (to come back to that worthy paper) +was able to stage a parade through the streets of Kansas City +that was even larger, it was said, than the American Legion +could muster when they held their National Convention in +the same city the year before. The entire police force was +needed to control the crowd. Some other cities did almost +as well.</p> + +<p>I have heard much comment on the campaign waged by +the <i>Star</i>, and by the like-minded papers of other cities, and +none has been unfavorable. I believe the mayor of Kansas +City thanked the <i>Star</i> for a great public service—or something +of that sort. But mayors do such things rather perfunctorily—whatever +is done by a prominent enough citizen or<span class="pagenum" id="Page_27">[Pg 27]</span> +foreigner, at that they publicly rejoice. But tradesmen are +usually more hard-headed, and their chief organizations are +discreet and particular to be always on the side of the common +weal. But higher than any of our non-religious bodies +in its ideals and aims is likely to be the Parent-Teacher Association +of the city. Listen, then, to what they said in a display +proclamation which occupied, in suitably large print, +nearly a whole page of <i>The Kansas City Star</i> on Christmas +Day, 1925:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>To <i>The Kansas City Star</i>:</p> + +<p>May we express our congratulations and appreciation to +<i>The Star</i> on the wonderful success of its enterprise in bringing +Santa Claus and his reindeer to Kansas City and acting +as the host, friend and guide of the children’s Christmas +saint.</p> + +<p>We believe all Kansas City and our neighboring towns +share with us in our felicitation. It is nothing new for <i>The +Star</i> to be generously mindful of the children at Christmas +time. We have not forgotten <i>Snow White</i>, <i>The Seven Swans</i> +and <i>Peter Pan</i>! But this year Santa Claus and his reindeer +have been brought “in person,” have paraded our streets, +visited our schools and hospitals and have taken their Christmas +cheer directly to the children and to the older folk as +well.</p> + +<p>The Old Spirit of Christmas has been revived and stimulated, +and everybody has been made happier and better by +this Yuletide visit. With this Christmas Spirit in our hearts, +we now think it most fitting to thank <i>The Star</i> publicity for +its unique and happy achievement.</p> +</div> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_28">[Pg 28]</span></p> + +<p class="c large sp"> +TO SANTA CLAUS AND<br> +HIS HOST:<br> +A MERRY CHRISTMAS AND<br> +THANK YOU +</p> + +<p> +Merchants Association:</p> + +<p class="pad2"> +Parent-Teacher Association:</p> + +<p class="pad3"> +Chamber of Commerce +</p> + +<p>You agree with them, heartily, Gentle Reader, I am sure. +And so do I. The pudgy Saint with his sleigh load of gifts +and his eight reindeer is part of the glory and romance of +childhood. You and I, when we were small and believed in +him, saw with our mundane eyes nothing more than a jolly +old man in a red coat with a crinkly smile and a flowing +beard; the more blessed youngsters of today (thanks to the +Lomen Corporation in Alaska and men of humanity and +vision in our cities who cooperate with them), become personally +acquainted with Dancer and Prancer, and Donner +and Blitzen, and all the other members of the famous team. +They ride in the sleigh with Santa and they ride on the backs +of his deer. They are thrilled by the no longer simulated (as +in our day) interest of their parents who now stand shivering +with cold and quivering with delight as they are shoved +about by policemen to make way for a Santa-and-Reindeer +parade as large and enthusiastic as ever marched behind a +young lady that swam the channel or a young gentleman +who flew the Atlantic.</p> + +<p>Best of all, this apparent faith of the elders enables us to +stretch the faith of the younger generation a year or two<span class="pagenum" id="Page_29">[Pg 29]</span> +longer than was possible before the Lomen concern thought +of providing real reindeer to make the mythical Saint more +real. We used to lose such beliefs when we were five, but +today the Parent-Teacher Association, the Merchants Association, +the Chamber of Commerce, and the <i>Star</i> are able to +stretch the faith of Kansas City at least till seven—two years +of happy unreality given to thousands of children in that one +city alone. And so in many other cities. Multiplying the clear +gain, two years for each child, by the total number of children +affected, we have an aggregate of millions of happiness-years +added for this nation alone. When the fashion spreads +to other countries and continues through the years, the total +gain to the world will become incalculable.</p> + +<p>Preserving the faith of children was the main purpose of +the Santa campaign, but the more enterprising newspapers +used the opportunity to benefit older readers as well. The +Denver paper (which we will not name, for some people +mistakenly consider it wrong to deceive grown-ups) erected +an imitation snow house near where the reindeer were kept +(I think it was at the municipal buildings) and employed an +Eskimo, who had never before seen that sort of snow house +except in movies, to explain to visitors that he and other +reindeer herders of Alaska dwelt in that kind of snow house +when they were at home. So far as I could judge, and I was +in Denver at the time, every grown person, from Unitarian +to Rotarian, swallowed that as readily as the children did the +Santa part, and with as much satisfaction. Such beliefs have +a moral as well as an entertainment value. It certainly makes +you more content with a hall bedroom if you can visualize +the Alaska Eskimos shivering in huts of snow.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_30">[Pg 30]</span></p> + +<p>But this about Alaska snow houses and the preservation of +the faith of adults, has been a digression. We must proceed +with our systematic inquiry into the planned and benevolent +deception of the growing child.</p> + + +<p class="c less pad">THE CASE OF THE GRADE SCHOOL</p> + +<p>We aim in this book at no more than establishing a reasonable +presumption either in favor of truth as opposed to deception +or else in favor of deception as opposed to truth. We +shall not, therefore, attempt a study of our educational system +as a whole but shall take a few cases that are typical.</p> + +<p><i>The Teaching of History</i>: Under this head we shall consider +two general problems and then a few specific instances.</p> + +<p>One of those disadvantages of facts which their advocates +usually admit, is that they are complicated. Another is that +in most cases people cannot agree as to what are the facts. +Simplification and standardization are therefore necessary, +especially for the young. This is universally conceded.</p> + +<p>Not till the prospective historian starts graduate work in +a university does he usually begin to have any conception of +how debatable are most of the things that he has been taught +as a child. The disillusionment then continues rapidly until +he feels like selecting as the best definition of his specialty +the one usually credited to Napoleon: “History is a set of lies +agreed upon.” But (and this is significant), in spite of the +high average moral tone of our populations, few historians +become crusaders against history. The simplest, and I believe +the correct, explanation is that they think that, on the +whole, deceiving children does them good.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_31">[Pg 31]</span></p> + +<p>When we entered the 1914-18 war, we suddenly discovered +that most of our school histories were anti-British. Many +of them were forthwith changed to pro-British, without a +murmur from anyone except a few people who (we all +agreed, as soon as they began to protest) were either pro-Germans +or Pacifists. But the War, after we got into it, was +so short that before it was over there was not time to oust +all the anti-British propaganda from the texts. I had the instructive +experience of being in a city where a violent newspaper +controversy sprang up between correspondents, some +of whom advocated anti-British history but most of whom +favored pro-British. The ground of the pros was that we +ought to stand by our former allies, that there might soon be +another war, and that we should bring up the younger generation +strong for English-speaking unity, because that was +the natural basis of the coming alignment. Some argued specifically +that we might be able to annex Canada if we used +the same sort of histories as the Canadians and therefore +grew up to the same beliefs. Even the Hearst papers, which +then opposed this view and anything else that seemed to +favor the British, later came out for the principle and advocated +an English-speaking union.</p> + +<p>The voices which suggested an impartial history were few +and weak. Thus did what we believe to be the sound common +sense of the people manifest itself. For next after patriotism +comes a right world outlook. We must know in advance +what country to favor in time of trouble. And how can +the needed unanimity be secured in a democracy except by +teaching the youngsters to like the right country so that they<span class="pagenum" id="Page_32">[Pg 32]</span> +may vote correctly when they later come to decide tariffs, +treaties and wars?</p> + +<p>Much proof of what no one doubts is tedious and we have +gone far enough in the argument. Certainly if you are pro-British, +you will see at once that teaching love for British +ideals, respect for British institutions, cannot help but benefit +any country. If you are not pro-British, you can arrive at +the same conclusion by substituting in the discussion the +name of whatever country you most admire. Call that country +X. You will then at once see the advantage of teaching +the rising generation to be pro-X, or <i>proex</i>—to coin a much-needed +word.</p> + +<p>The reader may here object that even if it is agreed that +history teaching in the schools should be chiefly for the purpose +of laying down principles to guide us in life, it does not +follow that we have to teach children to be in favor of any +particular country or set of countries. Perhaps you are a pronounced +isolationist and think we are strong enough to go +it alone, then this strength would be increased by the solidarity +we would gain if we learned in school to dislike all other +nations and later ran our government and shaped our private +actions so as to get them all to dislike us. That is an old +and much-advocated principle: that real unity can be attained +only in the face of a common enemy. Very well, then, +you are not a Proex but an Antex, and you must go about +trying to get the schools into your hands. Let the best men +win! It looks just now as if it would be the Antexes.</p> + +<p>Coming to specific problems of truth in history, we need +little but a catalogue to see on which side we stand. Supposing, +just for argument, that the biographers of Lincoln could<span class="pagenum" id="Page_33">[Pg 33]</span> +prove, as some of them have tried to do, that he was of +illegitimate descent, would you then want that taught in the +schools? The conclusive arguments against are: (1) Such +teaching would attack the Home, the most precious of all +our institutions; for Lincoln is our greatest national hero, and +having him illegitimate, even if only back in his parents’ or +grandparents’ generation, would be a destructive influence. +(2) That teaching would also attack the institution of National +Heroes. Lincoln is our greatest hero; nothing is more +beneficial than to have heroes to look up to; we would not +look up to Lincoln quite so much if he were in any degree +illegitimate; therefore we ought to hide the fact, if it were a +fact. (3) Nothing could be gained by encouraging children +to attach scandal to the names of great men. (4) It would be +in bad taste to teach in school about the illegitimacy of anyone. +On the basis of these and many similar reasons, all +decent people will agree that the question of whether Lincoln +was illegitimate should never be mentioned in the +schools.</p> + +<p>To be on the safe side, the author states here emphatically +that the biographers who favor the legitimacy of Lincoln, +even unto the third and fourth generation, have, in his opinion, +much the best of the argument. For this book might possibly +fall into the hands of minors.</p> + +<p>It is maintained by some that it would do no harm for +adults to know the fact, if it were a fact, that Lincoln was +illegitimate. Their reasoning is that character is formed in +infancy and that the perverting influence of a truth, no matter +how improper, is negligible in adults. We agree with that +contention, and the more readily because it is in harmony<span class="pagenum" id="Page_34">[Pg 34]</span> +with the conclusion at which we are fast arriving (a conclusion, +by the way, at which you could arrive still faster with +less reasoning): The purpose of child training is to build +character, and all education should therefore trend toward +that goal. The truth should be admitted into the curriculum +or kept out of it by that test alone. Facts of a disturbing nature +should be permitted, if at all, only when characters have +set beyond the reasonable possibility of change.</p> + +<p>The importance of discretion in history teaching was once +brought forcibly to my attention when I was spending a summer +in northern Vermont, and found in use three miles away +across the Canadian line in Quebec, school texts in which +the War of 1812 differed so much from the war in the +Vermont histories that you would hardly believe it was the +same war. You can readily see how wise that was on both +sides. Imagine the discord that would be introduced into the +teaching of Canadian patriotism if they used Vermont histories, +and similarly what havoc a Canadian history could +work, if tossed into our school system like a stone into delicate +machinery. Nor is there any halfway course possible. +If you were to cut out all the contradictions, there would be +little left of that particular war; neither would the leavings +be any good for inculcating patriotism or other moral virtues +into either Canadians or Americans. Obviously things had +best remain as they are.</p> + +<p>Or would you ever hint in the history courses that Sir +Galahad never had a bath? That Tristram’s courting, so +touchingly described by Edwin Arlington Robinson, must +have smelled pretty strong even at arm’s length (except when +the wind was just right)? That some of the most revered<span class="pagenum" id="Page_35">[Pg 35]</span> +saints of the Church made vows never to bathe and never to +be unkind to the lice that swarmed over them? And that the +only two great bathing eras of known history were the ancient +period which historians call the decline of the Roman +Empire, when civilization was going to the dogs, and our +modern period, when the Fundamentalists tell us we are all +going to the Devil? Would not such teaching suggest that +there may be a connection between clean bodies and unclean +living? And what could be worse for æsthetics or for the +soap trade?</p> + +<p>The fact was, of course, that Tristram liked the smell of +his sweetheart, and she liked his, both being used to it, and +that the sinners as well as the saints of the Middle Ages +really enjoyed what we would call the stink of foul linen. +The past was not necessarily such an unpleasant time for +those who lived in it (in view of their tastes). But, even after +dwelling on that, most of us will remain convinced of the +superiority of our own taste, and will continue unwilling +that historical studies shall in any way encourage those of +our youngsters who seem to have been born with medieval +propensities for dirt.</p> + +<p>Indeed, what possible good end could be served by letting +such facts (if they be facts) gain currency through history +teaching? Would patriotism, good manners, or good morals +profit thereby? Would such teaching build character? Certainly +not, and the present course is the right one: to say +nothing about bathing in the Age of Chivalry, but to imply +always that cleanliness is the natural state and passion of man—excepting +rare miscreants who come to school inadequately +washed behind the ears.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_36">[Pg 36]</span></p> + +<p>And so we might go on, canvassing our histories and our +moral, political and æsthetic judgments till we arrive at the +conclusion that in school texts at least the truth needs to be +very judiciously handled.</p> + +<p><i>The Teaching of Physiology</i>: If the truth be a tricky thing +in history, it is no less so in many other “branches” taught in +the first eight grades of school. For instance, consider physiology. +We need not dwell on sex, which most of us instinctively +and rightly feel must not be thrust upon the young, +but will instead continue under this head the discussion with +which we ended the section on history.</p> + +<p>Cleanliness may seem to lie in the field of æsthetics, but it +has the most practical value. You would be ostracized socially +if people knew you did not bathe; you would be worse off +than if you had halitosis and four-out-of-five pyorrhea. Personality +courses, books on etiquette, and the efforts of the +Hamilton Institute combined with Pelmanism would be of +little avail to gain you preferment. Listerine could not remove +the odor nor Pond’s Cream make your countenance +seem agreeable. So at least, we believe, and so the rising generation +must be taught to believe, or cleanliness may depart +from among us.</p> + +<p>But it is now said by some of the physiologists (doubtless +untruly) that nearly all the supposed scientific arguments +for bathing are fictions and fallacies. <i>Item</i>: The skin does not +excrete any appreciable amount of harmful substances from +the body, nor do the pores “breathe.” Therefore your system +is not purified by “keeping the pores open” and one argument +on bathing-for-health disappears. <i>Item</i>: A chief function +of the skin is to protect the body; poisons, such as mercury,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_37">[Pg 37]</span> +cannot enter your body through a skin proofed with its +own secretions, but will seep through if the natural lubricants +have been washed away with warm water, soap, or +other methods. Therefore your health is, in this respect at +least, the safer the less you bathe, and another of the standard +arguments vanishes. <i>Item</i>: The skin’s own secretions keep it +softer and in better condition than any substitute yet discovered. +This is a deserved pat on the shoulder for the Lord +who made us, but a rather stiff jolt for the cosmetic manufacturers. +<i>Item</i>: The body odors come chiefly from three +areas or parts of the body (that are too taboo for mention +even here). Keeping these clean goes nine-tenths of the way +toward freeing you from odors that other normal humans +can detect, and changing your underwear every day, or +even every other day, would go the remaining one-tenth, +thus removing that argument for bathing.</p> + +<p>And so on for many arguments more, the sum of which +is that if you have a healthy skin it is safe enough to bathe +if you like; but with eczema and certain other diseases you +must not bathe if you want to stop the blotches from spreading, +or to sleep for the itching at night.</p> + +<p>Now just assume, for argument’s sake, that all the above +(or to be conservative, say half of it), is true. Then ask yourself, +would you be in favor of having little children of the +dirty-ear stage find out about it? The slogan was, in the generation +of our parents: “Cleanliness is next to Godliness.” +But the investment in soap and in the allied industries has +grown faster since then than the property of the churches, +and the soaps advertise more. Today the sales talk sways the +nation, and it is doubtful if godliness even approaches cleanliness<span class="pagenum" id="Page_38">[Pg 38]</span> +in popularity. We must fight harder, therefore, to keep +such physiology out of the schools, than any fundamentalist +has yet fought to keep Darwinism out of the colleges. And +we shall succeed, backed as we are by the advertising funds +and the publicity genius of the whole soap industry from +Bon Ami to Zap.</p> + +<p>But there is one disquieting thought: The interests of Listerine +and the perfumers are opposed to those of the soap +and bath towel manufacturers. Europe, too, may seek to control +our cleanliness, as it does our politics, by its insidious +propaganda. But, fortunately, it will be disunited. It will be +England pleading that odors be removed with Lifebuoy +against France urging that they be covered up with Houbigant. +These may kill each other off. Then there will be +apathy and discord at home among our Napoleons of business. +Some will stand aside from the struggle, for great +houses, like Colgate, make soap as well as perfume. The +underwear manufacturers will be against both, and so will +the laundries, for they will want us to get rid of odors by +frequent changes of linen. Frequent launderings wear out +clothes and thus benefit the cotton planters of the South and +the wool ranchers of the West.</p> + +<p>The issue will be doubtful if the battle ever starts. We, the +great public, having once been won over from France and +the perfume to England and the tub, should try to prevent +the issue from ever rising again by keeping the unæsthetic +new physiology out of the schools.</p> + +<p>Furthermore, especially as this book may fall into the +hands of minors, the so-called new physiology is doubtless +all wrong. So let us continue circulating the story about the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_39">[Pg 39]</span> +page in Venice who was clothed in gold leaf for a pageant +and who died of suffocation because his pores could not +breathe. Let us never forget suggesting, when we see a lad +whose face is covered with pimples, that he has doubtless +been neglecting his wash basin and soap. And let us soft +pedal the fact, if it be a fact, that abstinence from bathing is +frequently prescribed by the most expensive skin specialists.</p> + +<p><i>The Teaching of Geography</i>: The teaching of this science +brings out a new consideration—the reticence customarily +practiced in it, while no less benevolent than in the other +subjects, is based on motives new in our discussion and results +in benefits of a different kind.</p> + +<p>When facts are played down in geography teaching it is +not usually because they would be in bad taste or otherwise +detrimental to the character of the scholars, but rather because +they are too complicated. The teachers are busy and +overworked, and the pupils have limited time for the curriculum, +for some of them may have to quit school soon and +go to work. A complicated idea takes a long time to teach, +it is hard to learn and difficult to remember and understand. +From both the giving and receiving end, simplicity is therefore +desirable, but facts have usually the unfortunate defect +of being complicated. In the practice of teaching it is therefore +often necessary and sometimes desirable to ignore them. +We can best and most sympathetically understand this if +we take a case where we have been ourselves deceived, for +we shall then be able to testify from personal knowledge +that we have benefited, or at least that we have suffered no +harm.</p> + +<p>The best geographical example under this head is perhaps<span class="pagenum" id="Page_40">[Pg 40]</span> +one of those upon which we touched briefly in the first +section of this book—that, other things being equal, the farther +north you go the colder it gets, no matter what the time +of year. We shall develop that topic more fully than we did +before, exploring some of its more instructive and entertaining +ramifications.</p> + +<p>First we need perspective from the history of geographical +science. As in many other cases, we owe the beginnings of +learning in this field to the Greeks. They may have borrowed +from earlier civilizations, and probably did; but they +formulated the doctrines and cast them into the molds in +which many of them are still set. One of their chief achievements +was that they worked out the laws of temperature +distribution over the earth substantially as we learned them +in the grade schools up to a few years ago, and roughly as +they still remain in the minds of the general public.</p> + +<p>Already five hundred years before Christ, the Greeks +knew that the earth was a sphere. They understood the +migration of the sun northward over the earth in summer +and southward in winter between what they called, and +what we still call, the tropics of Cancer and Capricorn. They +also determined the polar circles beyond which the sun does +not rise in winter nor set in summer. This was dividing the +earth into five logical zones. The Greeks and the rest of +mankind lived, they said, in a zone that was temperate. But +if you crossed the Mediterranean and were to travel south +into Africa you would get too near the sun and come first to +a section unpleasantly hot, then to one intolerable, and last +to a burning region where no living thing, either plant or +animal, could exist by reason of the fierce downpour of the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_41">[Pg 41]</span> +sun’s heat. This was the Torrid Zone. Going north from +Greece you came similarly first to lands unpleasantly cold, +then to others intolerable, and last to a permanently frozen +region “where life is as impossible because of the freezing +as it is in the Torrid Zone because of the burning.” South of +the tropics there doubtless was another temperate zone and +this might be inhabited—probably was, in fact, though we +should never know except by inference, as no one could ever +cross the burning tropics. And at the south end of the earth +would be a second frozen zone.</p> + +<p>Thus from their doctrines of beauty, simplicity, and symmetry, +and from the principles of logic the Greeks evolved +laws of temperature distribution which are so easy to explain +and understand that if you had never heard of them before +you could have grasped both them and their necessary implications +from a description no longer nor better composed +than mine that you have just read. Such a natural law is a +boon to teacher and student alike. No wonder, then, that it +held its ground from more than four hundred years before +Christ to more than fourteen hundred years after, as John +Kirtland Wright has recently proved in a long and scholarly +work published by the American Geographical Society of +New York: <i>The Geographical Lore of the Time of the +Crusades</i>.</p> + +<p>That we do not still have in the schools these Greek temperature +laws in all their pristine simplicity is due to two of +mankind’s most troublesome qualities, cupidity and skepticism. +In the fifteenth century Western Europe was greedy +for the riches of the Far East, and the road to Cathay, traveled +by Marco Polo and his predecessors and successors, had<span class="pagenum" id="Page_42">[Pg 42]</span> +been closed by Mohammedan victories over the less bigoted +Mongols. It is usually easy to disbelieve anything that crosses +our desires, and so doubts began to arise as to whether the +tropic lands were really burning hot and the tropic oceans +boiling. Henry the Navigator gets most of the credit for +cooling off the burning zone by sending out ship after ship +that went farther and farther south along the West Coast of +Africa, each returning with fearful tales of what they had +seen or imagined, but most of them nevertheless returning +and thus giving hope that others might go still farther. At +last a ship did sail to where the sun stood overhead without +cooking the sailors alive. Indeed, she returned with the story +that the days had not been hotter right below the sun than +they were on some occasions in Portugal.</p> + +<p>So began the “Conquest of the Tropics,” and so ended +the simplicity of the Greek laws of temperature distribution. +Every work on meteorology of college grade now tells you +that the highest temperatures registered by thermometers in +the shade, under weather bureau conditions, are not recorded +in the Torrid Zone at all; but in the Temperate (!) Zones. +Probably the highest in-the-shade records so far taken are +those of Death Valley, California, about 900 miles north of +the northern edge of the Torrid Zone—136°; almost certainly +the highest temperatures that can be recorded in +Africa are in the Sahara Desert, also north of the tropics. If +there are higher temperatures south of the Equator we feel +sure they will not be near the Equator, but near the tropic of +Capricorn or else (more likely) in the South Temperate +Zone.</p> + +<p>These principles are now known to all authors of text<span class="pagenum" id="Page_43">[Pg 43]</span> +books, but they are still able to maintain a degree of simplicity +in the lower school grades by implying it is average +temperatures that matter, and by saying nothing about extremes. +The fact is that averages count for some things and +extremes for others, and that both are important. It is not, +of course, the average cold of January that sometimes destroys +the fruit in the South, but the one extreme night; similarly +it is not the average heat of July that kills by sunstroke in +New York but the one extreme day. Extremes are really +more important, in that sense, than averages; but averages +are much simpler and more teachable. It is so complicated to +explain and remember that extremes may be high where +averages are high, that extremes may be high where averages +are low, and that extremes may be low where averages +are low. We would certainly have to lengthen out our school +courses if we went into such hairsplitting, and our millions +of potential workers would be kept out of the mills and factories +even longer than they are now. Besides, the complexities +of facts are bewildering and confusing to the average +mind, and never give the feeling of enlightenment you have +when you grasp a simple principle which throws a flood of +logical light on a previously haphazard world.</p> + +<p>It is unfortunate—or perhaps fortunate—that we have not +space to go deeply into the history of the way in which the +simple Greek law of temperature distribution has been gradually +broken down by explorers who went to remote places +and came back with stories of conditions that did not fit into +the theory, and how the scientists toiled at fitting together +the mosaic pieces till they finally evolved an explanation that +does fit all the facts. But we must give at least a brief sketch.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_44">[Pg 44]</span></p> + +<p>The investigation that has been going on since the days of +Prince Henry the Navigator started from the simple Greek +proposition: There is no cold and the greatest heat on the +Equator, no extreme of either heat or cold in the North +Temperate Zone, and no heat but merely intense cold at +the North Pole. The first slight exceptions to this had, of +course, been noted long before Henry’s day: The mountain +tops are cold. Other discrepancies due to sea breezes, ocean +currents, and many other things soon followed, but they +were, on the whole, not very difficult to explain as exceptions +to the rule. True enough, the altitude one was taken to be a +universal exception; mountains were said to be colder than +their surroundings in any zone at any time of year, and it +became a popular saying that climbing a few feet up was like +traveling a good many miles north.</p> + +<p>All exceptions other than altitude were explained in the +Middle Ages, and down to our day, as an inroad of conditions +from one zone into the territory of another—the Gulf +Stream warmed the British Isles because it came from the +tropics, the Labrador Current cooled Newfoundland because +it came from the Arctic, and so on. New Yorkers still +speak of sunstroke waves as coming from the Equator, even +on occasions when the press reports few or no deaths south +of Washington and the weather bureau shows that Boston +is hotter than Richmond (those who think about it at all +probably supposing that the heat arrives by some special +conveyance through the upper atmosphere). By similar acceptance +of theory and lack of reasoning, cold winds are still +spoken of as coming from the North Pole.</p> + +<p>Serious trouble for the classic theory first developed when<span class="pagenum" id="Page_45">[Pg 45]</span> +travelers returned from the Arctic with their reports. John +Davis, whose name you find on the strait west of Greenland, +said, for instance, that he had been far within the so-called +Frozen Zone “three divers times” (1585-1588) and that he +had on occasion found the weather there “as salubrious as +ever I did in the Isles of De Verde”—which was certainly +amazing, for those islands lie in the region supposed until +Prince Henry’s time (after 1400 <span class="allsmcap">A.D.</span>) to be lifeless “because +of the burning.”</p> + +<p>Both before and after Davis there were, however, conflicting +reports from the Arctic explorers, those of the hero +kind speaking (with modest reserve) only about the cold, +while those of the commercial type, like Davis, dwelt on the +surprising heat. On the whole there was reason for the textbook +writers to side uncompromisingly with the Greeks +(particularly in elementary education, where simplicity is +most desirable), so long as any travelers continued to support +them.</p> + +<p>The balance was more seriously disturbed than ever before +when the weather bureaus entered the field, and the U. S. +Weather Bureau, for instance, began to report from Fort +Yukon, Alaska, which is within the Arctic Circle, temperatures +and humidities like those which kill people in New +York. After that the classic simplicity of the zone in which +it is “always cold” could be maintained only by ignoring the +records. This has been done with remarkable success, for +the textbooks stating or plainly inferring that it is never +warm in the Arctic were in extensive use in American schools +for more than twenty years after the Bureau at Washington +began to publish at government expense Arctic temperatures<span class="pagenum" id="Page_46">[Pg 46]</span> +ranging up to 100° in the shade. You can verify this by going +ten years back in the geographies used by the schools of +your own neighborhood—not in every case, but in most.</p> + +<p>There are some texts still in use which imply that it is +never warm in the Arctic, but many have felt themselves +compelled to present the following complicated explanation +of Arctic summer temperatures (after stating that the old +law does hold for three-quarters of the year): Practically all +the heat comes from the sun, some arriving at any given spot +directly in the form of light, some transported there by various +agencies, such as winds, ocean currents. The amount of +heat (light) delivered straight from the sun to a unit of the +earth’s surface on a summer day depends primarily on how +nearly vertical the sun is and for how many hours it shines; +but secondarily it depends on other factors, such as clouds or +dust in the atmosphere, the color of the surface the light rays +strike, and so on. The resulting temperature, as observed +either by a thermometer or by the human sensory organs, is +further modified by how long a night, during which heat +was lost, has preceded the day, and by how much “cold” was +stored in that locality by the preceding winter. In some places +that are mountainous, such as Greenland, this winter chill +has been effectively stored in the form of snow, which not +only throws back the light rays without giving them a chance +to turn into heat but also neutralizes those that have become +heat by using them to lessen its own cold; other places, such +as the ocean, have also stored the “cold” effectively, and cancel +the heat of the summer with great success. Therefore it is +never very hot on mountains in the Arctic, nor on the +ocean; and it is probable that if you spent a summer in a<span class="pagenum" id="Page_47">[Pg 47]</span> +tent on an ice floe at the North Pole out-of-doors you would +never observe a temperature higher than twenty degrees +above freezing (say 50° or 55° F.) measured five feet above +the ice. It would of course be much hotter if you put up a +windbreak and then let the sun shine on a dark tarpaulin +spread on the floe.</p> + +<p>But there are in the Arctic, the explanation would continue, +thousands of square miles of low land not very near +either to mountains or to the sea. Over these it is far colder +in winter than at the North Pole (because the air above the +Pole is warmed by the heat radiated by the ocean up through +the floating ice). Winter winds are therefore frequently +warmer when they blow from the north than from some +other direction, and in some places the coldest winds are +southerly. This extreme cold makes a heavy precipitation impossible, +and the average snowfall of the Arctic lowlands for +twelve months is therefore less than the average snowfall of +Virginia or Scotland. This little snow dissolves quickly in +the spring, and after that the sunlight strikes a dark surface, +which helps it turn into heat. Nor is there much cold stored +anywhere near that can become effective to neutralize the +sun. What cold had been stored up by the snow is gone, except +as it is held in a little water on or near the surface. What +has been taken up by the ground through last winter, and +through the centuries, is securely imprisoned there; for the +first few inches which thaw near the surface become an insulating +blanket that confines the rest of the chill and makes +it as powerless to affect the temperature of the air as if it +were hundreds of miles away.</p> + +<p>On the Arctic prairie that is remote from mountains or<span class="pagenum" id="Page_48">[Pg 48]</span> +the sea, one factor, then, far overshadows all others in determining +how hot any given day shall be. This is the quantity +of heat received each hour from the sun at that place, multiplied +by the number of hours. Now, at the Equator the sun +can deliver heat no more than twelve hours out of every +twenty-four, giving the tropical prairie an equal length of +time in which to cool off. But on the prairie north of the +Arctic circle the sun shines the whole twenty-four hours, delivering +less heat per hour than at the Equator, but more per +day, and without any night in which to cool off. There is, +accordingly, a period in summer, varying in length according +to where you are in the Arctic, during which the sun +delivers to your locality about the same heat per day as at +the Equator. <i>This is the rule</i>, for it is based on the broadest +principles; the places where it does not work out are exceptions, +for narrower or special reasons. And it is a fact that +there are many places on and near the Equator where the +hottest day in a hundred years does not equal the hottest +days of the same century at many places in the Arctic that +are equally high above sea level.</p> + +<p>Few will deny the interest of the preceding facts; but, says +the really sensible man, the world is full of interesting things, +and we certainly have not room for them all in the textbooks, +nor time for them all in the schools. The practical value of +this curious Arctic lore is very small to the average man, who +stays at home or, at the most, goes to Paris; though it is undeniably +highly useful to those few individuals who travel +to the Arctic and who want to know in advance what sort of +weather to expect, warning them to take fly dope instead of +furs if they are going on a Midnight Sun excursion to Fort<span class="pagenum" id="Page_49">[Pg 49]</span> +Yukon. But even for the excursionist, facts are not an unmixed +blessing. If you know about the heat and the mosquitoes +in advance, you will not have the pleasure of discovering +them; the fly dope may save you from stings, but +it also spoils the after-dinner value of the tale about how +foolish you were and how badly instructed <i>before you went +north</i>, which sort of story is the only really satisfactory way +of putting your listeners both firmly and pleasantly among +the uninstructed where they belong. And even from their +point of view, too much advance knowledge is rather a bore, +for what is the drawing-room value of that which everybody +has learned in school when compared with: “Jones, you +know, the Famous Traveler, told me once that when he was +in the Yukon, etc.”</p> + +<p>Facts are tedious, anyhow, and we should think carefully +before agreeing that the simple and edifying Greek rule shall +go by the board. Consider just a few of the entertaining and +instructive things, some of them with no mean character-building +value, that would have to go, too.</p> + +<p><i>Item</i>: All the ideas would have to go that are similar to +the familiar kindergarten ditty that has been sung by millions +of little Americans and which goes something like this +(there seems to be no standard version):</p> + + +<div class="poetry-container"> +<div class="poetry"> + <div class="stanza"> + <div class="verse indent0">“Frosty little Eskimo,</div> + <div class="verse indent0">In your house of ice and snow.”</div> + </div> +</div> +</div> + + +<p>and so on, till the final line:</p> + + +<div class="poetry-container"> +<div class="poetry"> + <div class="stanza"> + <div class="verse indent0">“For in Greenland there is nothing green to grow!”</div> + </div> +</div> +</div> + + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_50">[Pg 50]</span></p> + +<p>We might be able to salvage the house of ice and snow temporarily, +though it is a bothersome fact that of something +over 14,000 Eskimos in Greenland, by the last census, less +than 300 had ever seen a snow house. But the “nothing green +to grow” would not last very long under the combined attack +of the unromantic geographers, who insist on pointing +out weather bureau records, and the historians of Greenland, +who will tell you that the country was a republic from 986 a.d. +to 1261 (a good deal longer than the United States has +yet been a republic) and a dependency of Norway and Denmark +thereafter; that they had churches and monasteries administered +from European archbishoprics (you may have +seen the Greenlandic church ruins in the movies some years +ago, as background for the King of Denmark hobnobbing +with Eskimos). The historians will point out that a European +civilization could not have existed in Greenland during +the Middle Ages except for stock raising. The colonists had +cattle, with as many as a hundred head in a single barn. +They lived in considerable part on milk and milk products, +and wove cloth from their own sheep, making garments +which you can examine today through photographs in many +books or study in the museum collections of Europe. Both +cattle and sheep raising are now again practiced in Greenland, +and have been for many decades. That means hay, and +hay means meadows with that “something green to grow” +which is denied by the kindergarten.</p> + +<p>Such are the facts, but what of it? If we pressed them upon +children while they were at the impressionable age, we +would so change their mental picture of Greenland as to +rob it of every charm it has so long had for us. What substitute<span class="pagenum" id="Page_51">[Pg 51]</span> +would they find for the delicious thrills and chills that +creep up and down our spines as we look with the mind’s +eye upon a world of permanent white silence and peer into +Greenlandic snow houses where Eskimos shiver (doubtless +without their teeth chattering, else it would not be so silent) +as they devour (again silently) the blubber that enables them +to eke out their miserable existence. And then there is the +character-building value of thinking what a marvelous thing +is the human spirit that continues its fight against the powers +of darkness and cold even up there on the frozen edge of +the world. On the other hand, too, how fortunate we are +who live in a country of warmth and green grass—and +schools. Take away, if you must, the good old picture of the +North that is always cold; but consider first what it is you +are going to give our disillusioned children in its stead. +Surely it will have to be something better than cow pastures +and a few ruined churches. We already have at home enough +of the one and many of the other.</p> + +<p><i>Teaching Through Educational Movies</i>: While our love +for children makes us conceal from them anything that may +be injurious to their welfare, the same affection leads us to +strive for their instruction in whatever we consider beneficial. +But in this field we are sometimes misled. I have in +mind a special case, parents who were greatly incensed at a +movie called <i>Nanook of the North</i>, which, although not +true to the native life of the Eskimos, had been shown in +their children’s school and recommended as true. But these +parents were wrong, as will appear.</p> + +<p>To begin with, the <i>Nanook</i> story was at least as true as +that of Santa Claus, of which those parents approved. It was<span class="pagenum" id="Page_52">[Pg 52]</span> +the same sort of partial truthfulness, only greater. Real as +well as Santa reindeer have horns, four legs, and are driven +before sleighs in harness, though not such sleighs, quite, nor +in such harness as the ordinary Christmas pictures show. +They run on the ground, not through the air; they are very +swift, though not quite so speedy as Santa’s. There are in the +world old men, too, who would like to give a present to every +child at Christmas if they could, though there is no old man +that actually succeeds in doing it. Thus the Santa story, while +fiction in a way, does represent truths.</p> + +<p>Similarly with the movie, <i>Nanook</i>. There are Eskimos in +Hudson Bay where the picture was taken, and the people +you see on the screen are Eskimos, which is more realism, +right from the start, than you have ever had in a Santa Claus +picture. The country you see, too, is the real Hudson Bay. +True enough, not even the coldest month up there averages +as cold as <i>Nanook</i> tells you the whole year averages (35° +below zero), but then you must have something exceptional +in a movie or it would not impress. You are told, too, that +the Hudson Bay Eskimos still hunt with their primitive +weapons, and this is justified. For it would spoil the unity of +the picture to tell the truth about the weapons, though it is +an interesting fact in itself that the forefathers of the Eskimos +shown on the screen have had guns for generations, as the +Hudson’s Bay Company has been trading into the Bay since +1670. Moreover the titles do not actually say that the Bay +Eskimos hunt with primitive weapons <i>only</i>, so you can take +it any way you like. Doubtless the producer meant nothing +more than to say that the children (who are certainly Eskimos)<span class="pagenum" id="Page_53">[Pg 53]</span> +still play at hunting (which would be hunting of a +sort) with bows and arrows.</p> + +<p>No real Eskimos, in my belief, ever hunted seals through +the ice in the manner shown in the picture, nor do I think a +seal could be killed by that method unless he were a defective. +But it is true that certain Eskimos in other parts of the +Arctic (about half of all there are) do know how seals can +be killed through ice. That the Hudson Bay Eskimos, with +whom our producer had to deal, did not know such methods +was no fault of his, and he would have been deficient in resource +if he had allowed that to stop him. Neither are there +libraries in Hudson Bay where he might have borrowed a +book that described the method so he could have studied it +up and taught it to the local natives. There he was with an +expensive movie expedition, the picture just had to be taken, +and audiences in the South would demand to be shown what +they had heard of—Eskimos sealing through the ice. And so +a method was developed (perhaps by the Eskimos themselves +along lines roughly indicated by the director) which +photographs beautifully and gives as much feeling of enlightenment +to an audience as if it showed the real technique +that does secure seals.</p> + +<p>I have gone to <i>Nanook</i> many times for the purpose of observing +the audiences. In several cases some movie fan has +noticed that the seal ostensibly speared in the picture is stiff +and dead, clearly planted there. But that, it seems to me, is +all the realism you could expect in a play. You would not +demand that Fairbanks really kill all his adversaries, though +you do appreciate seeing a bit of good swordsmanship. And +in <i>Nanook</i>, what seal but a dead one could possibly be expected<span class="pagenum" id="Page_54">[Pg 54]</span> +to allow himself to be speared in the manner shown?</p> + +<p>Another thing I have found <i>Nanook</i> audiences complaining +about is that they had heard somewhere that Eskimo +snow houses are warm and comfortable, while the <i>Nanook</i> +picture shows the occupants shivering as they strip for going +to bed, and there are clouds of steam puffing from their +mouths and nostrils. These erudite fans are still more +troubled when they see the movie title which says that the +Eskimos must always keep their snow house interiors below +freezing to prevent them from melting, for they have read a +book by someone who has lived in a snow house and who +has explained the principles of physics by which, when the +weather is cold enough outside (and no weather was ever +quite so cold as the <i>Nanook</i> country is supposed to be), the +snow does not melt though it is comfortably warm inside—say, +as warm as the average British or Continental living +rooms in winter. But the answer is simple, and the producer +is quite justified by it: An Eskimo snow house is too small +for inside photography, and the light might not be good +enough. So to get the best light and plenty of room for the +camera man, half the house was cut away (like the “sets” +you see in the movie studios), and the poor Eskimos were +disrobing and going to bed out of doors. But it would have +spoiled the picture to introduce such technical details. Hence +the producer had to explain the shivering people and their +visible breathing by the harmless pretence that snow house +interiors have to be colder than freezing to prevent the walls +and roof from thawing.</p> + +<p>And so on for the whole picture.</p> + +<p>It was the very fact just stated and others like them which<span class="pagenum" id="Page_55">[Pg 55]</span> +made my friends angry. That may have been because the +realities of the picture were not so charitably interpreted to +them as we have done above. It is possible to make the same +facts look a good deal worse if you try.</p> + +<p>But no charity is needed, and only a proper understanding +of the case, to reconcile any parent to a movie like <i>Nanook</i> +and to its presentation in the school. For the Eskimo, properly +understood, is really the grown-up’s Santa Claus. We +love the world of the imagination. Santa, fat, jolly and generous, +portrays certain things and qualities as we would like +them to be. But in the world of fancy we need contrasts; +ugliness as well as beauty, wickedness as well as goodness. +For the proper effect, we need not only Heaven, but Hell +also. It may be pleasant to think how fortunate you will be if +you go to Heaven, but that is nothing compared to the satisfaction +you get from a reasonable prospect of being able to +keep out of Hell.</p> + +<p>What we mean, then, is that the Eskimo is really a sort +of reversed Santa; and that since Hell has begun to fade, +the Arctic is our best substitute. For somehow grown people, +even those who cannot visualize Hell, seem to be able to believe +not only that Hudson Bay is in the Arctic but also that +the Arctic averages thirty-five degrees below zero, as the picture +says the Hudson Bay country does, and that it has all +the other distressing attributes.</p> + +<p>In fact, the Arctic, peopled by Eskimos, is much more practical +for our purposes than any inferno ever was when peopled +by tormented spirits. No picture of spirits ever gets us +like one of a wretched flesh-and-blood Eskimo who shivers +from one year’s end to the other. Away up there, crouched<span class="pagenum" id="Page_56">[Pg 56]</span> +in his foul, unventilated house, drinking oil, he has a power +to make us remarkably contented with poor lodgings, a +careless landlord, and meals at Childs’. In our little backyard +with its one wretched tree we think with a pleasant compassion +of the stunted little Arctic Mongol who has never +seen even a bush. And then, to make his usefulness complete, +we remember in summer when we are perishing with the +heat that Nature has her compensations! She mercifully sees +to it that her chilled children of the snows shall at least +escape sunstroke and the after effects of too much Coca-Cola.</p> + +<p>And how could you get these and other similar benefits +from the Eskimo and the Arctic if you did not encourage +such pictures as <i>Nanook of the North</i>, and the books that +correspond? And what better time than the impressionable +years of childhood in which to acquire ideas that are going +to have such high consolatory and moral values later?</p> + +<p class="gtb">******</p> + +<p>Perhaps, Gentle Reader, you had arrived at the truth about +Truth before you saw this treatise. If so, you will know, or +you may have guessed by the trend of this inquiry, that +neither side is going to have it all its own way. At first +Truth (in the sense of facts) seemed to be getting the worst +of it, being so frequently immaterial, inexpedient, even +immoral, and nearly always in such bad taste. But the last +argument from geography has shown the merits divided, +with, generally speaking, the “practical” advantages in favor +of the facts, but the idealistic ones against them. We are +likely to feel here an immediate concern that in a crass and +materialistic age the “practical” side will prevail. Not necessarily,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_57">[Pg 57]</span> +for we may be able to show the higher practicality of +idealism.</p> + +<p>We will admit now, partly to save the trouble of a formal +canvass, that the rest of the argument from the schools will +go, on the whole, against us; or, rather, against the conclusions +deduced. The fact is, our position is not really at all +what it has seemed to be. We keep another, and so far unhinted, +solution in reserve.</p> + +<p class="gtb">******</p> + +<p><i>A Glance over the Other Studies</i>: A critical study of psychological +teaching would not go against the preceding +conclusions from history, physiology, geography, and the +educational movies, but in fact decidedly in their favor, more +especially as the newer developments have tended so strongly +toward an undesirable, and, in fact, degrading materialism. +Psychoanalysis and especially behaviorism come near being a +total loss from the point of view of character-building. But +chemistry has scarcely any bad aspects unless you happen to +be a pacifist, objecting to gunpowder and poison gas. But +even so, what is that when measured against soap, a product +of chemistry on which rests that perfect cleanliness revered +today even beyond godliness? Physics, too, is on the right +side, especially those theories of it that are neither so puzzling +that the ordinary man can make nothing of them, or else are +clear in statement but seemingly lead to impossible conclusions—which +can, nevertheless, be experimentally verified. +For it is so valuable to be able to lay one’s hands somewhere +on views that seem either silly or impossible and can +nevertheless be proved. Reasoning from them gives such<span class="pagenum" id="Page_58">[Pg 58]</span> +force to analogous religious views which it does not happen +to be possible to verify.</p> + +<p>Going ahead thus to canvass the rest of the grade school +and high school sciences (for we have inadvertently progressed +on our argument a little beyond the grades before +we knew it) we shall come to the provisional conclusion +that about forty per cent of the truths of education are good +and should continue to be encouraged, about forty per cent +are bad and should be ignored or suppressed, and the remaining +twenty per cent are all right in themselves but too +complicated and should be reserved for those who continue +their education into the universities.</p> + +<p>Since our love and care prompt us to make the education +of our children their best and most logical preparation for +the life which we admire, it is not really necessary for our +present examination to go beyond the common and high +schools, for they are a sort of abstract or synopsis of the +world as we both think it is and want it to be. Still it will do +no harm to take another case or two.</p> + +<p>In politics, for instance, would you want the whole truth +told about every candidate? You can test that out with a few +simple reactions. When it was whispered around, for instance, +that Harding was partly of negro descent, was it your +first inclination to try to discover if the charge were true or +not? On the contrary, you almost certainly took no thought +of truth or falsehood, but were offended and angered by the +bad taste and poor sportsmanship of whoever it was that +started the yarn. In the case of Wilson, would you have +favored it (even as a Republican) if there had been openly +circulated some of the things which (as a Republican) you<span class="pagenum" id="Page_59">[Pg 59]</span> +firmly believed about him? Bad sportsmanship again, and +bad taste; you would not have done it and are glad no one +did. Even in the case of so innocent a thing as President +Theodore Roosevelt’s bad eye, said to have resulted from a +boyish sparring bout, would you, as a Democrat this time, +have favored any campaign use of it whatsoever? Once more, +bad sportsmanship, bad taste, an emphatic no.</p> + +<p>In the August, 1927, number of <i>Harper’s Magazine</i> Dr. +Joseph Collins, famous as a physician in all literary circles, +had an article on <i>Should Doctors Tell the Truth?</i> It will not +take a reading of that article, nor anything but a backward +glance of the mind over our own experiences, to make us +agree with him when he says: “The longer I practice medicine +the more I am convinced that every physician should +cultivate lying as a fine art.” Nor do we quarrel with the general +conclusion that while a physician should tell the truth in +certain cases, lying is usually the kinder, the safer, and therefore +the better way.</p> + +<p>And what of the every day social relations that are more +important than our business or professional contacts to most +of us? Consider the one remark: “How well you are looking!” +Can you imagine the sort of place this world would +be if that little exclamatory sentence, or its equivalent, were +not working overtime in every country? I know my own +case. Ever since I can remember the declaration: “You are +looking better than when I saw you last,” has cheered me +greatly. It was not till a year or two ago that it first struck +me that if this had been uniformly true all these years I +ought to be looking remarkably well by now. But even so, +I am still able to take a little comfort in this serial fiction.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_60">[Pg 60]</span></p> + +<p>In view of the benevolent nature of the many sample reticences +we have considered, all of which and many more like +them are sure of a heavy vote in their favor could this nation, +or any other civilized country, be polled on the subject—in +view of this and much more that could be said in favor, is +it not rather strange that most of us have allowed ourselves +to fall victims to that cynical outlook on life which considers +the deceiver, almost necessarily, wicked? You see how absurd +that is, particularly if you think back over the cases of your +own deception. As a child you may have deceived your +parents occasionally to get out of a licking; but far oftener, +I am sure, you did it to save their feelings, so they would not +be offended or worried—on the well-known and sound principle +that “what you don’t know don’t hurt you.” And, in +later life, was it not usually the same? In school you bluffed +partly for marks, of course, but very often, almost oftener +than you realized, to save the feelings of a kindly teacher +who trusted you and would have been so disappointed had he +known. In married life, too, you deceive, oftener than not (I +am sure the married will agree) to save the feelings of the +other party. In fact, the conjugal relation calls for the highest +known percentage of benevolent reticence. There are, for +instance, certain situations that do not seem to irk the technically +aggrieved parties, even when they know about them, +so long as they are able to keep up the appearance of not +knowing. And what is more, that public which always takes +an interest in the marriage relations of other people, does not +think it reprehensible for the technically aggrieved party to +know about the dereliction and still do nothing, so long as +he does not know that the public knows he knows.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_61">[Pg 61]</span></p> + +<p>In fact, next in importance after the systematic deception +of children by parents, comes the amiable deception of husband +and wife by each other. That is not only in the nature +of things, but proper according to the highest standards, +since the family is the social unit and the home the strong +citadel of our institutions.</p> + + +<p class="c less pad">CONCLUSION</p> + +<p>We have now come to a point where we can survey the +whole ground and draw reasonable conclusions from the +facts set down. The irresistible main decision is against the +rest of the philosophers and against all their philosophy. This +is as it should be; for what would be the profit of a new +philosophy if it failed to destroy the old? The philosophers +may, of course, rise to counter-attack; but what do we reck +of that? For we have the public with us, since we have come +to a conclusion which justifies what they always have done, +what they dearly love doing, and what they are at heart convinced +is right—though they did not know it, any more than +the perfect athlete knows how he balances when he walks.</p> + +<p>The conclusion is, then, that like religion, truth is neither +good nor bad. There are good religions and bad religions, +good truths and bad.</p> + +<p>Generally, though, or at least more often than not, truth is, +in practice, bad—especially in the fields of æsthetics, ethics, +morals, character-building, and business (which last we have +not stopped to argue since it is so self-evident).</p> + +<p>We pointed out in the first section of this book the necessary +imperfection of all the sciences except mathematics.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_62">[Pg 62]</span> +Since nothing is true there by observation or by any evidence, +but merely by agreement, it is obvious that truth in mathematics +need never be bad—since we are not obliged to agree +on it if we do not like it, and nothing is bad unless it is +something we do not like.</p> + +<p>Though we have not covered the field exhaustively, we +may agree that truth is good, usually, in engineering, chemistry, +physics, and the allied sciences. It is good in astronomy +and geology whenever it does not conflict with religion. It +is good about as often as bad in sociology, psychology, physiology, +biology, and several of the related sciences, for in +these about half the time it appears to support present-day +manners, current morals and the prevalent religion. In history, +civics and many such fields it is always open to the +gravest suspicion. In the training of very young children as +a general thing it should be rather carefully avoided.</p> + + +<p class="c less pad">THE NECESSARY REFORMS</p> + +<p>Having arrived at this conclusion, we must profit by it. At +first sight it will seem that, since we have found the truth +bad as often as not, the thing to do would be to proclaim our +emancipation from its tyranny. But that would be forgetting +the more important part of our findings—the benevolent +nature and salutary effects of at least a good half of all the +deception there is. How could you carry on a Santa Claus +campaign, or remain happily married, if you said openly +that you were going to deceive whenever you thought it +best? It is only in prestidigitation, where “the quickness of +the hand deceives the eye,” that you can safely tell people<span class="pagenum" id="Page_63">[Pg 63]</span> +that you are going to fool them. In spiritualist seances, in +praying for rain, or in forecasting a year without a summer, +what effect do you suppose you would produce if you said to +everybody that you were doing everything for its mere psychological +effect on them?</p> + +<p>We can well take our pointer as to what to do from a +famous general who has announced publicly that he is going +to explain in a book just how he himself and his associates +invented and circulated some of the most effective (or outrageous) +lies of the Great War. In connection with this announcement +he has had two things to explain, and he has +made an explanation that is not only satisfactory in his case +but admirably suited to broader uses.</p> + +<p>Asked how he could, without shame, admit such lies as +he proposed to admit, he replied in substance that if you are +justified in using shrapnel, poison gas, torpedoes from submarines +and bombs from airships, you are justified in using +any means at all. The main concern is to make the nation at +home and the soldiers in the field a unit for the war, and you +cannot do that unless you at least convince them that there +is good reason to fight. The more convinced they are the better +they will fight, and what propaganda does is to make +them more convinced. This argument is so familiar that it +deserves no further amplification.</p> + +<p>The General’s second defense was against the accusation +that he had said himself that he expected another war within +twenty-five years from the last, and that such a war could +not be won without propaganda. How, then, did he justify +himself in giving away his country’s secrets of just how its +citizens were fooled in the last war? His reply was that the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_64">[Pg 64]</span> +remedy would be very simple. All you had to do was to +say: “Yes, quite right; we fooled you in the last war. But +times have changed and that sort of thing would not work +now. Besides, we would not fool you even if it served our +ends, we have become so honorable.” Having said this, you +could go ahead and fool them not only with the old methods +but, in some cases, with the very same tale. All you will have +to do in the last case is to explain: “The story which we invented +in the last war must have given the enemy the idea, +for now they are actually doing what we then accused them +of.”</p> + +<p>We may well adapt the General’s ideas to a wider field. +The leaders of thought among us must continue to proclaim +their devotion to Truth, in order that they may be able to +get people to believe and act upon those things that are for +the general welfare.</p> + +<p>The conclusions and recommendations at which we have +arrived will receive informal support from most thoughtful +and all public-spirited persons. But will that be enough, especially +in view of the solid front presented by the old-school +philosophers, who still hold that the Good is the same as the +True, and that the True is whatever corresponds to facts? +It should be enough, for we have an initial advantage in the +cogency and popular appeal of our reasoning. By considering +the very same facts as the old philosophers, but merely +selecting them more judiciously and approaching them from +the opposite, or scientific, angle (of reasoning from facts +to principles), we have discovered (what has long been instinctively +felt) that many facts are bad; and have demonstrated +that the Good cannot be synonymous with every<span class="pagenum" id="Page_65">[Pg 65]</span> +kind of fact, for that would make good synonymous with +bad, which is nonsense. The Good, we have thus demonstrated, +has no necessary relation to facts at all, but is ultimately +determined by the sound instincts of the majority.</p> + +<p>The ancients, it seems, anticipated our findings in a measure; +but that is natural, and strengthens our position, for we +are only trying to go back to the first principles of Nature, +and they understood Nature better than we, being closer to +her and yielding a freer rein to their instincts. They expressed +their conclusion in the saying that “The voice of the +people is the voice of God.” The triumph of the same idea +was poetically forecast by Tennyson when he spoke of an +epoch in which “The common sense of most shall hold a +fretful realm in awe.”</p> + +<p>Can we secure the triumph which Tennyson foresaw, the +need of which we have shown, without a special organization +to attain it? Pondering the question, it does not seem +that we need any wholly new organization, but rather a +federation of those existing agencies that believe in acting +on our principle—the principle of the sound common sense +of the majority. Consider what we have to start with: The +Fundamentalists would take care of religion, the American +Legion and the Liberty League would see to patriotism and +would safeguard the status quo, the Anti-Saloon League, the +W.C.T.U., and similar organizations would look after the +prohibition of alcoholics (and other prohibitions, as needed); +the Society for the Suppression of Vice, the Watch and Ward +Society, and their kind, would protect our literary and other +morals. And so on through the list.</p> + +<p>Of course it will never do for the benevolent organizations<span class="pagenum" id="Page_66">[Pg 66]</span> +to continue acting separately, each for its own end. +They must unite. The Fundamentalists must agree to support +the Legion and League on patriotism, and they must +return the favor by a united Anti-Darwinism. All of them +must get behind the next Clean Books Bill, and so on till +every organization to promote the common good has the +support of every other.</p> + +<p>Such union will be strength, but there will be more power +in reserve that may be called on when needed. Suppose, for +instance, that the schools are threatened. The toy makers, the +printers of fairy tales, and the educational movie people will +see to it that Noah and his Ark remain in our religion, Jack +and the Beanstalk in our folklore, and the permanently +frozen Arctic in our geographies. The politicians will arrange +that the histories shall continue to be reticent and the +soapmakers will look out that the physiology of the skin +does not get too well understood. Back of all such individuals, +corporations, or groups, will be the sound morality +and the good taste of the community, taking care that mere +facts shall not lead us too far astray.</p> + + +<div class="chapter"> +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_67">[Pg 67]</span></p> + +<div class="figcenter2" id="c3"> +<img src="images/fig1.jpg" alt="decoration"> +</div> + +<h2>CHAPTER III.</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c large sp"><span class="smcap">Are Explorers to Join the Dodo?</span></p> + + +<p><span class="more">THERE ARE FEW WHO WILL NOT ADMIT THAT EXPLORATION IS A</span> +Good Thing (we do not here deal with those who question +its economic importance, and so on). In this chapter we offer +proofs that exploration can remain durable after the last +island has been discovered.</p> + +<p>With so much recent flying over seas previously unknown, +and no land discovered on any of the flights, the commentators +are beginning to worry about the end of the romantic +Age of Exploration, and the possible extinction of the Columbus +family. Are there to be no more explorers, they ask, or, +at least, no more Great Explorers?</p> + +<p>Waiving the question of whether it matters much if the +tribe of Columbuses does perish, we have encouragement, of +a sort, in a study of the inside history of exploration, by +which we see that nearly all the most famous explorers came +into their greatest fame through misunderstanding, or +through the planned or accidental fruits of publicity. That +is good news for those who want us to have Great Explorers +in future. For there is always room for more misunderstandings, +and surely the arts of publicity are not on the wane.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_68">[Pg 68]</span> +The Columbuses should, therefore, be able to flourish among +us yet awhile. Their last fade-out will come only when mankind +ceases to delight in being humbugged.</p> + +<p>For those who want new Columbuses hereafter, there is +nothing more encouraging than the story of Christopher +Columbus himself. If there were any such thing as an abstract +greatness in discovery, then surely <i>the</i> discoverer of +America would not have been Christopher, but the first +human being who stepped ashore on the continent, or who +first saw it from a distance (I rule out of court the beasts that +were ahead of the humans, since the institution of fame has +never been developed among them).</p> + +<p>This first human discoverer came thousands of years ago, +and may have been a Negrito or some sort of Negroid person. +He may have resembled a kind of Chinaman, or perhaps +he was a good deal like some modern Europeans. (In that +case the Nordics would assume, <i>a priori</i>, that he must have +been a Nordic, or at least an Asiatic proto-Nordic, in whom +their coming greatness was already foreshadowed.) One +more assumption is that the discovery probably took place +across Bering Straits or along the Aleutian chain, though +some contend that it may have been from island to island +across the South Pacific.</p> + +<p>But we are really perverting the meaning of “discoverer” +by this talk of Negro or Mongol, for by immemorial practice +the use of that word is confined to Europeans. No place +is discovered until some European finds it. It might be safer +to narrow down still farther the meaning of “discoverer,” +for there are books claiming that a kind of European (in the +sense of coming from Europe) really found North America<span class="pagenum" id="Page_69">[Pg 69]</span> +in very ancient prehistoric times. These would not have been +adequate discoverers, for they probably resembled Eskimos, +and no one would suggest that a place was discovered when +the first Eskimo found it—even if he came from Europe.</p> + +<p>We do not arrive at a proper competition in claims of discovery +until we begin to discuss whether the Irish found +America. They have enough political and other prominence—in +fact, they are the next most fashionable whites after +the Nordics. Still, merely being Irish is not enough, for what +we really mean by a Great Discoverer is a European who was +hurrahed while living or at least haloed reasonably soon +after he died. The Irish discoverer, if there was one, does not +meet these requirements. The Irish themselves never tried +to make much of him until recently, when they became +ambitious for setting up a rival to Columbus. Greatness +does not sit very securely on even the most deserving dead +man unless, as said, he develops a cult soon after his real or +alleged deeds.</p> + +<p>After the Irish, we come to more formidable discoverers, +for we know their names and they have the advantage of +being Nordic—Gunnbjorn, who first of known Europeans +sighted the American island of Greenland, probably around +the year 900; Eric the Red, who colonized Greenland following +982; and his son Leif the Lucky, who visited the American +mainland in A.D. 1000. There are no scholars and few +intelligent laymen who dispute the records of Eric and his +son Leif, but still most of them agree that they were not the +real discoverers of America, even though the Papacy followed +soon and effectively in their footsteps by establishing +churches in Greenland about 1050, maintaining them for<span class="pagenum" id="Page_70">[Pg 70]</span> +400 years, and encouraging the knowledge of the Western +World to spread throughout Europe by way of the learning +that bound together the medieval monasteries.</p> + +<p>Christopher Columbus is <i>the</i> discoverer of America chiefly +because he and what he was supposed to have done got the +right advance publicity. Marco Polo and others had reminded +Europe afresh of the riches of the East. Desert raiders, fairly +well press-agented for those days, were making more dangerous +the overland routes which had always been difficult. +Prince Henry the Navigator and his group had finally +worked out an eastward seaway by rounding South Africa, +but the way was stormy and tedious. Everybody wanted an +easy and cheap eastward route. For centuries many had been +trying and the public interest was constantly getting more +and more inflamed.</p> + +<p>Then, at the psychological moment, Columbus sailed westward +for the East, with all his other publicity advantages +strengthened by fashionable royal backing. He struck land, +and at first everybody thought he had discovered a short +route to the wealth of the Indies. A little later doubts arose, +about which people argued violently, and the arguing was +quite as good for advertising as the previous harmony of acclaim. +Before the legend died that Columbus had found +Asia, other legends about gold and jewels and fountains of +youth had grown up to take its place. There never was a +let-down of publicity until colonies developed, and America +became wealthy in her own right.</p> + +<p>As a result of the centuries of advertising that thus went +before the rise of historical scholarship, it is hopeless now +to try to disturb the preeminence of Columbus by publishing<span class="pagenum" id="Page_71">[Pg 71]</span> +the truth about all the discoverers who preceded him. Folklore +has gathered about him until he is almost as safe in his +historical shrine as if he had never existed, like some god or +demigod. When a well-known character is securely mythical +he has such permanence as our world can give. Hercules is +more famous now and his achievements are more widely +known than ever they were in the days when a handful of +Greeks believed in him. Little Red Riding Hood is better +known than Queen Elizabeth, more safely immortal than +Mary Baker G. Eddy. If fame depends on any achievement +at all, it depends only on publicity achievement.</p> + +<p>Greatness in the field of discovery can be acquired today +or tomorrow by the same publicity methods that worked for +Columbus. That such modern greatness happens to have been +secured most often by men who deserved well and worked +honestly, is really beside the point. For others who deserved +as well and worked as honestly are now forgotten, or else +were never known to the public at all.</p> + +<p>The most striking case in point is that of Admiral Peary. +For integrity, ability, courage, persistence, and many other +admirable qualities, he had few equals. He discovered or +elucidated several laws of nature that are of permanent value +to science, and he widened the horizon of geography. Theories +of the wind circulation of the globe, for instance, hinge +in considerable part on Peary’s work in Greenland. Now +that we are flying, and especially when we begin to fly more +with dirigibles, to understand the winds has become crucially +important. Peary is a world benefactor in helping us to that +understanding, but it is reasonably certain that his fame will +not thereby be appreciably increased. Geographers are nearly<span class="pagenum" id="Page_72">[Pg 72]</span> +unanimous in holding that his biggest achievement was determining +that Greenland is an island. Also, his demonstration +that the north end of Greenland, now called Peary +Land, is free of snow in summer, and that it supports plant +and animal life the year round, was a death blow to the old +theory that if lands were only far enough north they would +be sure to be covered with ice. But in spite of all these things, +Peary’s greatness has been made to depend almost solely on +his having been first to reach the North Pole. With all his +real worth, Peary would not have become an immortal had +the North Pole not been a well-advertised place. He rode in +on its publicity.</p> + +<p>A side issue is that the public will not usually consider a +man great unless he has done something which it can visualize. +Children play with tops and we have all seen vehicles +running on wheels, so we think we know what is meant by +the axis of the earth. We translate axis into axle, visualize +a top or a wheel, and imagine that we understand about the +North Pole. It is one end of the axle on which the earth +spins like a top or wheel. Accordingly, we think we can +understand and value properly the achievement of the man +who first got there.</p> + +<p>But what most people knew about the North Pole until +recently was an understanding as far from reality as it was +clear. By an artificially simplified theory of the nature of the +earth, they had arrived at the conclusion that this pole had +many remarkable qualities beside being the end of the axle +of the earth. It was discussed as if it were the coldest place +on earth, the center from which the cold winds were distributed, +the hardest place to reach, and the one toward which<span class="pagenum" id="Page_73">[Pg 73]</span> +the magnetic needle pointed. It was supposed to be at least +five poles in one—Cold Pole, Wind Pole, Pole of Inaccessibility, +Magnetic Pole, and North Pole. We now know that the +coldest place is more than a thousand miles from it, the wind +center nearly a thousand miles, the hardest point to reach +about four hundred miles away, and that the magnetic needle +points toward a district in Canada that is much closer to the +nearest railway station than it is to the North Pole.</p> + +<p>However, during the long time when the North Pole was +still supposed to possess the qualities of all the other poles, +it became so famous and acquired such a hold on the public +imagination that if you were now, by knowledge and argument, +to strip away from it one by one all of its supposed +attributes of greatness you would not detract appreciably +from its fame—just as Pike’s Peak remains the most famous +mountain in Colorado although more than twenty peaks in +that state alone are higher—just as Hercules will always be +more famous than any real strong man—just as Columbus +will remain the great discoverer of America no matter how +many earlier discoverers history may soundly establish.</p> + +<p>Peary seems to have agreed with Cicero that to be ambitious +for the immortality of your name is among the greatest +of human virtues. Furthermore, he wanted the glory for +his associates and for the flag of his country. So he went to +the North Pole and became immortal. It was not the most +difficult of his achievements nor the most important scientifically. +But it had the necessary advance publicity, and the +proper follow-up.</p> + +<p>In fact, the North Pole has a superfluity of popular reputation, +enough to make many explorers famous. Byrd will<span class="pagenum" id="Page_74">[Pg 74]</span> +probably become immortal for having been the first to fly +there, and Amundsen for having been the first to fly there in +a dirigible. No motor vehicle yet devised is likely to travel +effectively over the floating ice north of Spitsbergen, but if +such is built it is likely to make its driver semi-immortal for +having been the first to visit the North Pole by automobile. +This Pole is doubtless reachable by submarine, and the first +man who goes there that way will become still another +fixture in history. And so on for several firsts by new +methods.</p> + +<p>These will all be international immortalities. National immortalities +will fall to the first Frenchman, the first Japanese, +the first Siamese.</p> + +<p>If you want to find out how much glory a man gets for +doing a hard thing that is little advertised, just check up on +the credit Amundsen received for flying over the Pole of +Inaccessibility. That pole is at least as much harder to reach +than the North Pole as the top of Mount Everest is harder +than the highest point yet climbed. But, you will discover, +the applause of the world for Amundsen’s Inaccessibility +Pole achievement was only a faint echo of what he received +a few hours earlier for the North Pole. Although he was the +first man to do the most difficult thing possible on our earth +from the point of view of exploration, he got out of it far +less than for being the third man to visit an easier place that +was better advertised.</p> + +<p>True enough, this North Pole flying immortality does not +depend entirely upon the publicity of the North Pole. Some +of it rests in considerable part on the publicity value of the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_75">[Pg 75]</span> +airplane. Unless it be swimming,<a id="FNanchor_1" href="#Footnote_1" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> nothing has a better press +now. Just imagine the vaudeville salary of the first man to +swim to the North Pole!</p> + +<p>Close beside the North Pole and the airplane in publicity +value is femininity, as used recently, for instance, in the +Channel swims. Thus we may one day have immortality +for the first woman who goes to the North Pole, then for +the first mother of a family, and eventually, when we get a +little more advanced, for the first divorcee. And think of the +first visit to the North Pole by Siamese Twins! (A later set +of them could be the first to marry there, perhaps in an +airplane.)</p> + +<p>If and when the public gets fed up on the North Pole we +could no doubt, by suitable publicity, convince them that the +Pole of Inaccessibility is really more interesting because more +difficult. Hereupon vast glory will come to the first man to +fly there in an airplane, to the first to walk there, the first to +motor there, and so on. Then would come the first debutante +to go there, the first mother of a family, and so on, with no +limit other than that set by the arts of publicity.</p> + +<p>A further encouraging thing about geographic discovery +is that people are forgetful of details, although they remember +generalities.</p> + +<p class="gtb">******</p> + +<p>After more than three hundred years of heralded search, +the Northwest Passage has become permanently famous. +Then it was discovered by Sir John Franklin in 1846, but +nobody knew about that and gold medals were awarded to<span class="pagenum" id="Page_76">[Pg 76]</span> +Sir Robert McClure for discovering it in 1853. The world +resounded with McClure’s glory for a while.</p> + +<p>The great public had forgotten about even McClure, but +still remembered that there had been a search for a passage, +when, in 1903, Amundsen sailed west from Norway. Three +years later, when the job was done, some newspaper man +misunderstood Amundsen’s announcement that he had navigated +the Northwest Passage and put a story on the wires +that he had discovered it. The public hurrahed for the discovery +even louder than they had done in the case of McClure +half a century before, and most people think even now that +Amundsen discovered the Northwest Passage. Why not, if +Columbus discovered America?</p> + +<p>That it is not the first discovery, but rather the best advertised +discovery that counts, was proved to me from my own +career. For, in so far as I am known at all, I am generally +known as the discoverer of the “Blond” Eskimos. But the +first traveler to report a strangely blond people in the Arctic +was not I, but Nicholas Tunes 256 years ahead of me—in +1656. This seems to have been in Baffin Island, far from my +locality. But in my own district, without attracting much +attention, European-like Eskimos had been reported in the +following order: by Sir John Franklin in 1824, by Dease and +Simpson in 1837, by Captain Charles Klinkenberg in 1906, +by Captain William Mogg in 1908, and lastly by me in 1911. +The report that created a furore was my second, given out +in 1912.</p> + +<p>That none of these reports about a European-like people +in the Arctic produced an appreciable stir in the world was +apparently either because the public did not know of the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_77">[Pg 77]</span> +possible romance behind them, or else failed to make the +proper connection. They certainly did know of the romance +in 1911, but they failed to see its relation to my report, even +though it was published in the London <i>Times</i>, a paper that +commands much attention. But in 1912 the same report was +dressed in newspaper extravagance and joined up by the reporter +with the tragic drama of the colony of 5000 Europeans +who disappeared from Greenland in the Middle Ages. There +was better reason for connecting the report of Tunes with +the lost colony than with mine, and at least a reason equal +with mine of 1912, for connecting those of Franklin, Simpson, +Klinkenberg and Mogg, and my own report of 1911, +but it simply was not done. The achievement of making the +same discovery was presumably a little less each time it was +made, yet more glory resulted from the last one than from +all the others put together—because the right publicity note +was struck.</p> + +<p>The connection once made with a topic of high publicity +value (involving also a misunderstanding similar to the +supposition that Amundsen had discovered the Northwest +Passage), the “Blond” Eskimo story swept the world and +has not yet been forgotten after fifteen years—in fact, shows +no signs of fading.<a id="FNanchor_2" href="#Footnote_2" class="fnanchor">[2]</a></p> + +<p>In view of how often America, the Northwest Passage, and +the “Blond” Eskimos were discovered before the hero came +along who got the maximum publicity out of each, we have +little reason to be depressed, thinking that the glamor of discovery +is about to fade. When the first man has climbed +Mount Everest, the first woman can do it, and then the first<span class="pagenum" id="Page_78">[Pg 78]</span> +mother of a family; when the first airplane has flown over +Everest, there is still room for the first dirigible. You can +go to Northwest Australia this year and visit a black family +who have never seen a white man; next year you can capitalize +the same family by taking a woman to see them, for they +will never before have seen a white woman. Then will come +the turn of the first mother of a family, who really should +take one of her children with her. There would be a tremendous +thrill in the cannibalism angle. To make the front +pages it would not be necessary to have the baby actually +cooked and eaten.</p> + +<p>It may seem for the moment absurd that we shall ever be +as excited again as we were recently over the North Pole, +the Northwest Passage, or the “Blond” Eskimos. But the +wisest guessers frequently guess wrong, and especially about +news. During the last several years I have read many estimates +of the journalists of New York; none of them have +failed to put Mr. Carr Van Anda high as a judge of news, +and most of them have put him at the very top. Yet, in 1912, +Mr. Van Anda said to me that, with the North Pole found +and the Cook-Peary controversy settled, the Arctic would +never again occupy much space on the front pages of the +New York papers. But in 1926 he either himself directed or +was present while someone else directed that the entire front +page of the New York <i>Times</i>, along with several of the +inside pages, should be given over to the North Pole, first +for the second party to visit it and a few days later for its +third visitors.</p> + +<p>I doubt if Mr. Van Anda would prophesy as confidently +today as he did in 1912 that twenty years from now the North<span class="pagenum" id="Page_79">[Pg 79]</span> +Pole will occupy little space on the front page. And who +knows but the public may forget Amundsen as they did +McClure, so that a new discoverer of the Northwest Passage +may ride in on a new wave of hurrahs? Some explorer with +a good press may be able to get the same result sooner by +flying the Passage, or swimming it. A new man may in time +get new renown out of my “Blond” Eskimos as I did out of +Franklin’s. The “Tunnit” remains of Labrador were discovered +for perhaps the tenth time in 1926, and the tenth +discovery (if it wasn’t the twentieth) won more glory than +any preceding it. Judging from past records, those “Tunnit +ruins” could be found again with even greater <i>kudos</i> about +1946. And so on for many thrilling discoveries.</p> + +<p>It is, then, the best of discovery methods to find a thing +over again after just enough years so that the public has +nearly, but not quite, forgotten. Next best, as a perpetual +device, is to search again and again for a thing never found. +The interest created is not so intense as in the case of a repeated +discovery, but there is the compensating advantage +that you can search perhaps three or four times more often—you +get passable results say once every five years for the repeated +search method; effective rediscoveries need at least +twenty-year gaps.</p> + +<p>One of the best examples of perpetual search and resulting +publicity is the quest for an Arctic continent.</p> + +<p>Through various theorizing it had been pretty well established +a century back that a great land mass spread across +the northern polar sea. It was the Arctic Continent or Polar +Continent. The corner towards Europe and America had +been found and was called Greenland. The corner towards<span class="pagenum" id="Page_80">[Pg 80]</span> +Asia had been seen by natives looking north from northeastern +Siberia but had as yet no well recognized name.</p> + +<p>Just for walking to the North Pole it seemed best to +climb upon the continent at the Greenland corner. But sailing +might be easier, and there was known to be a lot of +water north of Alaska. So it appeared logical to sail up +through Bering Straits, coast along the east side of the land +seen by the Chukchis. This would presumably take you into +a deep bay. When you got to the head of it you would just +anchor your ship in some harbor and walk the rest of the +way to the Pole.</p> + +<p>Meantime the land seen by the Chukchis had also been +seen by the British—by Kellett in the ship <i>Herald</i>, so that +an island was named after the ship and a greater land seen +to the northwest after the captain. A modicum of fame resulted +from this discovery.</p> + +<p>The first attempt to pick up the east coast of Kellett Land +and sail north into the polar bay was by the American De +Long in 1879-81. Instead of sailing much, however, he was +caught among eddying floes that with the autumn frost solidified +around his ship and carried him drifting to the northwest +across a corner of the theoretical continent, amputating +Kellett Land—the piece now called Wrangel Island. The +expedition made notable discoveries and was successful in +adding to our knowledge as well as to the record of well-conducted +adventures, but it ended in personal tragedy for +De Long and a third of his men. Some of the interest which +the world gave De Long was through the bearing of his +work on the discovery of the Arctic Continent.</p> + +<p>A series of notable attempts to walk over Greenland to<span class="pagenum" id="Page_81">[Pg 81]</span> +the North Pole was made by Admiral Peary. The result was +one of the greatest geographic achievements of the last hundred +years, the determination that Greenland does not run to +the Pole, but is an island. De Long had made a small amputation; +Peary now made a large one. The Arctic Continent +had contributed materially to his fame.</p> + +<p>The work of many expeditions to the north of central +and western Asia, notably the voyage of Nansen, cut farther +into the theoretical continent and the chance became small +it could contain the North Pole. In 1909 Peary marched from +Ellesmere Island to the Pole, the whole distance over floating +ice, and took a sounding at the Pole showing the water +two miles deep. No shore of the dwindling continent was +therefore likely to be very near the Pole. Peary thought, however, +that he had seen land to the northwest of the north +tip of Heiberg Island, which might, of course, be a foreland +on the continent. This was named Crocker Land.</p> + +<p>So the two greatest explorers of their time, Nansen and +Peary, had profited materially in popular acclaim and in +more enduring reputation through the bearing of their work +on the Arctic land mass concept.</p> + +<p>The interest in the elusive polar land had grown enough +by 1905 that an Englishman, Harrison, organized an expedition +the chief purpose of which was to search for the continent +to the north of Alaska. He might have done something, +for he was a good man himself and had with him one of the +finest northern travelers, Hubert Darrell, whose quality can +be measured from Hanbury’s book, <i>Sport and Travel in the +Northland of Canada</i>, London and New York, 1904, one of +the great travel stories, an account of an expedition shared<span class="pagenum" id="Page_82">[Pg 82]</span> +in by Darrell. But there was now a whaling fleet at Herschel +Island. Whalers and Eskimos alike were sure that anyone +was crazy who tried to travel afoot over the sea ice to the +northwest, and, strangely, were apparently able to convince +Darrell. Harrison stuck to his ideas but could get no one to +go with him. Therefore, his book, <i>In Search of a Polar Continent</i>, +London, 1908, has in a way a deceptive title—the +search was never started. But it had a good name. The Polar +Continent, through being much sought after and never +found, had become a thing to conjure with.</p> + +<p>There was a receptive popular audience when there appeared +in Washington a scientific study by R. A. Harris +which, in the opinion of the author and of many others, +came near proving that there was a continent. The land’s +dimensions and the situation of its corners were pretty well +determined by deductions from what he thought to be +reliable tidal observations taken at a few northerly points.</p> + +<p>Between wish thinking and mathematics the continent +grew substantial and for the first time had a name, Harris +Land. The other names had been for just corners—Greenland, +Kellett, Crocker; this was a name for the whole land, +now shrunken but still spoken of as a continent. In size it +still more or less deserved the name.</p> + +<p>Our 1913-18 expedition had somewhat better luck than +Harrison’s. The whalers and Eskimos were not able to talk +us into believing that we could not travel over the sea ice far +from land and live by hunting. Between sledge journeys and +the drift of one of our ships (the <i>Karluk</i>, Captain Robert A. +Bartlett master), we made further inroads upon the continent. +More serious, we took soundings of 1386 meters<span class="pagenum" id="Page_83">[Pg 83]</span> +without bottom near some of the farthest points we reached. +However, to the northwest of the Ringnes Islands where, +on one occasion, we were forced to turn back less than 100 +miles from shore the soundings were only around 500 meters, +and there seemed possibility of land.</p> + +<p>Between driving Harris Land from some of its outposts +north of Alaska and finding what might be signs of it northwest +of the Ringnes Islands—between these achievements our +expedition got a whole lot of <i>kudos</i> out of the Arctic Continent.</p> + +<p>A year after we started our work in the sea north of +Alaska, Donald MacMillan attacked the problem and sought +the theoretical continent under the name of Crocker Land. +He started out from Cape Thomas Hubbard, Heiberg Island, +whence it had been seen and tentatively located by Peary. +MacMillan returned without seeing land but there was no +assurance that it might not be hidden a little way beyond, +for the expedition had taken no deep soundings near its +farthest. It was, therefore, possible to speculate after the return +that perhaps the farthest point might have been over very +shallow water, the land therefore possibly only a bit farther +on, concealed by clouds.</p> + +<p>So between our shallow soundings, MacMillan’s absence +of them, and Peary’s report that land had been seen, there +was an interest growing keener with the number of searchers +and the publicity of each.</p> + +<p>The interest remained keen and there was much talk of +the undiscovered continent when Amundsen, Ellsworth and +Nobile flew in 1926 from Spitsbergen to Point Barrow by +way of the North Pole. They saw no land and would have<span class="pagenum" id="Page_84">[Pg 84]</span> +divided the theoretical continent into approximate halves but +for the saving report that for portions of the journey between +Peary’s farthest (the North Pole) and Alaska the +weather had been so thick that they had not been able to see +what lay beneath. This, said the commentators, still left a +chance that they crossed fairly wide stretches of low snow-covered +land. The continent still lived.</p> + +<p>In 1927 Wilkins and Eielson flew 550 miles northwest from +Point Barrow and took at their farthest point the deepest +sounding ever recorded in the polar sea, 5440 meters. The +flight itself removed land possibilities through a wide space. +The sounding was a cause of further discouragement to the +geographers, but the public didn’t mind. So far as they were +concerned the Continent was merely elusive, rather clever at +hiding itself.</p> + +<p>In 1928 Wilkins and Eielson crossed from Point Barrow +to Spitsbergen. They went some 200 or 300 miles out of their +way to avoid the North Pole, for three assigned reasons—they +wanted to avoid the sections which had been visited by +previous explorers; they did not want to be suspected of a +play to that gallery which was still interested in the North +Pole; and they wanted to cross the area within which, for +reasons we have just given in dealing with the Peary, Stefansson +and MacMillan expeditions, there seemed the best chance +of finding land. The newspaper files show there was a great +deal of speculation as to whether they might find the Arctic +Continent. There was also talk of checking up on the observations +of Dr. Cook who had reported one or more lands +to the west of the course he described himself as having followed +back from the North Pole in 1908.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_85">[Pg 85]</span></p> + +<p>Wilkins took a course which was for a time approximately +halfway between the areas explored by our 1913-18 expedition +and those seen by Amundsen. Then he swung toward +skirting the district explored by MacMillan, and so on to +Spitsbergen, without seeing land. However, he was forced +to admit that for portions of the flight they, like Amundsen, +had been unable to see what lay beneath. The speculators +said there still remained the possibility of the Arctic Continent. +There was talk that somebody really must go and +settle the question of the Continent.</p> + +<p>Between what is reasonably inferred from the soundings +and from the visual report of travelers there is, however, +small chance now for an undiscovered land in the Arctic +bigger than Cuba. Islands from that size down are possible, +though not probable. But the interest in what is now beginning +to be called the lost continent still continues. There +will probably be plenty of talk about it next time anybody +flies. Anticipating discussions have already speculated on the +chance that the next flyer may discover “a lost continent the +size of Cuba.”</p> + +<p>As we admitted in the beginning, there have been in the +search for the continent no such storms of excitement as +there were from at least two of the discoveries of the Northwest +Passage, after McClure’s report (third or fourth discovery)<a id="FNanchor_3" href="#Footnote_3" class="fnanchor">[3]</a> +in 1854, and Amundsen’s (fourth or fifth) in 1906.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_86">[Pg 86]</span> +But on the whole the theoretical continent has given a +pretty consistent performance for a hundred years.</p> + +<p>I have myself been in parties, of three in one case and of +four in another, that discovered large islands, rich with vegetation, +birds and animals, which had never been seen before +by human eyes, press agented or otherwise exploited. We +were thrilled, of course. It was one of the great experiences +of our lives. But to judge by outward appearances, there are +friends of mine who have been even more thrilled by “discovering” +hamlets in Brittany that were “absolutely unknown +to Americans.” And I think they really had at least +an equal right with us to the thrill, for I imagine that discovering +polar countries never seen by human eyes is today +easier than the discovery of a Brittany village previously +never seen by Americans.</p> + +<p>Adventure, in the last analysis, is measured by the thrill +it gives to the discoverer, and later to those who hear about +it. You can predispose the world to any desired thrill by +suitable advance publicity. A deliberate campaign would be +too long and expensive, so you should choose for discovery +something well advertised already, as, for instance, the word +and idea “ray.” We have long had the rays of the sun, and +they have been very popular. Then there are the X-rays, +radium rays, and many others, until the world is now ready +to be thrilled by anything that is called a ray. It is also important +to have a good adjective for the ray you are going +to promote. “Cosmic ray” is the best to date—see what it has +done for Millikan. If you can find a name a little better than<span class="pagenum" id="Page_87">[Pg 87]</span> +cosmic, people will go daffy over the discovery of your ray. +(Death rays are perennially successful.)</p> + +<p>Thus we arrive at a heartening conclusion: the tribe of +Great Discoverers will not become extinct until the Age of +Advertising has passed.</p> + + +<div class="chapter"> +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_88">[Pg 88]</span></p> + +<div class="figcenter2" id="c4"> +<img src="images/fig1.jpg" alt="decoration"> +</div> + +<h2>CHAPTER IV.</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c large sp"><span class="smcap">Travelers’ Tales</span></p> + + +<p><span class="more">WHAT WE NOW CALL A FISH STORY THE ELIZABETHANS SPOKE</span> +of as a traveler’s tale. I shall discuss whether there are many +fish stories among the travelers’ tales of today, whether they +have an important effect on the sciences which gather their +data in part from the reports of explorers, and whether we +ought to do anything about it. These questions are more +important in our time than in Elizabeth’s, for the explorers +were mere travelers then. Now they all claim to be scientists +or at least to be the leaders of scientific expeditions.</p> + +<p>I address you both as an expert and as Exhibit A. For my +own expeditions have been insistently, if not so very effectively, +publicized as scientific; and I am one of the travelers +who, by my own contention and the claims of my friends +and backers, should be taken as a scientific explorer.</p> + +<p>I begin, then, by discussing the extent to which my own +books and other protestations are to be taken seriously.</p> + +<p>In a way this exposition is the direct result of a talk which +I gave in 1907-8 before the Century Association of New +York City. It is my necessary introduction to repeat in condensed<span class="pagenum" id="Page_89">[Pg 89]</span> +form what I said there and to tell you what the +Centurions thought about it.</p> + +<p>So far as I remember, I began by explaining to the Century +Association that I was an exceptionally reliable witness, and +particularly so with regard to the Arctic. My father and +mother had both been born on the north coast of Iceland on +the very edge of the polar circle, and that furnished me with +a useful background. I myself had been born in Manitoba +where winter temperatures run down to 55° F. below zero, +which is about as low as they get on the north coast of Canada—as +a matter of fact lower than any official record, for +the lowest of these to date is -52°. I had read the northern +literature from infancy and had always been so soaked in it +that my first published article labeled scientific (apart from +a brief linguistic study) was “The Icelandic Colony in Greenland,” +<i>American Anthropologist</i>, April-June, 1906. In North +Dakota I had seen blizzards as bad as any I had experienced +on my first Arctic expedition, which I was then describing +to the Century, and the prairies of my childhood Dakota, +when snow-covered in winter or green in summer, were +much like the Eskimo prairies of northern Canada, so that +I had been quite at home in the Arctic from the first, gathering +information more reliable than if I had been a nervous +visitor who was frightened by conditions different from +those of his childhood—as might easily be the case with, say, +a Frenchman.</p> + +<p>Such preliminaries being disposed of, I launched into what +I still believe was to the Century Association a convincing +first-hand picture of how things are with the Eskimos of +the Mackenzie River.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_90">[Pg 90]</span></p> + +<p>I told how I was taken into an Eskimo home where 22 +people and myself lived in one room through the middle of +the winter and where my life with the people was intimate +throughout the year. I enjoyed being there and they apparently +enjoyed having me with them. I entered both into +their routine and into the spirit of their beliefs, so that they +began to discuss things with me or in my presence quite as +freely as if no stranger had been near. In fact, no stranger +was near—I had become as one of them.</p> + +<p>On the basis of this I regaled the Century with many +amusing and allegedly important contributions to the ethnology +of the Mackenzie Eskimos. I shall here review only +one topic.</p> + +<p>One of the Eskimos, Memoranna, wore an eagle feather +on the left shoulder of his reindeer-skin coat. I asked him +once why he did this and he said there were two reasons:</p> + +<p>In Memoranna’s childhood the people of his native village +had been more numerous than now; and, besides, there +were many visitors. Athletic games were common and the +people took off their coats perhaps when wrestling or running +foot races, throwing them in a pile. Every coat was +of deerskin and most of them had the same trimmings, +but they were not all of the same size or workmanship and +some were newer than others. It was, then, important that +when the games were over each man should be able to find +his own coat. “Therefore we each had a mark on our coats. +One man would have a weasel tail in the middle of his +back, another perhaps a strip of wolf skin on his sleeve. +I had an eagle feather on my left shoulder.”</p> + +<p>The second reason for these marks was that when everyone<span class="pagenum" id="Page_91">[Pg 91]</span> +was dressed alike and when there were hundreds together +you could not recognize a man unless you saw his +face. But with the eagle feather on the shoulder of the coat +anybody could tell that the wearer was Memoranna.</p> + +<p>The chief reason why I repeat all this is that at the end +of my talk Dr. Franklin H. Giddings, Professor of the +History of Civilization at Columbia University, a foremost +figure in American sociology, came to me. He had been +making a study of property marks, he had been much interested +in this particular contribution of mine, and he was +satisfied of its accuracy not only because of my careful methods +of observation and my intimate life with the people but +also because it fitted in with his studies of the origin and +development of property marks among primitive people.</p> + +<p>This address of mine before the Century was based on a +year with the Eskimos of the Mackenzie River. I returned +north in six months and spent four years more, making five +all together. In the last of those years I finally acquired such +a control over the language that I could speak with the +people almost as freely as they spoke with each other. Then +at last I learned that the eagle feather was a talisman, with +no intentional property mark connection.</p> + +<p>Some weeks after I learned this I met Memoranna and +asked him why he had deceived me four years ago. He replied +in substance that he had been almost brought up as +a cabin boy on whaling ships and had besides associated with +missionaries, so that he knew the white man’s point of view. +If an Eskimo told his real beliefs, a sailor would call him +a damn fool and a missionary would explain how wrong +and wicked they were. Through long experience he<span class="pagenum" id="Page_92">[Pg 92]</span> +had learned the kind of explanation a white man likes; giving +that kind saved a lot of trouble. He had not meant specially +to deceive me; he was merely treating me as just one +more white man.</p> + +<p>There are within the social sciences few more broad-minded +or with a keener sense of humor than Professor +Giddings. Still, it is my impression that he felt just a little +bit more enlightened and pleased when he heard the original +incorrect property mark explanation of the eagle feather, +which agreed with his own theories, than he did when later +I told him the final and as I still believe correct explanation—which +did not fit into his sociology quite so neatly.</p> + +<p>If this property mark tale were an isolated case it would +not be worth repeating, but it is typical of my work. The +impressions and conclusions of my first year in the Arctic +were, I now think, mostly wrong. Luckily for me I did not +publish a book at the end of the first expedition but placed +the diaries of it in storage with the American Museum of +Natural History of New York City. They remained there +during my second expedition of four years and while I wrote +my first published book, called <i>My Life With the Eskimo</i>, +1913. They remained there also during my third expedition +of five years and while I wrote my second book, called <i>The +Friendly Arctic</i>, 1921.</p> + +<p>It was only in 1922 that I got out the diaries of the first +expedition and studied them as the basis of my third +book, <i>Hunters of the Great North</i>. In the introduction to +that volume, I said: “As I look over my diaries I shudder to +think how vastly I might have augmented the already great +misknowledge of the Arctic had I published everything I<span class="pagenum" id="Page_93">[Pg 93]</span> +imagined I had seen and everything I thought I knew.”</p> + +<p>You may think this autobiographical preface strange. But +I shall presently be dealing with names far more eminent +and respected than my own, even with those holding membership +in this oldest of the great scientific societies of America, +and I need myself as the thin entering wedge for a general +discussion.</p> + +<p>The introductory remarks closed, I turn to what I intend +as a criticism of the social sciences in so far as they depend +for their data on the findings of explorers.</p> + +<p>If I were giving a course of lectures, and had at my disposal +ten evenings instead of one, I should like to consider +under three heads the misinformation contained in the +books and reports of travelers. The first would be intentional +misrepresentation, the deliberate drawing of the long bow; +the second would be that unintentional misrepresentation +which results from careless observation or from misplaced +confidence in witnesses; the third would be that subdivision +where the traveler states as a fact which he has observed a +thing which he cannot possibly have observed but in which +he believes because it conforms to, or is part of, a belief which +he holds and has never questioned.</p> + +<p>Since I have only one evening, too short for me although +it may be too long for you, I shall not merely confine myself +to the third heading but shall discuss only a few typical cases +under it. What I said awhile ago, then, about property marks +does not belong to our subject and has its use merely as part +of the introductory approach.</p> + +<p>We turn, then, first to a large body of false testimony +which is nevertheless a small subdivision of the last third of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_94">[Pg 94]</span> +our subject, and consider some of the things that have been +testified to about animal and plant life in that small but +typical sample of our world, the Far North.</p> + +<p>The foundation of European belief about the distribution +of life over the earth was laid by the Pythagorean Greeks, +if not by someone else from whom the Pythagoreans borrowed +the idea. Essentially it was that terrestrial life depends +on heat from the sun. This heat, when it is of a degree called +warmth, permits life in a belt called the temperate zone. To +the south of the temperate zone there was, according to +orthodox Greek belief, a burning region where the rocks +were red-hot and the oceans boiling. North of the temperate +zone was a region frozen solid. One of the ancient authorities +has it that in the North life is as impossible because of +the freezing as it is in the South because of the burning.</p> + +<p>It is not a part of my northern specialty to review what is +so well-known to historians, that from the Greek learned +period before Christ to the age of Prince Henry the Navigator, +and therefore through almost 2000 years, it was nearly +or quite the unanimous opinion of the learned world that +no human beings would ever cross the lifeless, burning and +boiling tropics. It is more within my field as an Arctic explorer +to point out that the accepted Greek belief was at +one time that because of the cold no living thing could +exist north of Scotland. Then the Irish discovered Iceland, +600 miles north of Scotland, and the Icelanders, or someone +else, discovered Spitsbergen, another 600 miles still farther +north.</p> + +<p>The average January temperature of Reykjavik is about +the same as that of January for Milan in Italy or Philadelphia +in Pennsylvania, and the tourist companies which contract<span class="pagenum" id="Page_95">[Pg 95]</span> +with their passengers to show them pack ice are forced, some +years, to carry them 200 miles beyond Spitsbergen to keep +their promise. But at every advance of knowledge, which in +this case has been the northward advance of travel, it has +been discovered with profound surprise that life was there +ahead of the traveler. The interpretative scientists have been +driven to every expedient of logic to explain the contradiction +between what they believed and what they saw. This +effort, in turn, has been the foundation of much false testimony +by those of them who were explorers.</p> + +<p>Take the case of perhaps the most solidly famous and respected +of the British polar explorers, Sir Edward Parry. He +landed on Melville Island the summer of 1819 and found +musk oxen grazing there. This was startling, but had to be +accepted. Presently he went into winter quarters, practically +hibernating with his men for several months. When +they emerged in the spring they saw musk oxen. Hereupon +Lieutenant Sabine, himself later a distinguished explorer +in his own right but acting for the time as naturalist in the +publication of the scientific results of Parry’s voyage, wrote +as follows:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“They (the musk oxen) arrived in Melville Island in the +middle of May, crossing the ice from the southward, and quitted +it on their return towards the end of September.”<a id="FNanchor_4" href="#Footnote_4" class="fnanchor">[4]</a></p> +</div> + +<p>This was accepted by the entire learned world because it +fitted in with two of their preconceptions—that Parry and +Sabine were reliable witnesses, and that the Far North was<span class="pagenum" id="Page_96">[Pg 96]</span> +by nature hostile to animal life. It had been believed earlier +that no animals could exist, at any season, as far north as +Melville Island. Now, when they had been found to be there +in summer, the scientists executed a strategic retreat by saying: +“The beasts make a summer foray deep into the Arctic, +but they flee from the winters to the hospitable shelter of +the temperate zone.” The theory of the complete absence +of grazing animals from this part of the Arctic was thus +replaced by an elaborate theory of seasonal migration.</p> + +<p>For a quarter century after Parry’s first voyage there seems +to have been practically if not complete unanimity among +the explorers and the stay-at-home scientists alike that the +musk oxen, in spite of short legs, made each year a 1200-mile +round trip between the winter shelter of the forest on the +North American continent and the summer stamping +grounds in Melville Island.</p> + +<p>Lieutenant Sherard Osborn, who both shared in and wrote +books about the Franklin Search, appears to have been the +most thoughtful of those officers. Yet in 1856 he published +<i>The Discovery of the North-West Passage</i> ... and assumed +in it that the grazing animals of the islands north of Canada +migrate south to the mainland in the Autumn to return each +Spring. But in 1857 he published a second edition with a +new Chapter, XVII, on “The Migration of Animals Theory.” +For the views there expressed he says he has been “nearly +excommunicated as a heretic.” In this chapter he points out +the manifest theoretical absurdity of the postulated migrations +and cites a little testimony he had been able to get +which tended to show that there was no migration.</p> + +<p>Thirty years later Greely was sure that the musk oxen of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_97">[Pg 97]</span> +the Arctic islands do not migrate south<a id="FNanchor_5" href="#Footnote_5" class="fnanchor">[5]</a> and most observers +are now agreed that they do not move from one Arctic +island to another at any time in any direction. Yet there are +still in use in the English-speaking countries, among others, +textbooks of recent copyright which retain the Parry statement +and the Parry explanation—that the musk oxen migrate +and that they do it because they need the shelter of +the forest against the severe climate of the northern winters.</p> + +<p>When the scientists were finally converted to believing +that the musk oxen do live in the remote Arctic permanently, +they and the travelers cast about for some more explanations—the +philosophical scientists are continually busy trying to +reconcile new knowledge with ancient theory. They now +hit upon something clever. People had believed, they explained, +that grazing animals could not exist without grass, +and that was why they had thought there would be no such +animals in the Arctic. They were right in part; there was +no grass. What they could not have foreseen was that in the +Arctic the place of the flowering plants is taken by mosses +and lichens. The musk oxen live on mosses and lichens!</p> + +<p>The musk ox still lives on mosses and lichens in the usual +reference works; he is mounted with his mouth stuffed with +them in the usual museums. This is in part because many +explorers have supported the philosophizing scientists by testifying +that lichens are verily the food of the musk ox.</p> + +<p>But many explorers have denied this flatly. Greely said<a id="FNanchor_6" href="#Footnote_6" class="fnanchor">[6]</a> +“... in no case did I ever note the musk-ox feeding on the +latter vegetation (lichens), although in many places near<span class="pagenum" id="Page_98">[Pg 98]</span> +Conger the ground was covered with scanty, minute lichens +for acres in extent.” Roderick MacFarlane says<a id="FNanchor_7" href="#Footnote_7" class="fnanchor">[7]</a> that musk +oxen live mainly if not wholly on flowering plants, and I +have said the same.<a id="FNanchor_8" href="#Footnote_8" class="fnanchor">[8]</a></p> + +<p>But the traditional belief is still being advanced by explorers +as testimony and as observed fact. For instance, a +statement implying that musk oxen do live on mosses and +lichens was issued within the year by the Northwest Territories +and Yukon Branch of the Department of the Interior +of Canada, for they published a photograph of musk oxen +with an accompanying letterpress which said that they were +here shown grazing on mosses and lichens. I wrote at once +to a friend, O. S. Finnie, who is official head of this department +although not personally responsible for the picture and +description. I asked him how did they know that these +animals were feeding on lichens and whether their botanists +could not (by examining the original photograph and perhaps +enlarging it) determine what plants were really visible +along with the animals. Finnie then submitted the photograph +to A. E. Porsild, the distinguished Danish-Canadian +botanist and specialist in Arctic flora, whose verdict came +in a letter of February 27, 1930:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“There is a firm and rather hard turf composed chiefly of +grasses and sedges with a slight admixture of flowering plants. +Most predominant is the Alpine Foxtail grass (<i>alopecurus +alpinus</i>) which probably has a higher food value than any other +Arctic grass. With the foxtail grow a few sedges (<i>Carex</i>). In the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_99">[Pg 99]</span> +foreground to the right are flowers of the Alpine Chickweed +(<i>Cerastium alpinum</i>). A few twigs of a decumbent willow +(<i>Salix</i>) show in the center of the photo.”</p> +</div> + +<p>Not only these recent Canadian Government observers +but also many scores of normally honest travelers have, then, +testified, because of a solidly founded belief, that musk oxen +live exclusively or mainly on a food which in fact they rarely +eat—and then probably not by choice.</p> + +<p>One of the most interesting of the systematic fabrications +about the polar regions is within the observational domain +of the exact sciences, although its effects are noticed chiefly +in the social sciences. This is the statement that at a certain +place a certain observer has noted that the midnight sun was +visible for a given number of days in summer and that correspondingly +the noonday sun was invisible at the same +place for the same number of days in winter. All statements +ever made to this effect are false. They could not be true +anywhere in the world unless at least one important fact +were changed and some laws of nature altered or abolished. +The fact needing change is that the sun would have to be +contracted down to a pinpoint; the laws needing change are +those governing refraction.</p> + +<p>A medieval writer, Jordanes, says:<a id="FNanchor_9" href="#Footnote_9" class="fnanchor">[9]</a></p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“In its northern part (of Norway) live the people Adogit, +who, it is said, in the middle of the summer have continuous +light for forty days and nights, and likewise at the time of the +winter solstice do not see the light for the same number of days +and nights.”</p> +</div> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_100">[Pg 100]</span></p> + +<p>On this Nansen comments<a id="FNanchor_10" href="#Footnote_10" class="fnanchor">[10]</a> to the effect that there can +never have been any such place. For, says he, if the sun was +visible at midnight 40 days in summer then it never +disappeared at all in winter. Or if it was invisible 40 days +in winter then it was visible 63 days in summer.</p> + +<p>Nansen conjectures for the writers of this immediate +group, the commentators on northern Norway, that they had +heard for a given place that the sun was invisible for a certain +number of days in winter and had then added a gloss +(in conformity with Greek theory) to the effect that the +midnight sun was visible for the same length of time in +summer. Nansen seems to believe, then, that had the writers +themselves been residents of northern Norway, or had they +spent a year well beyond the Arctic Circle, they could not +have written as they did. In this judgment Nansen is not at +his best as a student of human nature. Nor does he show thorough +familiarity with the writings of his contemporaries, +for there are on record a number of them who without question +have seen with the eyes of the body that the periods of +the sun’s invisibility and visibility are unequal, but whose +mental eyes have been holden so that they thought they had +observed the periods to be equal.</p> + +<p>We could go into a long catalogue of instances but shall +actually use but a single example which, although typical +in a sense, is striking for three reasons among others: that +the witness is a Russian and therefore a member of a northern +people who ought to understand northern conditions, +that his general scientific work is looked upon by his colleagues +as good, and that he has undoubtedly spent long<span class="pagenum" id="Page_101">[Pg 101]</span> +periods within the Arctic Circle. The quotation we are about +to give was published on pp. 581-2 of the <i>American Anthropologist</i>, +for October-December, 1929. The author is Waldemar +G. Bogoras, who says:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“The north polar circle forms the southern border of the area +which has in midsummer the continuous day and in midwinter +the continuous night. And so, for instance, on 68-70 degrees of +north latitude, we have in the polar zone three or four weeks +of continuous night in winter and as many weeks of continuous +sunshine in summer.”</p> +</div> + +<p>Unaware of the laws of refraction and forgetful of what +they knew concerning the brightness of the twilight before +sunrise and after sunset, Europeans throughout the Middle +Ages and down to our time have assumed generally that +darkness comes in the Arctic when the sun dips below the +horizon. This belief is popularly translated into saying: “In +the Arctic there are six months of daylight and six months +of darkness.” That most people hold this belief is shown +by the frequency with which the idea appears in school texts, +in serious newspapers, and in the humorous journals. The +average reader supposes the humor to rest upon some basis +of fact when an Eskimo wife who sits up to await her husband’s +homecoming starts scolding and he replies: “Why, +my dear, it is only half past October.” The father of a baby +with the colic walks the floor with it through the night and +is then referred to as being on a six months’ tramp. A funny +paper tells that Macpherson operates his business from San +Francisco during the summer and from Point Barrow during +the winter. You want to know why he goes north in<span class="pagenum" id="Page_102">[Pg 102]</span> +winter and are told he conducts his business a good deal by +telegraph and uses the Barrow office six months to get the +benefit of night rates.</p> + +<p>That great universities and leaders in science are still teaching +the view on which the humorists base their quips, was +brought in upon me through a talk I gave at the Explorers +Club in New York. There I cited one traveler after another +who had reported from various places within the Arctic +Circle, some of them far north, that they had observed the +sun to be fully visible in summer and wholly invisible in +winter for equal periods. These men, I contended, had reported +what neither they nor anyone else can ever have seen.</p> + +<p>A few days later a troubled voice called me on the telephone +for an appointment with regard to a situation at Columbia +University. On arrival he proved to be a student in +a course on meteorology. He had heard my talk and had +reported to his instructor my saying that there was no spot +on earth where the days of the sun’s complete visibility and +invisibility could be equal in number. The instructor had not +been impressed, and had pointed out that the author of a +book they were using in the class, Robert DeCourcy Ward, +Professor of Climatology in Harvard University, likely knew +what he was talking about when in defining the zones he +said:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“In the polar zones, the sun is below the horizon for twenty-four +hours at least once in winter, and is above the horizon for +the same length of time at least once in summer.”</p> +</div> + +<p>I had Ward’s <i>Climate: Considered Especially in Relation +to Man</i> in its 1908 edition. Sure enough, on p. 20 were the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_103">[Pg 103]</span> +lines cited by the Columbia instructor. I procured a “Second +Edition, Revised” which says in a note dated August 1917:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“I have taken the opportunity offered by the publication of a +second edition of this volume to make some revision of the +chapters on ‘The Characteristics of the Polar Zones’....”</p> +</div> + +<p>In that edition I found, unchanged, the statement we have +quoted.</p> + +<p>Professor Ward had, then, taken special thought of his +chapter on the polar zones and had nevertheless repeated +himself verbatim. No wonder the Columbia instructor was +also firm.</p> + +<p>Some textbooks, with a pretense to meticulous accuracy +that makes them more effectively deceptive than others, will +contain such statements as: “Among the Eskimos there is +continuous darkness for three months.” There are, of course, +no Eskimo settlements that have continuous darkness for +even three days, or one day.</p> + +<p>The textbook writers are in a vicious circle. Embryo explorers +learn from school texts about the continuous Arctic +winter darkness; they come back some years later from an +Arctic expedition with testimony of having observed the said +darkness, and this testimony becomes in turn the basis of +new incorrect textbooks. A case is Elisha Kane, the most +famous of American polar explorers before Peary. He reported +having wintered at a place where there was no trace +of daylight in a clear sky at the winter solstice. For comment +on this it suffices to quote Captain George E. Tyson, +who says: “Have passed Rensselaer Harbor, where Dr. Kane<span class="pagenum" id="Page_104">[Pg 104]</span> +wintered during 1853-55. I am surprised that in the latitude +of Rensselaer Harbor (N. Lat. 78⅔°) he should have found +the darkness so intense as he describes it. It was not +totally dark with us at high meridian at any time in clear +weather....”<a id="FNanchor_11" href="#Footnote_11" class="fnanchor">[11]</a></p> + +<p>In Heft 1/2, 1930, of the international scientific journal +<i>Arktis</i>, Dr. Wilh. Meinardus of Göttingen, has published a +diagram of the distribution of daylight and darkness within +the polar regions throughout the year which shows not only +that Kane (as Tyson implies) must have had a lot of daylight +at noon on the shortest day of the year but also that no +polar explorer except members of one Nansen and one Peary +expedition have ever been so far north (or south) in midwinter +that they could say accurately that there was no trace +of daylight in a clear southern sky at the solstice. Yet there +are dozens of explorers who have said so in books or reports +which have been believed. Many of these were as respectable +and respected as Nansen or Peary. They were not liars; +rather they were observers and reporters who had been +hypnotized by a belief.</p> + +<p>It may be said in the defense of these travelers that when +they said “no daylight” they meant “only a little daylight.” +But would we similarly excuse a chemist after an autopsy +if he said “no trace of arsenic” and really meant “only a +little arsenic”? Explorers are putting themselves forward as +scientists. If we are to take them seriously and at their own +evaluation, we should require of them the standards not only<span class="pagenum" id="Page_105">[Pg 105]</span> +of truthfulness but also of precision that we require of +chemists or astronomers.</p> + +<p>It follows naturally from what we have said above how +ridiculous it is to suppose, as many school textbooks still +assert or imply, that you have “six months of daylight and +six months of darkness at the North Pole.” If you mean by +daylight what Captain Tyson means in criticizing Dr. Kane, +then we have at the North Pole more nearly four months of +darkness (from October 6 to February 5) and eight months +of daylight (from February 6 to October 5). If, on the other +hand, you mean ability to read ordinary print throughout +a clear day out-of-doors, then the division must be something +like 5 months of darkness and 7 months of daylight.</p> + +<p>A further corollary is equally plain. It is that we are being +misled when it is constantly being stated or implied that +there is less daylight per year in the polar regions than in +the tropics or temperate zone. You can perhaps defend that +old view if you say that by daylight you mean the quantity +of sunlight delivered per unit of earth’s surface per year, +but that is not really at all what we mean when we say daylight. +For instance, you will hardly say that daylight is lacking +when there is so much of it that you have to wear colored +glasses to protect your eyes and must be careful to +sleep in dark places so as not to go snow-blind while in bed. +Judged by ability to read print out-of-doors, there is more +daylight at an average Arctic station per year than there +is in the temperate zone or in the tropics. (We are not here +entering into niceties of how dark it is in Arctic mountain +canyons or how light on snow-clad tropical peaks.)</p> + +<p>There was a time when it was commonly believed in<span class="pagenum" id="Page_106">[Pg 106]</span> +Europe (by those who did not identify travelers’ tales with +fish stories) that the people of a certain remote land had +ears so conveniently large that in sleeping they used one for +a mattress and the other for a quilt. This we now consider +a strictly medieval belief. But it is thoroughly modern to +believe that Eskimo women carry babies in the hoods of +their coats. We shall cite you eminent men, many of whom +are living, who have asserted that they themselves have seen +Eskimo women carry babies in their hoods, but first, departing +from the main chronological order of our discussion, we +give the testimony of the man indisputably the best authority +on this subject.</p> + +<p>Knud Rasmussen was born in Greenland of a Danish +father and a mother who was part Eskimo. He was brought +up by the Eskimo women somewhat as our Southern babies +are by their Negro mammies. He was raised bilingual, his +two mother tongues Danish and Eskimo. He associated with +Danes in the house and played with Eskimo children out +of doors. In due course he was taken to Copenhagen where +he went through that university and other training which +has made him both a well-equipped scholar and a cosmopolitan +gentleman.</p> + +<p>Quite apart from his childhood, which is in this connection +the most significant period, Rasmussen has spent more +time in the countries inhabited by Eskimos than any other +man who is ordinarily classified as an explorer. He is the +only one of us explorers who has visited every Arctic Eskimo +territory and practically every Arctic Eskimo people from +the east coast of Greenland to the west coast of Alaska and +to the East Cape district of Siberia. He is primarily an<span class="pagenum" id="Page_107">[Pg 107]</span> +anthropologist and geographer. For his sound work in +these fields, and especially for his interpretation of the +Eskimos to the learned world, he has been awarded gold +medals by nearly every important geographical society in +Europe and in the United States.</p> + +<p>On the basis of the studies for which Rasmussen has +really deserved these medals, he says about the belief that +Eskimo women carry babies in their hoods: “The women +in Greenland have never in the past carried their children +in their hoods, nor do they do so now ... the child is decidedly +not (carried) in the hood, as that would simply +choke the mother.” (Letter to Vilhjalmur Stefansson, 3rd +May, 1930.)</p> + +<p>Now we turn to the history of the belief. The early travelers +through Eskimo lands described from most if not all +districts a custom whereby women’s coats were made especially +roomy in the back so that a baby could be slipped up +under the coat and supported by a belt. The child was then +held by the coat and belt against the small of the woman’s +back. Usually in removing the child the mother would undo +the belt and let the baby slide down, but the neck of the +coat was naturally made roomy to enable the child to breathe +and sometimes the mother would reach in that way and +pull it up and out. It is not impossible, but was at least +geographically rare, that mothers inserted the baby into +the coat from above. But whatever the method of ingress +or egress, the baby, according to early northern books, was +always carried inside the body of the coat, never inside the +hood.</p> + +<p>Since there are now living men who hold distinguished<span class="pagenum" id="Page_108">[Pg 108]</span> +professorships in great universities and others of equal rank +who say that they themselves have seen babies carried in +hoods, I am planning one day to write almost a book on this +subject, citing, so far as my researches allow, practically +every traveler who has said anything about how Eskimo +babies are carried. Here I give only a few typical cases, generally +men who are not only entitled to respect but who +have received it from the learned world.</p> + +<p>Taking them chronologically, the first writers examined +are the following:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>Hans Egede: <i>A Description of Greenland</i>, first published in +1757 (pp. 132 and 148 in the London, 1818, edition).</p> + +<p>David Crantz: <i>The History of Greenland</i>, London, 1767. Vol. I, +pp. 138 and 162.</p> + +<p>Hans Egede Saabye: <i>Greenland ... in the Years 1770 and 1778</i>, +London, 1818, pp. 13 and 259.</p> + +<p>Vol. XIX of the <i>Continuation of the General History of Voyages</i>, +Paris, 1770, in which there is a “History of Greenland” by an +anonymous author.</p> +</div> + +<p>All of this early Greenland evidence agrees with Rasmussen—the +manner in which the child is carried and the +coat in which it is carried are described in almost the same +terms as he uses.</p> + +<p>But there existed a stream of contradictory testimony. +Henry Ellis published his <i>Voyage to Hudson’s Bay</i> at London +in 1748. There you find on p. 136:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“The Difference between the Dress of the Men and the +Women is, that the Women have a Train to their Jackets, that<span class="pagenum" id="Page_109">[Pg 109]</span> +reaches down to their Heels. Their Hoods are also larger and +wider at the Shoulders, for the sake of carrying their Children +in them more conveniently on their Backs.”</p> +</div> + +<p>On pp. 495 and 496 of Sir Edward Parry’s <i>Journal of a +Second Voyage</i>, London, 1824, the hood-carrying is weightily +reinforced.</p> + +<p>Between Parry’s time and about 1855 I have found the +following references:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p class="c less pad">BABIES CARRIED IN HOODS:</p> + +<p>G. F. Lyon: <i>The Private Journal</i>, London, 1824, p. 315.</p> + +<p>John Franklin: <i>Narrative of a Second Expedition in the Years +1825, 1826, 1827</i>, London, 1828, p. 118.</p> + +<p>John Rae: <i>Narrative of an Expedition to the Shores of the +Arctic Sea in 1846 and 1847</i>, London, 1850, p. 39.</p> + +<p>John Richardson: <i>Arctic Searching Expedition</i>, London, 1851, +Vol. I, pp. 252 and 369; also <i>The Polar Regions</i>, Edinburgh, +1861, p. 306.</p> + +<p>Berthold Seemann: <i>Narrative of the Voyage of the H.M.S. +Herald during the Years 1845-51</i>, London, 1853, Vol. II, p. 53.</p> + +<p class="c less pad">BABIES NOT CARRIED IN HOODS (BUT CARRIED INSIDE COATS):</p> + +<p>Captain W. A. Graah, <i>Narrative of an Expedition to the East +Coast of Greenland</i>, London, 1837, p. 118.</p> + +<p>Thomas Simpson: <i>Narrative of the Discoveries on the North +Coast of America</i>, London, 1843.</p> + +<p>Joseph Bellot: <i>Memoirs of Lieutenant Joseph René Bellot</i>, +London, 1855, Vol. I, p. 186.</p> +</div> + +<p>Around 1850 there was living in Greenland a man who +knew the Greenland Eskimos at least as well as even Rasmussen +does now. This was Samuel Kleinschmidt, born of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_110">[Pg 110]</span> +missionary parents and brought up there until he had +learned Eskimo as one of his mother tongues. He was then +educated in Germany and went back to Greenland to spend +the rest of his life, much of which he devoted to the preparation +of an Eskimo-German grammar and an Eskimo-Danish +dictionary.</p> + +<p>In some Eskimo dialects <i>amaut</i>, <i>amaun</i>, or some variant +of that word is the name of an enlargement for child accommodation +in the back of a woman’s coat, or it may be the +name for an entire coat which contains this enlargement. +In many districts the nursing mother wears a coat of no special +design but one simply large enough so the child is well +accommodated. The name of the coat is still <i>amaun</i>. This +is, then, a word referring to the purpose for which the coat +is used, not to its design. <i>Amaun</i> is never used as the name +for a hood, of a woman’s coat or of any other garment.</p> + +<p>In <i>Den Gronlandske Ordbog</i>, Copenhagen, 1871, p. 24, +Kleinschmidt defines the verbal form <i>amarpok</i>, “carries a +child on her back in a roomy coat designed for that purpose”; +and the noun form <i>amaut</i>, “such a coat for carrying +the baby.” Thus we see that while most of the travelers had +by this time been converted to the Ellis-Parry hood carrying +and were testifying that they had themselves observed it, +Kleinschmidt, working as a missionary and scholar in his +native Greenland, had either never heard about the belief +that children are carried in hoods or else considered it so +absurd as not to be worth noticing in his dictionary.</p> + +<p>In 1927 Schultz-Lorentzen published a dictionary which +in many respects is an improvement on Kleinschmidt’s. At +that stage, as we shall show in a moment, the books were<span class="pagenum" id="Page_111">[Pg 111]</span> +favoring by a substantial majority the Ellis-Parry view, at +least if you merely count noses among the testifiers. Greenland +books, among others, were favoring it and on p. 16 +of the Schultz-Lorentzen dictionary we find: <i>amaut</i>, “fur +jacket with hood for carrying child.”</p> + +<p>But this is really an ambiguous definition. If you think +already that babies are carried in hoods, you will read that +meaning into Schultz-Lorentzen’s words; but if you think +that babies are not thus carried, you will understand him to +mean that the coat is for carrying the baby and that this coat +also has a hood. It is therefore fair to him to cite some of his +allied definitions: <i>amaq</i>, “child carried in fur jacket with +hood”; <i>amarpa</i>, “takes him on his back; carries him on his +back”; <i>amarpoq</i>, “carries a child in fur jacket with hood.”</p> + +<p>From about 1855 down to about 1888 the evidence of explorers +who had traveled among Eskimos is divided as +follows:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p class="c less pad">BABIES CARRIED IN HOODS:</p> + +<p> +Charles Francis Hall, 1865.<br> +Isaac I. Hayes, 1867.<br> +Dr. Henry Rink, 1877.<br> +</p> + +<p class="c less pad">AMBIGUOUS:</p> + +<p>A. W. Greely, 1886.</p> + +<p class="c less pad">BABIES CARRIED INSIDE COATS:</p> + +<p>No testimony during this period.</p> +</div> + +<p>Now we come to what makes our discussion really worth +while. It is that one of those who report Eskimo babies carried +in hoods is Franz Boas, Professor of Anthropology in<span class="pagenum" id="Page_112">[Pg 112]</span> +Columbia University and President of the American Association +for the Advancement of Science.</p> + +<p>Boas is, if not the most eminent living anthropologist, +which he very well may be, at least the most distinguished +of those who are also Arctic explorers and who have made +some specialty of Eskimo studies (we classify Rasmussen +here as a traveler or geographer rather than as an anthropologist). +Moreover, the Smithsonian Institution, through +which Boas published a book on the Eskimos on Baffin Island +and neighboring districts, is in one sense at least our foremost +scientific body. It is then significant that on p. 556 of +the <i>6th Annual Report, Bureau of Ethnology</i>, 1884-85, in the +Section, <i>The Central Eskimo</i>, by Boas, we have:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“The women’s jacket ... has a wide and large hood reaching +down almost to the middle of the body.... If the child is +carried in the hood, a leather girdle fastened with a buckle is +tied around the waist and serves to prevent the child from +slipping down....”</p> +</div> + +<p>Boas spent a winter with the Eskimos at Baffin Island and +undoubtedly had hundreds of opportunities of seeing how +the women carried their babies. He was there for the purpose +of studying just such things and there is no doubting +his sincere desire to record and interpret rightly everything +he saw.</p> + +<p>But Boas had in a considerable part of his Eskimo work +the collaboration of a man who testifies directly against +him, a man, too, of keen observation, shrewd judgment, +and much longer experience among Eskimos. This is Captain<span class="pagenum" id="Page_113">[Pg 113]</span> +George Comer, who lives at East Haddam, Conn., co-author +with Boas of <i>The Eskimo of Baffin Land and Hudson +Bay</i>, Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural +History, Vol. XV, 1901. On the subject of the belief that +Eskimo women carry babies in their hoods, Captain Comer +says:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“... (The statement that) Eskimo women carry their babies +in the hood of their garment is perfectly absurd.... Once when +I spoke of the child being carried in the hood it made the women +laugh.” (Letter to Vilhjalmur Stefansson, May 22, 1930.)</p> +</div> + +<p>This discussion has been based on the easiest reading of +Boas, which is that he means to say the Eskimo babies +are carried in the hoods of the women’s coats. However, +the part about the leather girdle serving “to prevent the +child from slipping down” may be taken to show what +Boas really meant was that the child is carried not in the +hood, but inside the coat as described by Rasmussen. For an +examination of Baffin Island women’s coats in museums, or +an examination of the pictures from Boas and others which +give the women’s coats of Baffin Island, will show that if a +child (or anything else) is in the hood, then there is no +chance of its sliding down along the woman’s back whether +or not she wears a girdle.</p> + +<p>Continuing our studies, we have made the following +classification of the reports on the Eskimo manner of carrying +babies by travelers later than Boas.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_114">[Pg 114]</span></p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p class="c less pad">BABIES CARRIED IN HOODS:</p> + +<p> +Lucien M. Turner (Bureau of Ethnology), 1894.<br> +David Hanbury, 1904.<br> +E. W. Hawkes (Canadian Dept. of Mines), 1916.<br> +Donald MacMillan, 1918.<br> +</p> + +<p class="c less pad">BABIES CARRIED INSIDE COATS:</p> + +<p> +Alfred H. Harrison, 1908.<br> +John W. Kelly (U. S. Bureau of Education), 1890.<br> +Fridtjof Nansen, 1893.<br> +</p> + +<p class="c less pad">AMBIGUOUS:</p> + +<p>Ejnar Mikkelsen—expedition 1906-08 (book undated).</p> + +<p>John Murdoch (Bureau of Ethnology)—reports them carried +in coat for those Eskimos he visited but says that among the +eastern Eskimos (whom he had not visited) the baby is +carried in the hood—1892.</p> + +<p>Josephine Peary—describes method of carrying, showing that +child is really carried in coat; but she calls it the hood—1893.</p> + +<p>Henry Rink—same as above, description correct for carrying +in coat but speaks of it as hood—1877.</p> +</div> + +<p>You may think that in spite of the distinction of some +of the advocates, the carrying of babies in hoods has by now +been relegated generally to the domain of folklore and that +this discussion has therefore grown academic. But until +within the last twelve months several of the foremost up-to-the-minute +authorities have in reality been influenced to +believe that the baby hood-carrying is a fact.</p> + +<p>For with Rasmussen and Boas in knowledge of the +Eskimo we might well group Diamond Jenness, Chief +Anthropologist of the Canadian Government at Ottawa,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_115">[Pg 115]</span> +who, as anthropologist on the staff of the expedition which +I commanded from 1913-18, spent three years in studying +the Eskimos from western Alaska eastward along the north +Canadian coast as far as Coronation Gulf. Since then, +through his continued studies and official position, he has +been in close touch with anthropologists and with the development +of Eskimo research. On March 29, 1930, he wrote +me in substance that, although he was convinced those early +travelers who had testified that babies were carried in hoods +in the districts which he had himself later investigated were +mistaken, nevertheless he was willing to believe other travelers +who said that in certain districts which he had not +visited the babies were so carried. It was only when Rasmussen +and Comer testified about those very districts in +which Jenness still credited the hood-carrying that he realized +the belief had a folklore nature outside his own territories +as well as within them.</p> + +<p>There is plenty of evidently correct testimony that Eskimo +women do carry certain things in their hoods. Among things +frequently mentioned are cigarettes (in recent times), needle +cases, dolls or other playthings for their babies, and small +stolen articles. Why is it not, then, reasonable that they +might carry babies similarly?</p> + +<p>The reply is that the admittedly hood-carried articles +are light. A baby is so heavy even at birth that (as Rasmussen +points out) it would choke, or at least seriously incommode, +the mother if its weight reposed in the hood. +(Babies are carried on women’s backs until they are three +or four years old, making the weight increase considerably +each year.)</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_116">[Pg 116]</span></p> + +<p>The second paragraph in rebuttal will be that most testimony +represents the babies in the hoods as usually naked, +at least while very young. If you study the construction of +the hoods on women’s coats in any of our museums, you +will find not only that a weight in them would press +against the mother’s throat with choking action, but also +that they are so open at the top that a naked baby would +necessarily suffer a great deal from cold, at least in winter, +even if it were not frozen to death.</p> + +<p>It may be suggested that when Boas, for instance, speaks +of a hood he is actually referring to the enlargement farther +down in the coat which makes it commodious, as described +by many travelers and easily seen in museums.</p> + +<p>The reply is that this might not be a bad defense argument +for Greenland, where the women frequently have +coats without hoods, but that Boas is dealing with Baffin +Island and other neighboring districts where the women’s +coats, at least usually, have hoods. Since Boas does not describe +the coat he has in mind as having two hoods, we are +inclined to feel that by hood he means what the rest of us do.</p> + +<p>Then it may be advanced that there are motion pictures +and other photographs in existence which show Eskimo +babies actually in the hoods of women’s coats. This would +serve as good argument, if not full proof, were it not that +we know the circumstances under which those photographs +were taken, which are that to oblige the photographers, or +for pay, the women consented to place the babies in the +hoods for the time of as much photographing as the explorer +needed to show graphically on his return what he +believes to be the custom of a primitive people.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_117">[Pg 117]</span></p> + +<p>In other words, we are driven to the conclusion that the +many travelers who have said they have seen Eskimo babies +carried, as a matter of widespread custom, in the hoods of +women’s coats, have all testified to having seen things +they did not see. The merited eminence of some of these +unreliable witnesses comforts the rest of us who, led by +faith, have said or implied in print that we have seen certain +objectively non-existent things. For it is not only misery +but error that loves company. People like Dr. Franz Boas +and Sir Edward Parry are very good company indeed.</p> + +<p>The importance of the babies-in-hoods case is in that it +shows strikingly the danger to which the social sciences are +exposed when they include the testimony of explorers among +their data.</p> + +<p>There are bound to be many in every scientific audience +who feel that the misrepresentations and misstatements of +their own science are as serious as any that will fall within +the domain of the geographers and anthropologists. They +may be right, which, if they are, makes the case more interesting. +What we cite are then not exceptions but fair samples +of the body of knowledge.</p> + +<p>I have, in reality, never met any specialist who thought +that fully half of what is now being taught in the schools +about his subject was contrary to fact or definitely misleading; +but that proportion fits my opinion with regard +to my specialty and I shall use the last few minutes of my +time in dwelling upon it.</p> + +<p>The first reason for there being abroad fewer “untrue +facts” about the Temperate than the other zones is that +ours is a temperate zone civilization and that to our forefathers<span class="pagenum" id="Page_118">[Pg 118]</span> +(and, to an extent, ourselves) the two regions of +unrestrained imagination were the tropics and the Arctic. +Five hundred years ago the percentage of misinformation +was no doubt approximately the same with regard to the +zones north and south of the North Temperate, but of late +books and ideas about the tropics have become relatively +correct. For the crossing of the tropics has been a commonplace +these 400 years, while the crossing of the Arctic was +not accomplished until within our own time and is not yet +a commonplace, though it soon will be.</p> + +<p>The tropic myths have been dispelled by the frequent +journeys of investigators and by the necessities of commercial +development. The Arctic myths have not been dispelled +by these or any other causes, or at least not to the same extent. +Moreover, the human mind appears to crave some +district where the fancy may roam. Our favorite character +of the imagination is Santa Claus and we are perhaps right +in feeling subconsciously that it is fitting and necessary for +him to reside in an imaginary world. Moreover, our present +attitude towards explorers makes them the grown-ups’ equivalent +of childhood’s Santa Claus. The explorers, then, need +an imaginary world for a satisfying background.</p> + +<p>I might confess here that to the extent that I am successful +in talks such as this, I feel as if I were stealing candy from a +child when I make it increasingly difficult for the rest of +the world to swallow the good old hokum about the Arctic. +Fortunately, I have never been very successful.</p> + +<p>But it is equally fortunate that I am not very serious about +Truth—fortunate at least for me. I am no Jeremiah declaiming +against iniquity. I like to contrast my benevolence with<span class="pagenum" id="Page_119">[Pg 119]</span> +the misanthropy of the satirists, and I go on now to point +out the amusing but effective ways which the scientific organizations, +some of them nearly as lofty and respected as +the American Philosophical Society, have discovered for +keeping Santa Claus in his Arctic so that all may be well +with the imaginary world.</p> + +<p>One of the branches of our government is the Geological +Survey and another branch is the Signal Corps. Lieutenant +P. H. Ray, of the United States Army, discovered on the +Signal Corps expedition to Point Barrow (1881-2) that +“willows” 20 feet in height grow a little way inland +from Barrow, more than 200 miles north of the Arctic Circle. +But it is out of character to picture such large vegetation +in the Arctic, and so the Geological Survey now comes to +the rescue by issuing through the journal <i>Science</i>, the official +organ of the American Association for the Advancement +of Science, and through <i>Science Service</i>, a statement that +in the great triangle north of the Endicott Mountains in +Alaska (an area larger than that of the great Commonwealth +of Pennsylvania) there is no tree-like growth bigger than a +lead pencil.</p> + +<p>Before any of us were born the Hudson’s Bay Company +had a trading post called La Pierre’s House, on the Bell +branch of the Porcupine River, and at Fort Yukon, where +the Porcupine enters the Yukon. Ever since then missionaries, +traders, and white men and women of nearly every +condition and description, have been traveling up and down +that river or residing upon it. Now the United States Bureau +of Education, among its other contributions to the Santa +Claus background, tells that one of its agents will go northward<span class="pagenum" id="Page_120">[Pg 120]</span> +and associate on this river with Indians who are untouched +by the white man’s civilization. The implication is +that some of them will never have seen a white man until +the Bureau representative gets there. Really he will find +there Athapaska Indians speaking English with a Scotch +accent, their inheritance from the Orkneyman “servants” of +the Company.</p> + +<p>We have been listing a few of the notable contributions +from scientific departments of the American Government +to our knowledge of the Arctic. There are naturally similar +contributions from the governments of other countries. We +close our remarks on this subdivision of our topic with a +note on the Antarctic which appeared in <i>Science</i> on February +27, 1925:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“The Minister of the Colonies, by a decree dated December +30, has created a large game sanctuary in France’s Antarctic +possessions ... the principal animals protected are polar bears, +walrus, sea lions and penguins. The French naval station in +Madagascar will be responsible for the patrol of the new preserve.”</p> +</div> + +<p>In this French decree we seem to have the first published +reference to walrus south of the equator. The polar bear citation +is even more remarkable, for up to this time there had +been discovered in the Antarctic no land mammal, small +or big.</p> + +<p>The walrus in southern waters has apparently not been +reported again since the French government’s original note; +but the polar bears, once introduced (and protected by gunboats +in Madagascar only a few thousand miles away) have +been doing well in our Antarctic mental world. True, they<span class="pagenum" id="Page_121">[Pg 121]</span> +appear as yet with comparative rarity in print; but they +appear frequently in pictures—not in photographs, of course, +but in drawings. A sample contribution was a cartoon of +the <i>New York World</i>, spring 1930. Formerly in such drawings, +penguins by themselves had symbolized the Antarctic; +now they were joined by the polar bear. Father Knickerbocker +was shown standing at the New York waterfront +to welcome Byrd home from his southern adventures. The +boat conveying the hero toward shore was rowed by a crew +of polar bears and steered by penguins.</p> + +<p>These same late years that have been so propitious to the +Antarctic have seen a reciprocal enrichment of the Arctic. +As there had been no bears in the South so had there been +no penguins in the North. Or, rather, there had been a sort +of penguin, the Great Auk, which became extinct a century +ago. It would manifestly add charm to have penguins, and +so they have been appearing more and more frequently in +references to the North. As with bears in the South, they +are most frequent in drawings. There is, however, a growing +demand for photographs of them. It happens to me, for +instance, with increasing frequency that lecture committees +bargaining for talks on the Arctic request that I shall use +movies, or at least stills, showing penguins.</p> + +<p>I get friendly advice, too, after my talks—what I said was +interesting and they didn’t realize before they saw my pictures +that there are flowers in the Arctic. But why did I not +also show the penguins?—they are so solemn, so funny and +so human.</p> + +<p>Next after the official Government agencies in the Santa +Claus propaganda, with regard to Arctic and Antarctic, may<span class="pagenum" id="Page_122">[Pg 122]</span> +be ranked our great universities. Few of them are greater +(and I remind you again I am not trying to be satirical) +than the University of Chicago. In the spring of 1928 that +university informed us through what appears to be an +official press release that a graduate student of theirs, Cornelius +Osgood, was going to live on Great Bear Lake. They +said:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“If he is successful, young Osgood, ... will be the first white +man ever to live in the Great Bear Lake region. Two missionaries +who tried it in 1912 were slain by the natives. Armed only with +rifles, cameras, note-books, recording phonograph disks and a +sleeping bag to withstand the 79 degrees below zero weather, +Osgood will seek to win the confidence of the natives, living their +lives, helping in their work and eating their food.... The only +other white men who have penetrated the district are Steffanson, +the Arctic explorer, and his companion D’arcy Arden, a famous +figure of the North, and a Northwest Mounted Policeman who +captured the murderers of the missionaries.”</p> +</div> + +<p>The stodgy fact is, of course, that John Franklin wintered +at Fort Franklin on Great Bear Lake a hundred years ago, +that the Hudson’s Bay Company operated on the lake +thereafter, that Richardson and Rae, three quarters of a +century ago, built their Fort Confidence on Great Bear Lake, +and that white men too numerous for easy cataloguing +have been there off and on ever since. I was so overborne +by this knowledge that when I was there in 1910-11 I lacked +the courage, or something, to claim I was the first white +man ever to winter.</p> + +<p>The bit “Steffanson ... and his companion D’arcy Arden”<span class="pagenum" id="Page_123">[Pg 123]</span> +will be news to him, as it is to me. We never met at or +near Great Bear Lake. I believe he began his long residence +in that district a year or so after I left there. The lake is +big, however, and the country is big—he may have been +to the west somewhere in 1910 without my knowing it.</p> + +<p>It is perhaps heaping Pelion on Ossa to prove further the +thesis of this paper, that even scientists will constantly and +solemnly report, as having been observed, things for which +there is no foundation but an inherited belief. I might have +resisted the temptation except that a beautiful example has +just fallen into my hands.</p> + +<p>In Canada, Dr. F. G. Banting, Professor of Medical Research, +Toronto University, Nobel Prize winner, is the +country’s foremost scientist in that more people know his +name than that of any other Canadian scientist now living. +The Canadian Government has deservedly recognized his +position by what the papers say is a lifetime stipend. There +is in Canada now an organization called the Canadian Geographical +Society, a purpose of which is the increase and +diffusion of knowledge of Canada. I shall list for you a few +of Dr. Banting’s observations on a summer trip North, as +chronicled in Volume I, No. 1 (May 1930), of the official +organ of the Society, the <i>Canadian Geographical Journal</i>:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>1. “The thickness of the pans (of sea ice) varied from twenty +to forty feet, depending on whether they were one-year-old +or two-year-old ice.”</p> +</div> + +<p>Many Northern explorers, prominent among them Nansen, +have studied the time required for the thickening of sea +ice. Their reports are of the order that the first winter’s<span class="pagenum" id="Page_124">[Pg 124]</span> +freezing is from seven to nine feet, that of the second winter +adding one to three feet, the third perhaps less than a foot.</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>2. “On the surface of the older pans were pools of fresh blue +water, while on the year-old pans the pools were of salt +water.”</p> +</div> + +<p>“Pans” several years old and those a year old will both +have on them pools of water fresh to the taste in summer, +if the spray has not reached them. It is ice much younger, +only a few weeks or months old, that has salty pools.</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>3. “Varieties of saxifrage, fireweed and stunted willow spring +up beneath the snow and ice.”</p> +</div> + +<p>Probably what Banting means is that during the winter +they had been under snow, as plants are in Minnesota. Some +of the spring processes may conceivably quicken a little +while the snow is still above the plants, but, if so, how could +Banting learn this on a summer trip? Since he distinguishes +between ice and snow, what can he mean by their springing +up beneath the ice? What ice other than snow would there +be?</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>4. He lauds Franklin and his men who, on Franklin’s last expedition, +“in tiny sailing vessels, ventured through these +perilous waters.”</p> +</div> + +<p>Franklin’s <i>Erebus</i> was 370 tons and his <i>Terror</i> was 340 +tons, large to date for ships which have gone in among the +islands that are north of Canada. Amundsen’s <i>Gjoa</i>, by<span class="pagenum" id="Page_125">[Pg 125]</span> +which he navigated the Northwest Passage, was 47 tons. +The largest of the six ships of my own third expedition was +the <i>Karluk</i>, 247 tons; the smallest, the <i>North Star</i>, about 30 +tons.</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>5. “In protected spots the flowering mosses of various colors ... reminded +us of a summer day at home.”</p> +</div> + +<p>Either Banting here made some startling discoveries or he +was a bit confused as to the nature of mosses. Not a few +works of reference divide plants into flowering and non-flowering, +putting the mosses on the non-flowering side of +the fence.</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>6. “During these blizzards the land animals huddle together +with their backs to the storm and allow the snow to drift +around them.”</p> +</div> + +<p>Banting must have been thinking of cows and horses +down Ontario way. The ordinary report of hunters and +naturalists is that both caribou and musk oxen feed into the +wind and are more likely than otherwise to travel into it.</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>7. “... thunder is so rarely heard that the natives are frightened +by it.”</p> +</div> + +<p>I know people in New York who are frightened by thunder, +and have seen the like farther south.</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>8. “The married women wear larger hoods which are used for +carrying the baby.”</p> +</div> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_126">[Pg 126]</span></p> + +<p>We have earlier in this paper dealt with the question of +whether babies are ever carried in hoods.</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>9. “... the Eskimos live in igloos made from blocks of hard +snow.”</p> +</div> + +<p>We consider this under two heads:</p> + +<p>(a) If Banting means that an Eskimo calls his dwelling +an igloo, then he is of course right; the Eskimo word <i>iglu</i> +means dwelling. A lot of people in a lot of countries live +in dwellings.</p> + +<p>(b) If by igloo Banting means a snow house, then he +should not have said “the Eskimos.” Certainly there are +Eskimos who live in snow houses in winter; but it is equally +certain that the number of Eskimos who have never lived +in a snow house is larger than that of those who have lived +in them. This statement goes not only for the 20th century +but, so far as we believe, for the 19th, 18th, and 17th centuries +at the least. In fact, there are good reasons to consider +that the snow house was geographically more widespread +in 1900 than it was in 1600.</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>10. “... the native has <i>no</i> natural immunity.”</p> +</div> + +<p>The only necessary comment is to say that the italization +in this quotation is ours.</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>11. “In a country where there is no sunshine for three months +of the year the people are dependent on their food for their +vitamins ...”</p> +</div> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_127">[Pg 127]</span></p> + +<p>The inference seems to be that if there were more sunshine +these remarkable people would not have to depend +on food for any of their vitamins. The recipient of one Nobel +Prize for endocrine studies may then well be candidate for +another in comparative racial physiology and in deficiency +diseases.</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>12. “Perhaps the most important introductions (from whites to +the Eskimos) are the darning needle, which has been the +greatest help to the women in making the clothes and boots, +and matches for igniting their lamps.”</p> +</div> + +<p>The testimony of many travelers has been that Eskimos +felt it a hardship to sew with copper or bone needles which +almost necessarily were too large for their purpose. Accordingly, +the needles which the Eskimos most valued when +the whites arrived were those that were smaller than darning +needles. No. 1 needles are much smaller than darning size +but are, nevertheless, about the largest that I have found the +Eskimos of my territories to value at all appreciably. No. 3 +was a rather large needle for most of the seamstresses whom +I have known, who did most of their sewing with size 5 or +smaller. So far as my experience goes, it has been a standing +marvel with white women, and with white men used to sewing, +that the western Eskimos sew with such small needles. +I do not recall ever seeing one use a darning needle for anything +but darning or sewing heavy cloths, like tenting.</p> + +<p>As to the preciousness of matches to the Eskimos: I have +reported that the Stone Age people of Coronation Gulf, with +whom we spent the summer 1910, often got their camp fires<span class="pagenum" id="Page_128">[Pg 128]</span> +lighted with blocks of iron pyrites quicker than we did ours +with matches. On days of strong wind pyrites has particular +advantages, so that it seemed to me the Eskimos needed +matches less, and appreciated them less, than they did many +of our other contributions to their way of life.</p> + +<p>The issue is not so clear with the matches as with the +needles. It is ludicrous to claim that darning needles supplied +a keenly felt want. Whether the matches did is in the +field of legitimate dispute.</p> + +<p>To guard against misunderstanding I close this discussion +of the Banting paper by reminding you, and insisting upon +it, that I am on the whole one of his great admirers. It +appears to me that his career and character are both of a +high order. That is my point. We get from eminent and +deservedly respected men substantial contributions of misinformation +useful in maintaining the general unreality (or +shall we say poetic quality, imaginative charm?) of our +world outlook.</p> + +<p>Before introducing the next example of how the great +stand with us shoulder-to-shoulder in the battle to keep the +world unreal, we mention that the North Pole of reality lies +in a deep ocean and is removed some 400 miles from the +nearest land. During a hundred years there have been numerous +explorers studying this ocean. No one has during +this century, or at any other time, seen an iceberg within +300 miles of the North Pole; few have been seen within 600 +miles. We know, too, the conditions under which icebergs +are formed. So it appears both from well-established theory +and from uniform observation that there are not and cannot +well be icebergs anywhere near the North Pole.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_129">[Pg 129]</span></p> + +<p>Now we come to a statement that could not be introduced +to you more impressively than by a simple recital of facts. +The publication is the September 20, 1928, number of +<i>Science</i>. The original author of the statement is Sir James +H. Jeans, who, according to <i>Who’s Who</i>, is M.A., D.Sc. from +Oxford, LL.D. from Aberdeen, F.R.S. and secretary of the +Royal Society. He is quoted with implied approval by Robert +A. Millikan, who, according to <i>Who’s Who in America</i>, is +A.B., A.M., Ph.D. from Columbia, studied at Berlin and +Göttingen, is D.Sc. from Oberlin, Northwestern, University +of Pennsylvania, Columbia, Amherst, Dublin and Yale, and +LL.D. from California, as well as holder of the Nobel Prize.</p> + +<p>And this is what Millikan says, quoting Jeans: “Our position +is that of polar bears on an iceberg that has broken loose +from its ice pack surrounding the pole.”</p> + +<p>Millikan and Jeans consider, then, that icebergs come from +the vicinity of the pole. But if you could take a census of +icebergs as we take a census of the human population of the +United States, you would find more of them in the temperate +zone than in the Arctic; if you could determine the population +center of icebergs as we determine the population center +of the United States, you would find this center is nearer the +British Isles, where Sir James lives, than to the North Pole. +Or, speaking astronomically, since Jeans is an astronomer, +it would be as correct to imply that Saturn is the center of +our solar system as it is to imply that the North Pole is the +center of icebergs.</p> + +<p>Jeans tells us in a recent work on <i>Cosmogony</i> that light, +which goes eight times around our earth in a second, requires +140,000,000 years to reach us from the farthest celestial<span class="pagenum" id="Page_130">[Pg 130]</span> +object that our telescopes now show. With his intellect and +with that marvelous tool of the intellect, mathematics, he +probes these depths. The while he probes the vulgar onlooker +speculates as to how accurate Jeans may be about +those distant reaches when he is so far from being accurate +about things that are, comparatively speaking, within a +stone’s throw of his house.</p> + +<p>It may be said that many people have heard of icebergs +who have never heard of sea ice, and that Millikan and Jeans +were perhaps just catering to their audience in using the +better-known word. For it is a common view that scientists, +addressing the laity, have an obligation to translate their +rigorous phrasing into the looser forms of common speech. +But when Millikan referred to the iceberg as “broken loose +from its ice pack surrounding the pole,” he was, according +to <i>Science</i>, giving not a popular talk but an “Address before +the Society of Chemical Industry, New York, September 4, +1928, on the occasion of the conferring on Dr. Robert A. +Millikan of the Messel Medal in honor of his work on the +structure and relations of atoms.” We are too polite to believe +it was necessary to talk down to that audience.</p> + +<p>Jeans and Millikan were no doubt really thinking of floe +ice when they said iceberg. Their precision of speech would +then be like my referring to Halley’s planet or calling the +moon a nebula. An iceberg differs as much from sea ice as a +comet does from a planet.</p> + +<p>The iceberg is formed on land; floe ice at sea. The iceberg +begins as snow and gradually acquires the semblance of common +ice through time, pressure, etc., while sea ice forms +directly from liquid water. The iceberg has been fresh since<span class="pagenum" id="Page_131">[Pg 131]</span> +it started; the floe ice began salty and, if fresh now, has attained +that state through a long process. The ice destined +to be a berg gradually approaches the sea; the floe ice was +on the sea from the start. These are but a few of the +differences.</p> + +<p>It is possible, however, that Jeans and Millikan were not +confusing an iceberg with any form of sea ice. For it appears +to be the view of the average scientist who is not a geographer +that the northern polar sea is just filled full of icebergs. +For instance, practically everybody whom I ever heard objecting +to the use of submarines in the northern polar basin +will say that you are bound to collide with icebergs even if +you can navigate deep enough so that there is no chance of +colliding with sea ice.</p> + +<p>It may be said, finally, that since Jeans is an astronomer, +and Millikan a physicist, you can’t expect them to know +much about the earth. But why not? I find in several of +Jeans’ books which I own, and have even read, that he talks +a lot about the earth in general. He analogizes from earth +to moon and to various other bodies. And Millikan should +know something of land, sea and air, for he and his agents +scale mountains and go aloft in aircraft to study his later +rays, sometimes crossing oceans to do so. Meteorology and +geography should be to him, then, not wholly alien professionally.</p> + +<p>The fact is, of course, that this whole reasoning is beside +the mark. Jeans and Millikan, leaders in science, are simply +acting, too, as leaders in that great effort where we all collaborate, +the struggle to keep the world unreal.</p> + +<p>Or, declining to close with a negative statement, we affirm<span class="pagenum" id="Page_132">[Pg 132]</span> +that all the way through from my telling the Eskimo method +of property identification to Millikan’s telling of icebergs +breaking loose from an ice pack surrounding the pole—through +that whole gamut we multitudinous scientists are +champions of a higher knowledge which I have advocated +in <i>The Standardization of Error</i>, knowledge derived from +facts-by-definition.</p> + +<p>There is a perhaps subconscious awareness that lands near +home are getting dull through excessive familiarity and it +may be this feeling which prompts many who are not scientists +to join them towards keeping the ends of the earth +from becoming too ordinary. There are many examples in +recent polar exploration and we take a few.</p> + +<p>The New York newspapers carried one day a statement +that Byrd had flown over the North Pole and that the temperature +of the air had been 10° F. above zero. Now that +is a commonplace temperature, without fascination; for +every state north of the Mason and Dixon Line has had it, +as well as a good many states farther south. This cheapening +of the North Pole needed counteracting. Accordingly, there +was an editorial the next day to the effect that in properly +evaluating Byrd’s achievement we must remember that the +flight was performed in cold so intense as to be unimaginable +to New Yorkers.</p> + +<p>The reports from most of the winter flights in the Arctic or +Antarctic have been that the planes flew in warmer air than +on the ground. There have been instances where they flew +at 40° or 50° warmer; in one case the temperature was +79° higher at the plane than on the ground below. Reports +of this kind we neutralize in our discussions by assuming,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_133">[Pg 133]</span> +without citing figures, that (because high mountains are +snow-capped and for various other reasons) the heroic polar +flyers contend during their journeys with temperatures even +colder than those endured by their earth-bound predecessors +who explored by dog and afoot.</p> + +<p>A danger well-known to the air mail between New York +and Cleveland, too well-known in most parts of the so-called +temperate zone, is that of ice forming on wings to +make the plane heavy and, what is more serious, to change +its aerodynamics so that it becomes unmanageable. This +occurs in what the people of New York and Cleveland think +of as cold weather. Accordingly, in our discussions of polar +flying we just assume that because it is much colder the +danger to the flyers, through ice formation, must be that +much greater than on the New York-Cleveland winter run. +This gets by 90 per cent of the readers and is one of our most +effective devices in keeping the polar districts unreal. The +fact is, of course, that ice forms on wings chiefly at temperatures +between freezing and fifteen degrees below that point +(between 30° above zero and 15° above). When it gets +colder you have comparatively little icing trouble with a +plane.</p> + +<p>The Arctic and Antarctic have their chief social usefulness +as proving grounds for heroes. The stay-at-homes are thrilled +by that courage, that devotion to the aims of science, which +leads men to expose themselves to the terrors of a frozen and +lifeless wilderness. In order that the said terrors shall have +their maximum appeal to the reading public there should be +a good many of them. One of the things commonly dreaded +is illness, and it is therefore desirable to have it believed that<span class="pagenum" id="Page_134">[Pg 134]</span> +the polar risks include the greatest possible number of +diseases. Recent deficiency-disease study has been helpful +through showing that one at least of the vitamins can be +produced by sunlight falling on the human skin. Obviously, +then, the members of exploring parties are going to suffer +great deprivation, are going to be in imminent risk of their +lives, because of the long absence of the sun in winter. This +belief has been utilized in two chief ways: You take along +ultra-violet lamps and then make a great play on the forethought +of a commander who enlists the newest powers of +science towards protecting from disease the members of his +courageous band. Or else you have the expedition go into +the field without the lamps, and then work up a suspense on +whether by cleanliness, regular exercise, amusements, and +strict medical supervision it may turn out possible for the +men to retain their health until the sun comes back after +the Long Polar Night.</p> + +<p>On the whole, disease scares have been managed satisfactorily +by the public relations departments of at any rate +the larger expeditions; but until just recently there was a +serious exception. It had been found by many explorers, and +had been so often reported as to reach the public consciousness, +that head colds and the related diseases of the pulmonary +passages were rare on polar journeys. Some said they had +been practically absent. For instance, it was reported on one +of the British expeditions that nobody had a cold for several +winter months, that everybody then caught cold from germs +which emerged when boxes of clothing were unpacked, and +that when this flare-up was over no more head colds appeared +through the rest of the year.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_135">[Pg 135]</span></p> + +<p>Obviously the polar explorer is deprived of half his chance +to be courageous if the life and the climate are represented +as normally healthful. The growing awareness that cold +prevents colds had to be dealt with. Simplest was, no doubt, +to counteract this through the old belief that cold produces +colds. Notable help in the campaign was received from the +cough-drop industry.</p> + + +<div class="chapter"> +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_136">[Pg 136]</span></p> + +<div class="figcenter2" id="c5"> +<img src="images/fig1.jpg" alt="decoration"> +</div> + +<h2>CHAPTER V.</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c large sp"><span class="smcap">Standardized Wolves</span></p> + + +<p><span class="more">THOSE WHO WANT TO BELIEVE THAT WOLVES DO NOT RUN IN</span> +packs should read only the first two-thirds of this chapter. +For believing in wolf-packs, read the sections “Crumbs for +Believers” and “Wolves for Posterity.” The section “Wolves +and Babes” can be read safely by believers and non-believers, +for these are an entirely different (though standard) species +and the nursing complex, save for one classic exception, +seems to be confined to Hindu wolves.</p> + +<p>To read all sections may prove not merely difficult but +also confusing—may we hope even befuddling.</p> + +<p class="gtb">******</p> + +<p>Everybody knows that wolves run in packs. One of the +standard definitions of pack is: “A large number of predatory +animals, such as wolves, banded together for the purpose +of hunting their prey.”</p> + +<p>That used to be an undisputed statement of the case. But +now there is an argument about whether any wolf-pack ever +really existed, with the scientists nearly all on one side, the +general public nearly all on the other, and the sportsmen +divided about half and half.</p> + +<p>On the affirmative side we have the undoubted fact that<span class="pagenum" id="Page_137">[Pg 137]</span> +“everybody knows,” especially in Russia, that wolves do run +in packs. If you want to refresh your mind as to what Russian +wolf-packs are believed to be like, you can do so easily +and pleasantly by turning to Willa Cather’s <i>My Antonía</i>, +page 63. The people Miss Cather is going to feed to her +wolves are the very diet to which Russian wolves are most +accustomed—a wedding party. There are six sleighs drawn +by three horses each and carrying from six to twelve passengers. +There is starlight on the snow and the road is through +a forest. The first distant wolf howl does not drown the +tinkle of the sleigh bells or the laughter of the wedding +guests. But the rallying cry is answered from many sides, +the leaders of the pack draw nearer, and fear grips every +heart. The bride sobs on the groom’s bosom and the drivers +lash their horses to breakneck speed. The rear sleigh upsets, +the passengers sprawl out over the snow and the wolves are +on top of them in a moment. The screams of horses being +eaten alive are more dreadful than the shrieks of people +whose entrails are being torn out. The cries of terror from +the remaining sleighs are as loud as the cries of pain from +the dying. The wolves are silent now—they have other work +to do.</p> + +<p>And so the story goes on for sleigh after sleigh in Miss +Cather’s story, and in all the typical stories, until only the +bridal sleigh is left. About forty or fifty people and fifteen +horses have now been eaten, but the wolves are still hungry +and going strong. There are hundreds of them, you see, and +wolves have proverbially good appetites. Nothing will save +the last sleigh but throwing the bride to the pack. This Miss +Cather accordingly does, and so do half the other authors of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_138">[Pg 138]</span> +tales. But it seldom happens that quite everybody is eaten. +Somebody has to be saved, to give the narrator a chance to +portray the survivor’s life of shame and remorse through +many effective pages that lead to a distant and friendless +grave.</p> + +<p>Such tales as Miss Cather’s we usually consider to be “true +in spirit” only, since they occur in novels, but we take them +for sober fact when we read them in books of travel or in +newspapers. The press stories excel the books in verisimilitude, +for they tell us what is said to have happened yesterday +or last week. They give the names of places that are on every +map, they frequently mention the widow and orphaned +children, they sometimes tell that the funeral of the fragments +left by the wolves was conducted by the home lodge +of Masons. There is every detail to prove that what you see +in the <i>Sun</i> (or the <i>Bee</i> or the <i>American</i>) is really so.</p> + +<p>If you look in the index to the news published by the New +York <i>Times</i>, you will discover scores of authentic-looking +wolf-pack stories. I have the space to reproduce here only a +sample:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p class="c large sp">WOLVES DEVOUR 3 MEN IN<br> +NORTHERN ONTARIO</p> + +<hr class="r5"> + +<p class="c"><i>An Elderly White Trapper and Two Indians Fall Victims to a<br> +Horde of Hungry Beasts</i></p> + +<p>Port Arthur, Ont., Dec. 27—A great roving band of hungry +timber wolves has devoured three men.... Last Saturday an +elderly trapper left his cabin in the woods seventy miles north of +Ignace to mush down to the settlement for his Christmas mail.... +There was no mail, however, and the old man said he would<span class="pagenum" id="Page_139">[Pg 139]</span> +come back Christmas morning. At noon he had not arrived. The +postmaster sent two Indians to follow the trail....</p> + +<p>About two miles from the settlement the Indians found a +spot pounded down in the snow. There was blood. Bits of dog +harness torn to shreds were scattered about. In the midst of them +the Indians found human bones. They hastened back to report +their discovery. The lure of the bounty on wolves, however, +urged the Indians to take the trail again, with extra ammunition. +They sped behind the dog team into the woods as the villagers +waved good-bye. They did not return.</p> + +<p>Yesterday a new searching party departed. They found another +patch trodden in the snow, with much more blood, about two +miles from the first. The two guns the Indians had carried were +lying in the crimsoned snow. Scattered about were bones, bits +of clothing and empty shells.</p> + +<p>The carcasses of sixteen dead wolves—some half eaten—lay +stretched in a circle about the remains of the two Indian hunters.</p> +</div> + +<p>I quote from the New York <i>Times</i> of December 28, 1922. +The story, from what is justly considered one of the world’s +greatest and most reliable newspapers, gives proof of the +cunning no less than of the ferocity of the North American +wolf. Judging from the evidence, the pack must still have +been hungry when they got through eating the trapper +(perhaps he was small and skinny), so they lay in wait to +finish their meal on the search party, which they evidently +knew was coming. Then, still hungry, and fearing the size +and prowess of the second search party, they reluctantly ate +a few of each other for dessert before retreating into the +shadows of the forest. That was discretion and admirable +generalship. They fought when there was a chance to win, +and then withdrew before superior numbers.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_140">[Pg 140]</span></p> + +<p>There are plenty of such wolf stories in the papers, and +now and then others even more impressive. During 1926, for +instance, in the pages of the New York <i>Sun</i> packs of wolves +held Italy under a reign of terror; a bit later in the New +York <i>Times</i> villages in Siberia were barricaded against +wolves. Two million cattle and many people were killed.</p> + +<p>Thus stands the evidence for the affirmative—wolves <i>do</i> +run in packs. They devour wedding parties in Russia and +they eat trappers and Indians in Canada. They terrorize +Italy and lay siege to towns in Siberia—in the papers, at least.</p> + +<p>But there are skeptics who do not believe all they see in the +papers or read in books of travel. These iconoclasts tell you +that every story of a wolf-pack that you ever read or heard +is fib, fiction, or folklore, and that there never has been a +pack of wolves in Russia, America, or anywhere except in +people’s imagination. That seems a hard position to defend, +but they go at it valiantly. Their defense lies in both logic +and fact. For the logic they ask you to consider the caribou-hunting +wolf as a sample.</p> + +<p>Their argument begins with the generally accepted fact +that there are more than ten million wild caribou in Northern +Alaska, Northern Canada, Northern Siberia and the +Arctic islands. From these at least two million caribou are +born every year; two million must, therefore, die, or the +numbers would increase. Certainly less than 10 per cent of +these are killed by human hunters. None die of old age and +very few of accident or disease, for if a caribou is old or sick +it moves slowly and is soon overtaken and devoured. This +means that wolves kill every year a good many more than a +million and a half caribou.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_141">[Pg 141]</span></p> + +<p>In summer, when their puppies are being brought up, the +northern wolves live in part on eggs, fledgling or moulting +birds, and rodents. But in winter the birds have flown south, +the rodents are safe asleep in their frozen burrows, and +almost the only thing a wolf can find to eat is caribou. I +know how wolves kill caribou, and I can offer some personal +testimony on wolves in general, for I was born on Lake +Winnipeg in a wolf country; I was brought up among +wolves and coyotes in Dakota before it became “civilized” +and was split up into North and South Dakota; I lived for +some ten years in the Arctic, supporting myself most of the +time by hunting. I have shot wolves with a rifle and have +seen hundreds of them either trotting quietly along or loping +steadily in pursuit of caribou. I have seen the tracks of +thousands following game, and have found signs of hundreds +of tragedies where they had killed some bird or beast. +I have asked dozens of Arctic Indians (Slaveys, Dogribs, +Loucheux) and hundreds of Eskimos about how the wolf +hunts, and there has been no divergence between what they +have told me and what I have seen.</p> + +<p>A wolf cannot run nearly as fast as a caribou, and must +capture it by tiring it out. That is the essence of all I have +seen and all I have been told. It means that, before it is +killed, each caribou has to be pursued by the wolves from +several hours to several days—nobody knows exactly how +long. All hunters agree that (except for newborn calves) the +youngest caribou are the swiftest and staunchest runners. +The ones killed by wolves are therefore chiefly the old bulls +and old cows. A cow may weigh two or three hundred +pounds, and a bull three or four hundred, live-weight.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_142">[Pg 142]</span> +Nearly half of that is waste. The wolves are, then, pursuing +anything from 100 to 200 pounds of food. For, no matter +how large the caribou herd may be when the chase begins, +they eventually scatter, and the pack, if there is a pack, finds +itself pursuing the single slowest animal.</p> + +<p>Suppose, now, there are 200 or 300 wolves, as in Miss +Cather’s heart-rending story. She provided hers with six +sleigh loads of Russians, six to twelve in a sleigh, and three +presumably fat horses hitched to each. That would make a +square meal for even 300 wolves. But it would be far otherwise +if the 300 followed a single 300-pound caribou for +three days, or even one day. They would be so hungry that +the beast, divided by 300, would be to the pack no more +than a tantalizing appetizer. There would be nothing for it +but to resort to another well-known habit of the fiction wolf +and use their whetted appetites on each other—eating, let +us say, a dozen to correspond to the soup course, a dozen for +the fish, and two dozen for the roast, with at least another +dozen of the youngest and tenderest for dessert. But the continued +practice of dining on each other like that would soon +reduce a wolf-pack below fiction and movie standards. In +fact, you might as well do without a pack altogether; for it +is scarcely worth the bother to build one up to the required +size, just to have it disappear again in a few weeks by the +members of the troupe swallowing one another.</p> + +<p>Those who are trying to prove that the wolf-pack really +exists will perhaps admit that the abstract logic of pack +hunting seems a little faulty, but will insist, and quite rightly, +that logic does not amount to a hill of beans when contradicted +by facts. The pack stories, they will tell us, are simple<span class="pagenum" id="Page_143">[Pg 143]</span> +truth. Newspapers may exaggerate, but the better ones never +invent. Besides, nearly everybody has an uncle or an aunt +who had a grandmother or grandfather that was eaten or +nearly eaten by a pack of wolves.</p> + +<p>That brings us to the evidence—are the wolf-pack stories +true? To save time, we shall take at once the testimony of a +group of scientists and practical hunters who ought to know +because they make the study of wolves their profession—studying +also the testimony of everyone they ever heard of +who claimed to have seen a pack of wolves. They are Americans, +too, and within your reach, so you can write postcards +to them tomorrow and see what they really think. Don’t be +diffident about asking. You are probably a taxpayer. They +are your servants, for they work for the government that +taxes you.</p> + +<p>The branch of the government that studies wolves as a +part of its business is the Bureau of Biological Survey at +Washington, and the head of it is Dr. E. W. Nelson,<a id="FNanchor_12" href="#Footnote_12" class="fnanchor">[12]</a> a +lifetime student of wild animals. He was four years among +Arctic wolves in Alaska (1877-81) and has himself studied +wolves in Mexico and all over the United States. Furthermore, +he has under him other men who have studied wolves, +among them Edward A. Preble, who has spent much time +in the sub-Arctic and Arctic forests and prairies of Canada. +But more significant still, there is under Dr. Nelson’s successor’s +direction the wolf-killing service of the United States +Government. This is a body of men who hold themselves +in readiness for telegraphic appeals from stockmen, usually +in the West, who find their animals being destroyed by<span class="pagenum" id="Page_144">[Pg 144]</span> +wolves. They come and exterminate the wolves “scientifically,” +and the flocks and herds are safe again.</p> + +<p>In gathering material for a book I was writing about +wolves, I consulted Dr. Nelson. We agreed, first, that the +accepted meaning of the word pack, when applied to wolves +is <i>a large number of wolves that have come together to help +each other in hunting</i>. In other words, one mother with her +puppies would not constitute a pack. Dr. Nelson felt so positive +about the nature of wolves in North America, from +Mexico to the Arctic, that he thought I would be safe in +denying flatly in my book that any wolf-pack ever existed +on our continent. But, just to make sure that no different +opinion was held among people of authority corresponding +to his own, we formulated a letter which he addressed to +certain scientific students of wolves, and to all his wolf-killers.</p> + +<p>As to how many wolves had been seen together, the various +replies naturally gave different answers, for experiences +varied somewhat. But they ranged only from two to five. +They were unanimous in reporting that if several wolves +were seen together then these were always the mother with +her puppies, or conceivably the father and mother with their +puppies, and never a pack in the usual sense of that word.</p> + +<p>Then what about the story of the wolves that killed the +elderly trapper and the two Indians on the front page of the +<i>Times</i>? Surely that was no family of puppies—sixteen dead +wolves, killed by the Indians; a few, presumably, killed by +the old trapper, and enough left over to eat up one white +man, two Indians and part of sixteen dead wolves. To make +the inquiry into the truth of the story official and more<span class="pagenum" id="Page_145">[Pg 145]</span> +authoritative than if I were doing it myself, I suggested to +Dr. Nelson that he write to Ignace, Ontario. For checking +up, I wrote also to Mr. J. B. Harkin, Commissioner of National +Parks, Ottawa, who was at that time (1922) in charge +of the administration of the game laws of Canada, and therefore +in a position to set in motion official machinery to find +out about this wolf story. Thus I received the same replies +from two directions, one through Dr. Nelson and the other +through Mr. Harkin. They were, in substance, that no such +man as the old trapper ever existed and that no white man +had been killed by wolves. No such Indians as described +existed there and none had been killed by wolves, whether +in packs or otherwise, either in the vicinity of Ignace, or +anywhere in the world, as far as anyone living in the vicinity +of Ignace knew.</p> + +<p>Hundreds of other tales about wolf-packs, published in +newspapers or books, have been traced by the United States +Biological Survey and by various students, including myself. +In no case was evidence found to support them. Just try it +yourself on the next American despatch you read. In spite +of all the pretended details—the sorrowing family, the Masonic +funeral—it will be reasonable odds to bet dollars to +doughnuts that the story will turn out pure fiction, or at best +will rest on testimony no court of law would accept as proof.</p> + +<p>The case seems to be definitely settled against the wolf-pack +in North America. But there still remains Russia. Well, +why not let Russia remain? No one seems to have checked +wolf-pack stories in Russia for everyone is so sure they are +true. And perhaps they are. Besides, it is a distant country, +and the fancy must somewhere have play.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_146">[Pg 146]</span></p> + +<p>The book on wolves which the July, 1927, <i>Mercury</i> said I +was writing is still being written (1936), or, rather, the evidence +for it is still being gathered. We use here from that +accumulation sample case histories which give the trend of +the material.</p> + +<p>Under a date line of Winnipeg, April 16, 1922, many or +most Canadian newspapers printed a story which I read in +the Ottawa <i>Morning Journal</i> about the body of a trapper, +Ben Cockrane, having been found torn to pieces north of +Fisher River on Lake Winnipeg the previous Thursday. “He +had been attacked by a pack of timber wolves. His bones and +pieces of his clothing and a rifle with a broken stock were +found nearby. Before being killed, Cockrane shot seven +wolves dead and clubbed four to death, their bodies lying +around his tattered remains being the only evidence of his +fight for life.”</p> + +<p>That story had a personal interest. For I was born on Lake +Winnipeg and might, therefore, seem to have had as a child +a narrow escape from the ancestors of the pack which destroyed +Cockrane—we were there in the pioneer days back +in the late 70’s, long before railways, when there was only +an odd cabin along the shores of the lake and when presumably +the wolves were even more numerous than now, +and more predatory. Investigation would be simple, too, for +I could write to some of our old neighbors or their descendants.</p> + +<p>But the case was being handled so widely and with so +much respect by the press that a formal approach seemed +indicated, one above the suspicion of bias. Accordingly, two +lines of inquiry were started, both of them official. Nelson,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_147">[Pg 147]</span> +at my suggestion, inquired on behalf of the logical department +of the United States Government. In Canada, Harkin +was then in charge of wild-life investigation for his government +and could use the machinery of the Dominion Parks +Branch. When I placed the newspaper report in their hands +I received friendly assurance that the case would be followed +up both in their own interest and because of their previous +association with me in similar studies.</p> + +<p>Under date of May 22 Harkin wrote that an investigation +had been made and that “Mr. Cockrane has stated ‘that the +report of his death was grossly exaggerated.’” On May 31, +Nelson, after like findings, wrote:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“This amusing climax to the ferocious wolf tale is similar to +that of many other newspaper accounts of the killing of human +beings by wild animals, which the Biological Survey has run +down during the last thirty years or more. Such stories are almost +invariably pure fiction.”</p> +</div> + +<p>A third inquiry, made by a friend in the Hudson’s Bay +Company’s office at Winnipeg, brought a statement that +when their representative interviewed Mr. Cockrane he +seemed annoyed and replied, I gather somewhat petulantly, +that as long as he could remember there had seldom been +so few wolves around as this year.</p> + +<p>Sometimes when we trace the story of a pack devouring a +group of school children we find that it all started when a +small boy stepped on a dog’s tail and was bitten in the leg. +There does not appear to have been even that much local +base for the Cockrane fabrication.</p> + +<p>The Ignace, Ontario, story (given above in its <i>American</i><span class="pagenum" id="Page_148">[Pg 148]</span> +<i>Mercury</i> form) has in my files considerable documentation. +On January 2, 1923, I wrote Dr. Nelson in part:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“I wonder if you missed the interesting wolf story that appeared +in the New York <i>Times</i> for December 28th. In case you +did, I am enclosing a copy.</p> + +<p>“I am writing an article for publication in <i>Collier’s Weekly</i> +about fake wolf stories and especially about the great wolf-packs +that gallop through our books and newspapers. Just as this +article is being prepared for publication out comes another story. +I am so sure that this one also is a fake that I am not holding +up the publication of the article. However, I hope very much that +you will be able to put a tracer on it and find out whether there +is any truth behind this particular version.”</p> +</div> + +<p>Dr. Nelson replied January 4:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“... I saw the New York <i>Times</i> article copied in a local +paper and at once considered it one of the typical wolf articles +which appear in the press, particularly every winter.</p> + +<p>“In order, however, to get definite information on the subject, +I am writing to the postmaster of Port Arthur, Ontario, and also +at San Ignace, sending them copies of the article and asking them +what basis there is for a statement of this kind. I will let you +know the results when they are received....”</p> +</div> + +<p>I had written similarly to A. Brabant, Fur Trade Commissioner, +Hudson’s Bay Company, Winnipeg, and to Harkin. +Brabant, who later investigated for me more fully, gave +preliminary reply January 6:</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_149">[Pg 149]</span></p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“I believe that the wolf story which was enclosed with your +letter of the 2nd inst., is merely romance....</p> + +<p>“As you are well aware, there are few, if any, cases of wolves +attacking people....”</p> +</div> + +<p>G. D. Russell, Postmaster of Port Arthur, Ontario, wrote +Dr. Nelson January 17, 1923, in part:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“There have been similar stories circulated during the past +years, but all have been found to be untrue, and while wolves are +a serious scourge to wild animal life in the bush, and a source +of annoyance to settlers in the back country, in so far as they +are not averse to raiding their domestic fowl, yet the genuine +evidence of men being killed by them has yet to be established.</p> + +<p>“This recent story originated at Ignace, 200 miles west of Port +Arthur. My personal opinion (and the consensus of opinion) is, +that there is not the slightest foundation of truth in it.”</p> +</div> + +<p>The Postmaster of Ignace, John Davies, wrote Dr. Nelson +January 18, 1923:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“Your letter to hand, RE: the killing of three men by wolves +north of Ignace. We in Ignace know nothing about this affair +excepting what we read in the papers. I don’t think there is a +word of truth in it. There are a lot of wolves which are doing +a lot of damage among the wild game but so far as tackling +human beings, I have never had any proof yet.”</p> +</div> + +<p>The press discussion of the Ignace story was voluminous +throughout Canada, particularly in Ontario. On January 18, +1923, Harkin sent me a quotation from “one of our local +papers, under date the 17th instant”:</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_150">[Pg 150]</span></p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“... The scene of the tragedy was laid on a trail seventy +miles north of Ignace. The names of the victims of the wolves +were not given. Several old timers in Northern Ontario have +ridiculed the story and have claimed that wolves are not man-killers. +A Toronto man ... wrote to W. T. Thompson, dealer +in furs at Ignace, asking as to the facts of the story.</p> + +<p>“Mr. Thompson is quoted as replying: ... ‘Wolves are very +numerous around here, but I have lived in this country for +twenty-five years and have yet to hear of anyone being killed +by wolves. During the past ten years, or over, I have been buying +raw furs from trappers and Indians and have never heard any +such tales that turn out true.’”</p> +</div> + +<p>Reverberations of the Ignace yarn continued to reach me +for several months. For instance, there came in a letter from +an old friend, Inspector G. L. Jennings, of the Royal Northwest +Mounted Police (now styled Royal Canadian Mounted +Police), dated April 20, 1923. We shall use the main part of +it in another connection but print here extracts from a cutting +he sent taken from the Edmonton <i>Journal</i> of February +10:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“Recently I read a letter concerning the habits of wolves. I +had also read some time ago of a tragedy in the woods of our +north country in which several men were pulled down and +devoured by these animals,” says Dr. J. S. McCullough, writing +in the Toronto <i>Globe</i>.</p> + +<p>“In the gold rush of 1897 or 1898, when so many men made +an attempt to get into the Klondike country via Edmonton, +Athabasca Landing, Great Slave Lake and the Mackenzie River, +I was one of a party which attempted a traverse from the +Mackenzie River to Fort Norman to the Stewart or McMillan<span class="pagenum" id="Page_151">[Pg 151]</span> +River over the divide. I was obliged to come back on account of +sickness when we had got out about 60 miles on the trail. After +dividing the supplies with my partner I made the trip back +alone and as it was necessary that the onward-going party should +have two tents I did not even have a tent to cover me on the +return trip, but built little shelters of spruce, rolled in my sleeping +bag with only boughs with a fire at my feet, and this slight +windbreak to protect me from the winds and the wolves. Wolves +there seemed to be in plenty, judging from the terrifying howls +at night, but they were seldom seen. In my weakened condition +from dysentery I made very slow time on my return trip to the +banks of the river, six miles below Fort Norman, where there +were several unoccupied, roughly-built log shacks. With 75 to +100 pounds on my sled I would drag along five or six miles, construct +a stage and place my pack in safety, returning over the +ground until I had all my stuff moved up. At this time of year +and in this latitude I saw little of the sun, and frequently I made +my move at night if the light was good and not much wind.</p> + +<p>“I found the wolves very curious, following along on my snowshoe +track, crossing and recrossing it, appearing at one side and +ahead and then on the other side ahead or behind, always, however, +in silence. I had been given to understand by Billy Paton, +then of the Hyslop and Neaggel Trading Company, that the +wolves never attacked a man, and so I traveled all alone, and +very seldom with a weapon of any kind other than a light camp +axe, and, although I was very lonesome and very weak and very +down-hearted, I really never had any fear of the wolves. There +was one that I became pretty well acquainted with, a very large +and almost black fellow, who was afterward accidentally caught +in a bear trap which had been set by an inexperienced miner by +the name of Low Day. The trap was lost beneath the snow, and +although Day knew about where it was, we were all afraid to<span class="pagenum" id="Page_152">[Pg 152]</span> +hunt for it for fear of getting into it ourselves. The large, almost +black, wolf that followed my trail like a ghost in some mysterious +way sat down on his haunches right in the jaws of this +trap, where we found him dead and frozen stiff.</p> + +<p>“I think that those of us who put in the balance of the winter +on the bank of the Mackenzie were all more relieved that the +trap was thus discovered than at catching the wolf. What I have +said here makes a very negative sort of wolf story, but the fact +that I was out night after night alone and that every time I went +back over my trail I saw fresh wolf tracks, and that through the +long Arctic nights one could almost always hear the howl or bark +of the wolf probably chasing hares, for the big game was driven +away by the 40-odd men who had gone over the country, leaving +hungry wolves and little else but hares and ptarmagan, would +seem to prove that if ever the wolf would attack a human being +the conditions were right for them to do so as I plodded my +slow course back alone over this trail.</p> + +<p>“... Personally I do not believe that the wolves of Canada ever +attack a living human being. They would in time probably become +bold enough to pick the bones of anyone dying or being +frozen to death in the bush country. I have talked of wolves to +many bushmen and never yet have I come across anyone who +had bush experience but had an absolute contempt for the wolf +so far as being attacked by him or them went....</p> + +<p>“I can quite believe that a person who had been fed-up on wolf +stories might take to a tree in fear when the wolves kept appearing +and disappearing as they will do on the trail of a woodsman +as he marches along at dusk, but I believe that it is only +the wolf’s natural curiosity that leads to his follow-up tactics. +The black tail or mule deer will often do the same thing if you +pretend not to have seen him....”</p> +</div> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_153">[Pg 153]</span></p> + +<p>The Cockrane story, as said, never gave us investigators a +trace of foundation. One version of a basis for the Ignace +story was contained in a letter of January 12 from L. M. +Gleeson, of 416 Victoria Avenue, Fort William, Ontario, +who wrote me on the letterhead of the Fort William-Port +Arthur Rotary Club:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“Replying to your letter of January sixth, re wolf story from +Port Arthur. I would say that the story was just a rumor. It +originated, I believe, by a trainman running between here and +Ignace, Ont., and as the story was re-told it was enlarged upon. +I do know that the newspaper here tried for sometime to get +a confirmation of the story direct from Ignace, but they were +unable to do so. This story did not appear in our local paper +although it was telegraphed outside....”</p> +</div> + +<p>A theory of the Ignace yarn, published long after, makes +it a fable devised for the good of a community. On January +16, 1933, the Portland <i>Oregonian</i> printed a letter from Ada +Alice Tuttle, summarizing investigations which she had +made or was familiar with, the occasion being that the “Ten +Years Ago” column had revived the story:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“The occurrence was investigated by several persons, Dr. +(William T.) Hornaday among them. The explanation reveals +the resourceful boss of a lumber camp, solving an acute liquor +problem. It seems that a number of his men were in the habit of +going to the nearest settlement to get drunk. So, remembering +the effect produced on the youthful mind by the adventures of +‘Little Red Riding Hood,’ he also invented a fairy tale, suiting +it to his audience by introducing plenty of action and lots of gore.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_154">[Pg 154]</span> ... They +swallowed the yarn, hook, line and sinker, and after +that stayed where they belonged, with the most admirable +docility.”</p> +</div> + +<p>As Dr. Nelson pointed out, the newspapers run dispatches +on wolf-packs chiefly in winter. This, according to the +stories themselves, is determined by laws of Nature. The +rigors of the weather have banished or destroyed the wild +animals on which the wolves customarily prey; besides, there +is no doubt an increased metabolic rate, wolves, like people, +needing some of the caloric energy from the food they eat +for keeping themselves warm. In desperation the beasts +gather in larger and larger packs and finally in extreme +cases attack houses or even villages—the latter chiefly in +some distant foreign country. In America they seem to confine +themselves to attacks on people that are out in the +woods. Usually we have to depend on word pictures by the +survivors for information regarding these encounters, but +on December 9, 1923, the New York <i>Times</i> was able to +publish in its rotogravure section two photographs from +Sudbury, Ontario, giving the supporting testimony of a +camera. One of the pictures showed two men standing knee-deep +in snow as they defended themselves against a pack of +wolves. The caption was “A Tragedy Among the Snows of +the Far Northern Woods.” The summarized printed account +said that, ammunition gone, two huntsmen were set upon +by a pack of fifteen wolves. They fought them off, one +using for a club the barrel of his gun, the other an axe. +Before the battle came to a decision a third member of the +hunting party arrived and was able to turn the tide with +gunfire. The second picture has the description:</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_155">[Pg 155]</span></p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“The aftermath of a bloody battle in the wilds. Huntsmen +binding up their wounds after hand to hand battle with pack +of timber wolves from which they were saved by the timely +arrival of a third member of their party.”</p> +</div> + +<p>When I sent these pictures to Harkin for investigation, if +he thought well of it, and in any case for comment, he +replied that he was fed up with tracing stories of wolf-packs. +It seemed to him a study of the picture indicated that +the wolves in the picture had all been dead for some time. +Apparently they had been allowed to freeze stiff in various +attitudes and had then been propped up in the soft snow to +give the semblance of an attacking wolf-pack.</p> + +<p>Doubtless the three hunters were too excited during the +battle and forgot about taking pictures. So they had to re-enact +the adventure for the camera next day. The chief difficulty +about that explanation was that some of the “wolves” +looked a bit like dogs.</p> + +<p>Sure enough, time proved that the doggy look of the +wolves had its reason. On April 12, 1927, the Utica <i>Press</i> +carried a letter from B. H. Divine in which he said, in part:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“The New York <i>Times</i> published a picture a while ago of two +men with clubbed guns fighting for their lives against a pack +of wolves. Following this up I received word from the Royal +Canadian Mounted Police that the wolves in the picture were +dogs very cleverly posed, and the whole thing was a fake.”</p> +</div> + +<p>During the next years there were few American stories of +note although striking accounts of packs and their depredations +were printed from Europe—these we shall discuss farther<span class="pagenum" id="Page_156">[Pg 156]</span> +on. The American scene brightened with January, 1926, +when on the 17th the Chicago <i>Tribune</i> presented to its +readers the desperate situation then facing one of the territories +of the United States:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p class="c large sp">ALASKA TO WAR ON WOLF PACKS<br> +WITH AIR BOMBS</p> + +<hr class="r5"> + +<p class="c">Shrapnel from Planes May Save Game</p> + +<hr class="r5"> + +<p>Juneau, Alaska—(Special)—Dropping bombs from airplanes +upon packs of big timber wolves is a method for destroying these +game-killing brutes, now advanced and approved by Governor +George A. Parks. A trial of the idea is planned for next month, +generally known as the hunger-month of winter, when wild life +is at its lowest ebb and gnawing pangs grip wolves, lynx and +owls.</p> + +<p>According to reports received at the governor’s office, female +caribou, deer, and domesticated reindeers have been repeatedly +attacked this winter by large bands of timber wolves. The destruction +among the female caribou is appalling.</p> + +<p>The bull caribou in winter round-up together, peacefully content, +leaving the cows to protect themselves and yearling calves +as best they can. All are antlered, but they lack the weight of +caribou bulls, likewise the fighting strategy.</p> + +<p>Air mail men operating in the Alaskan service have filed many +reports of instances where packs of wolves, hearing and seeing +the planes in the sky, gathered forces and raced the aviators, +leaping and barking at the birdlike machines after the manner +of dogs barking at pigeons. To the aviator it seemed that a large +rock dropped into the packs would easily kill or maim many.</p> + +<p>The plan proposed is to drop bombs loaded with shrapnel and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_157">[Pg 157]</span> +dynamite into wolf-packs powerful enough to wreak terrific damage +even hundreds of feet away in all directions. Trappers and +hunters believe that the animals, seeing a bomb dropped, would +instantly run to examine it, thus bringing about their own destruction.</p> + +<p>Timber wolves weighing 250 pounds, seven to eight feet in +length, have been killed by trappers this winter near Fairbanks. +The same breed of animal infests the territory from Ketchikan, +far north in the tundra, where herds of reindeer forage. The native +herders report many encounters with prowling brutes eager +to pull down young reindeer.</p> + +<p>A powder manufacturing concern has offered bombs free for +the unique hunting expedition.</p> +</div> + +<p>The <i>Tribune</i> account thus pictures not only a situation +physically serious but paints a discouraging view of the +moral deterioration of the Alaska bull caribou which were +no longer willing to place at the service of the smaller and +weaker members of the herd their superior antlers, greater +weight and their fighting strategy.</p> + +<p>But it was encouraging to read that the very head of the +Alaska territorial administration, Governor George A. Parks, +was in charge of the relief operations. I happened to know +he was in Washington and wrote him there February 19. +His reply came dated February 23 from the office of the Secretary +of the Interior:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“Concerning the clipping from the Chicago <i>Tribune</i>, I am at +a loss to understand how it originated. I left Juneau, December +16, 1925, and have been in Washington since early in January. I +never have authorized any such statement. It may be a fact that<span class="pagenum" id="Page_158">[Pg 158]</span> +the bulls separate from the rest of the caribou herd during the +winter, but my personal observation has been to the contrary. +If any of the pilots in the Air Mail Service have filed reports as +alleged in the newspaper account, these reports never have come +to my attention. It would be most unusual to hear a wolf bark like +a dog. There may be wolves in Alaska that weigh 250 pounds, +but I do not know of any such records.<a id="FNanchor_13" href="#Footnote_13" class="fnanchor">[13]</a> I believe that it is conceded +generally that a wolf-pack usually includes only the members +of the family—father, mother, and pups—and they separate +about the beginning of the next mating season. I have no personal +knowledge of any large bands of wolves, nor have I been able +to find any authentic cases where bands of wolves have molested +reindeer or caribou herds. Many times during my winter trips +through Alaska, I have been told about the wolf-packs, but so +far as I know the stories never have been founded on fact.</p> + +<p class="r2">Geo. A. Parks</p> + +<p class="r">Governor of Alaska.”</p> +</div> + +<p>Logically the Bureau of Biological Survey was concerned +with the situation and its Chief, Nelson, wrote me February +24:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“The other day I had a conference with Governor Parks on +various matters relating to Alaska and he showed me the copy +of the Chicago <i>Tribune</i> clipping of January 17, a copy of which +you sent me, containing the weird tale of the plan to bomb +wolves by the use of airplanes. Governor Parks was inclined to +be somewhat exercised over the connection of his name with this +absurd statement....</p> + +<p>“Of course, the whole thing is an absurdity on the face of it ... there +is no such abundance of wolves in Alaska as indicated in<span class="pagenum" id="Page_159">[Pg 159]</span> +this article.... The claim that timber wolves weighing 250 +pounds have been killed near Fairbanks the present winter is +another evidence of the absolute unreliability of the article.”</p> +</div> + +<p>This is trying to be a chronological statement but we are +unable to resist the temptation to print from a Washington +despatch of the <i>Associated Press</i> as it appeared in the New +York <i>Times</i> of May 31, 1936:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“Plans for an airplane attack on savage packs of Alaskan +wolves were worked out today by three Federal agencies....</p> + +<p>“Last Winter, Governor John W. Troy cabled for help....”</p> +</div> + +<p>It may have seemed a bit far afield in 1926 to go all the +way to Alaska for stories of wolf-packs, so the <i>Associated +Press</i> in 1927, with a Chicago date line of January 24, had a +story which one paper used under “Hunters to Renew Search +for Wolves Near Chicago. First Venture Fails to Disclose +Marauding Pack Reported by Farmers.” However, there was +skepticism (that’s the difficulty of having the stories too near +home) and Leroy Davidson, former chief of the Cook +County Highway Police, was quoted:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“Wolves—bah! Last summer there was a camp of Campfire +Girls in the forest preserve. They had three dogs—the dogs were +a mixture of Airedale and police dog. When the girls broke camp +they left the dogs behind. I also had an Airedale. He ran away +and joined the other three. These four dogs are the ‘pack of +wolves’ that are causing all the commotion.”</p> +</div> + +<p>That pronouncement threatened at first to be a wet blanket. +However, there is in my files a press cutting dated<span class="pagenum" id="Page_160">[Pg 160]</span> +February 4 with the heading: “Fliers Hunt Wolves on Edge +of Chicago. Posse Has Had No Luck.” So the story did keep +going awhile.</p> + +<p>When it requires ten days on the edges of Chicago to +dispose of a wolf-pack, even with the assistance of the chief +of the Highway Police, no wonder stories from Alaska have +a considerable lease of life. Some of them promise to become, +and to remain, a part of the source material of Alaskan +natural history.</p> + +<p>The year 1927 proved rich in American wolf tales, making +up for the comparatively lean years since 1923. My favorite +of that season, and of many years, I was able to trace through +the help of my old friend Lee Smits, free lance writer and +also columnist for the Detroit <i>Times</i>. It is not a story of a +wolf-pack, but we digress a moment to place chronologically +a striking episode of a lone Michigan wolf. We quote the +St. Ignace <i>Enterprise</i> of February 3, 1927:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p class="c large sp">LARGE TIMBER WOLF</p> + +<hr class="r5"> + +<p class="c sp">Entered the Home of Robert Alexander<br> +and Attacked Woman and Children</p> + +<hr class="r5"> + +<p>Mrs. Robert Alexander and children were made the victims of +a savage attack by a large timber wolf in their home in Brevort +township last Wednesday. The animal, made desperate evidently +by hunger forced its way through the doorway of the kitchen +and made a rush at the children who were playing on the floor. +Mrs. Alexander got between the wolf and the children and called +to her husband to get a gun, and she also was leaped upon by +the animal and borne to the floor. Before it could do serious harm<span class="pagenum" id="Page_161">[Pg 161]</span> +Alexander appeared with a gun and first kicking the wolf from +the prostrate form of his wife fired as the wolf made its escape +through the doorway and slightly injuring it. It was making +towards the woods when Mrs. Lottie Page, a neighbor, hearing +the shot came out of her home with a loaded shotgun in her +hand and seeing the wolf made a lucky shot killing the animal.</p> + +<p>While wolves have been reported as being numerous in Brevort +and surrounding townships, and have done considerable damage, +this is the first instance that one has been known to have attacked +a human being. The Alexanders are of the opinion that the +attack was caused by starvation as the animal appeared to be +weak from exhaustion.</p> +</div> + +<p>On seeing this gem, I wrote Smits, who replied April 29:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“State Conservation Officer George Gish, Jr., who patrols the +area in which the ‘attack’ occurred, called at the Alexander home +and was shown the dead wolf. It was a small mongrel of the collie +type, with a bob tail, a white blaze, yellow in color, weighing +not more than 40 pounds. There is an epidemic of ‘running fits’ +or ‘fright-disease’ among dogs, and this dog may have rushed +into the cabin while delirious, or it may have merely been cold, +hungry and lonesome. It was a male dog. The rumor that the +animal was a timber wolf started when someone in the neighborhood +‘guessed maybe’ there was wolf blood in the dog. Not because +of its appearance, but because it came out of the woods and +acted strangely....</p> + +<p>“... The story is from a paper at the county seat. It was carried +extensively over the wires....”</p> +</div> + +<p>Although chiefly known to the literary world for his novel +<i>Spring Flight</i>, Smits is, among other things, one of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_162">[Pg 162]</span> +America’s connoisseurs of un-natural history. So he could +not resist going on:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“Not only can many bartenders and hotel clerks in the backwoods +give you good wolf yarns—attacks on mankind—but old +lumberjacks know, by direct hearsay, of some desperate encounters. +The editor of the daily paper at Sault Ste. Marie, Ont., ... has +for several years offered $100 for an authenticated report +of a wolf attacking a person in the Algoma district of Ontario. +No takers.</p> + +<p>“The state prison at Marquette, Mich., fronts on Lake Superior +and, although on the outskirts of a small city, is at the edge of +a strip of wild country extending into rather large areas of swamp +and timber and offering cover for a fugitive for hundreds of miles. +Very few escapes are attempted, and the fear of wild animals is +unquestionably a deterrent. One gang got loose and were rounded +up because they made straight for roads and kept on them. They +spent one night in the brush, with a few hares, porcupines and +owls about them, and perhaps a fox or coyote, and said when +they were caught that they all were sorry they ran away when +darkness closed in on them. They had a terrible night. All city +gunmen.”</p> +</div> + +<p>That there are at times very special motives behind wolf-pack +stories appears from a letter from B. H. Divine, published +in the Utica, New York, <i>Press</i> of April 12, 1927:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“To the Editor of <i>The Press</i>:</p> + +<p>The following wolf story recently appeared in <i>The Press</i>:</p> + +<p>‘Huntsville, Ont., March 31—While making his way to a lumber +camp near Algonquin Park, Elwood Bloss was pursued by a +pack of wolves. He fled onto the open ice, where the animals, 16 +of them, surrounded him. Their howling attracted the attention<span class="pagenum" id="Page_163">[Pg 163]</span> +of a game warden, who arrived before they closed on their intended +victim. He shot seven before the pack fled.’</p> +</div> + +<p>Upon writing to the authorities at Huntsville for the truth of +the matter, I received the following letter from T. Muyhum, +postmaster:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>‘This story was first published here early in January last, but +since that time it has been pretty thoroughly exploded.</p> + +<p>‘The young man (aged 22) started out to walk six or seven +miles to the railroad station early in the morning. The howling +of some wolves at a distance frightened him so badly that he +did not recover for some days. It was necessary to make some explanation +of his condition, and the truth sounded so inadequate +he built the story to suit his condition. It was soon into the papers, +and after being contradicted from the pack end he acknowledged +that much of it was not true.’”</p> +</div> + +<p>For some reason there did not come to my attention until +1931 a support of wolf-packs by book reviewers and press +commentators who relied on a volume published in 1929, +<i>The Last Stand of the Pack</i>, by Arthur H. Carhart and Stanley +P. Young. At last, said the reviewers, a distinguished +biologist and student of wild life has spoken out, resentful +about the sniping at wolf-packs by amateur naturalists.</p> + +<p>Young was chief biologist of the U. S. Biological Survey, +exclaimed the champions of the pack, in consonant triumph. +They were right, for I looked him up in <i>American Men of +Science</i> and found this substantial record:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“... U. S. Govt. hunter, bur. biol. surv., U. S. Dept. Agr., Ariz., +17-19, in charge ground squirrel control work, 19, coyote control<span class="pagenum" id="Page_164">[Pg 164]</span> +crew, southeast N. Mex., 20, asst. leader predatory animal control, +20-21, leader, Colo-Kans. dist., 21-27, asst. head div. econ. investigations, +Washington, D. C., 27-28, prin. biologist in charge div. +predatory animal and rodent control, 28-....”</p> +</div> + +<p>The reviewers did not notice, but I did, a sensational angle. +To have Young opposing Nelson was like Roosevelt falling +out with Smith—the chief of a division of the U. S. Biological +Survey opposing that retired chief of the Survey who +had brought him to Washington. It was a delicate situation +but I had to get Nelson’s view and wrote him discreetly +April 28, 1932. He replied May 14 from California:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“... It will surprise me very much if he has recorded a pack +of any considerable size beyond that which you and I believe to +be normal (mother with litter of pups). I will look up the matter +soon after I return and talk to him about it. Will then write +you....”</p> +</div> + +<p>An invalid, and busy though officially retired, Nelson did +not communicate until March 22, 1933. There was to be no +Smith-Roosevelt situation, it now appeared, for the retired +Chief said:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“Under date of March 14, 1933, Stanley P. Young of the Biological +Survey writes....</p> + +<p>“‘With regard to your question on wolves, I heartily agree +with you that the great packs of wolves such as have been often +described in books and newspapers exist only in the minds of +writers. In my experience the typical wolf-pack consists of the +two parents and their young of the year. One is apt to see this +so-called pack in the late fall and up until the early spring. Also<span class="pagenum" id="Page_165">[Pg 165]</span> +it is possible in the formation of this so-called pack for two +families of wolves to intermingle for a short time in the fall of +the year, particularly if one family group is in close proximity +to another, and a kill is in progress. My experience, even under +these conditions, however, is to the effect that wolves of several +families never unite in a long and friendly association....</p> + +<p>“‘It is therefore possible from the foregoing that newspaper +writers and authors have in mind the family groups of wolves +rather than the packs of adults. However, these writers usually +give the impression that these packs are made up of adult wolves. +The greatest number of wolves in one litter that I have ever seen +totalled eight. This pack was made up of the eight young, which +were apparently whelped in early March, and the old female and +old male.’”</p> +</div> + +<p>Nelson felt Young was a bit too generous “in explaining +what the writers have in mind in their tales of big packs. +Really they are drawing from an inexhaustible store of +ignorance on the subject. Probably less than 1 per cent of +them ever saw a wolf in the wilds.”</p> + +<p>The year 1933 closed on a note ominous for New York +State. For the <i>Herald-Tribune</i> of December 30 reported:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“Lithgow Osborne, State Commissioner of Conservation, has +assigned Ray Burmaster, game protector of the Saranac Lake +district, to exterminate the wolves which have been seen in the +northern counties in recent weeks. Ten dozen snares and traps +have been set in the wolf-infested areas and seventy-five skilled +hunters and trappers will be employed. Wolves recently attacked +two farm hands near Fort Covington, in Franklin County.... +The pack now at large numbers from twelve to fifty.”</p> +</div> + +<p>The New York <i>Times</i>, evidently not jealous, supported<span class="pagenum" id="Page_166">[Pg 166]</span> +its rival the <i>Herald-Tribune</i> by saying in an editorial of +January 5 that: “... one pack hunting in Franklin County +at this time is estimated at from twelve to fifty in number....” +They added that: “An application has been made +to the Biological Survey at Washington for the services of +an expert wolf trapper to rid New York of the unwelcome +visitors.”</p> + +<p>I wrote the Conservation Department of New York at +Albany January 5, and Lithgow Osborne, Commissioner, +replied January 12:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“... we do not have any definite information to indicate that +the wolves which have recently appeared in the vicinity of Owls +Head in the Adirondacks are running in packs. We are sending +one of our field investigators, Mr. Darrow, into the region which +the wolves apparently inhabit, in an effort to determine just what +the situation is. I shall be pleased to request a report from him as +to whether or not the wolves are actually hunting in packs, and +to see that the information is forwarded to you sometime early +in the spring.”</p> +</div> + +<p>The Commissioner’s follow-up slipped and I did not remind +him for two years. On July 13, 1936, came a letter from +John T. Gibbs, Deputy Commissioner. He mentions several +reports on the Adirondack wolves “all of which resulted in +our deciding that there were no packs of timber wolves in +the Adirondacks.”</p> + +<p>One of the reports was from E. A. Goldman of the U. S. +Biological Survey. He had been in the region of the packs +and “we crossed a fresh track of one of these canine beasts +in a remote section of the forest. Owing to the softness and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_167">[Pg 167]</span> +depth of snow it had been making slow progress. The track, +about one day old, appeared like that of a rather small dog.”</p> + +<p>Two animals from the supposed wolf-pack had been captured, +but “general appearances indicated, however, that +both are dogs.”</p> + +<p>The skin and skull from another animal killed was sent +to the American Museum of Natural History of New York. +On February 15, 1934, H. E. Anthony, curator, reported that +in his judgment the relics were those of a dog.</p> + +<p>By 1935 the news magazine <i>Time</i> had already secured a +wide public for its news radio broadcast. They had enough +nobility or were secure enough to print in their “Letters” +of January 21, 1935, an indignant protest from Manitoba +against what the correspondent felt was their nature-faking. +Axel Nielsen wrote them from Cranberry Portage, Manitoba:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“Your radio representation of the wolf story (Dec. 21, 1934), +was most unconvincing. Don’t let yourself be taken in by such +stories....</p> + +<p>“For 15 years I have traded and prospected in the North, over +a vast territory, a belt 1,200 miles long by 500 wide, the top of +all the prairie Provinces and beyond. I have met wolves, traveled +with them, trailed them. They have trailed me too; they’re a +curious lot. But my own sleigh dogs were ten times more dangerous.... +Your terrified passengers were probably stretching +the imagination valiantly, thanks to the nursery version of wolves +in general.... In all my experience, all my questioning of +Indians, whose language I speak fluently, I have never yet discovered +a single wolf half as dangerous as the ordinary pasture +bull, an irritable sow, or a gander.”</p> +</div> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_168">[Pg 168]</span></p> + + +<p class="c less pad">THE WOLF PACK IN THE OLD WORLD</p> + +<p>The <i>American Mercury</i>, July, 1927, statement on the wolf-pack +closed:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“The case seems to be definitely settled against the wolf-pack +in North America. But there still remains Russia. Well, why not +let Russia remain? No one seems to have checked wolf-pack +stories in Russia for everyone is so sure they are true. And perhaps +they are. Besides, it is a distant country, and the fancy must +somewhere have play.”</p> +</div> + +<p>For many years I sought and found reliable information +on conditions in what is now the U.S.S.R. from a learned +and far-traveled officer of the Russian Navy, Commander +N. A. Transehe, who was doing scientific work in New +York. One of our conversations dealt with packs of wolves.</p> + +<p>Transehe had journeyed through recognized wolf districts +of Russia and Siberia so extensively that few could have had +more experience. He never saw more than single wolves or +a pair (doubtless male and female), except when it seemed +clear that the group was one or both parents with a litter. +I suggested that doubtless the wolf-pack, then, existed in +Russia only as folklore, but this he considered did not follow +at all. “I have lived in New York several years,” he said. +“I have never been to Wall Street but I know there is a +Wall Street. I have lived in the United States without seeing +the Rocky Mountains but I know there are Rocky Mountains. +It is that way with packs of wolves in Russia. They +are of common knowledge.”</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_169">[Pg 169]</span></p> + +<p>This was the considered view of a Russian whose judgment +I had often found good. Also there were two of the +foremost authorities on wild animals in the United States, +who had expressed to me the feeling that Eurasian wolves +might be quite different from ours and that we had better +not get too dogmatic about their not running in packs or in +general about their being just behavior replicas of American +wolves. These authorities were the above-cited Nelson, in +several letters and conversations, and C. Hart Merriam in a +letter of December 9, 1924.</p> + +<p>In 1926, with the hilarious Lake Winnipeg (Ben Cockrane) +and Ignace yarns fresh in mind, I found myself an +after-dinner speaker at a New York banquet of the Western +Universities Club where Kent Cooper, then recently elected +General Manager of the <i>Associated Press</i>, presided. The opportunity +was too good, and I dealt with press faking, spinning +yarn after yarn and alleging, in some cases not correctly, +that these had been carried by the <i>Associated Press</i>.</p> + +<p>On July 8, 1926, I received a letter from Jackson S. Elliott, +Assistant General Manager, saying that the <i>Associated Press</i> +was making “use of the information you gave to us about +the wolves not running in packs in order to have our own +service as near accurate as possible.”</p> + +<p>Three things seemed to me: that the <i>AP</i> carried fewer +American wolf stories during the next several years, that +most American wolf stories in the press during that time +were not of <i>AP</i> origin, but that stories of wolf-packs from +abroad failed to decrease in number.</p> + +<p>Magazines were active in European tales. Through an +article, “Russia of the Hour,” by Junius B. Wood, the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_170">[Pg 170]</span> +<i>National Geographic Magazine</i>, for November, 1926, p. 521, +said:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“It is only a step from Moscow ... into the wide open spaces. +Wolves and bears still roam in the Moscow district, and when +the dull winter dusk comes at 2 o’clock in the afternoon and +the country is under its white mantle of snow, hunger drives +them to prey on mankind.</p> + +<p>“They boldly attack villages and, this year, even assailed a +railroad train of cattle. No peasant ventures alone far outside +his village, and one group of 20 men, fancying safety in numbers, +was attacked by a wolf-pack. Several were killed and all seriously +torn before the pack was driven off.”</p> +</div> + +<p>The author proved to be a correspondent of the Chicago +<i>Daily News</i>, with broad experience of travel, including Russia. +I wrote him July 14, 1927, with interest in his picture of +Russia under the Soviets, asking several questions, mainly +ones that would enable me to check on the reports further:</p> + +<p>On what railroad and near or between what towns was +the cattle train attacked, whence did the information come, +when did the attack take place? Could the author furnish +corresponding information regarding the twenty men attacked? +What further information could he give regarding +wolves in Russia, as to their traveling or working in packs? +What sources for still more knowledge could he suggest?</p> + +<p>Wood wrote from Paris, France, August 31:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“Your letter of July 14, in which a certain unidentified group +designated as ‘we’ requests further information concerning my +reference to Russian wolves in an article in the <i>National Geographic +Magazine</i> has been forwarded to me here. From time to<span class="pagenum" id="Page_171">[Pg 171]</span> +time this coming winter when I return to the U.S.S.R. I will +be pleased to send you what information I receive on this subject +as wolves are as active a source of news in that country as bootleggers +are in the U. S. A.</p> + +<p>“This information was taken from Soviet newspapers. The +attack on the cattle train standing on a siding was later corroborated +from other sources. The attack on the villagers went into +details to the extent of giving the names of those killed. Both +occurred in the winter of 1926-7. As I do not have my papers +here and do not remember the names of villages, railroad, casualties +and other details requested in questions 1, 2 and 3, I must +postpone answering further until I return to Moscow and have +opportunity to look them up.</p> + +<p>“Your statement ‘You know, of course, that of all wolf-pack +stories published by the American newspapers, more than 75 +per cent are without any foundation whatever, and that most of +the rest are based on some misapprehension’ indicates a clairvoyance +worthy of your fellow explorer ‘Doc’ Cook. It is the +first suggestion which has come to me that I ‘know’, or even +admit such a theory. It is far from proven.... (I) have serious +doubts of your impartiality on the gregariousness of wolves. +Though entirely personal, my humble opinion would accept the +version of unscientific but not blind natives, including rural correspondents, +who are living with wolves in preference to scientists’ +dogmas which appeal to publishers and lyceum managers....”</p> +</div> + +<p>The letter then goes on to valuable and no doubt accurately +quoted statements by Russians on wolves, ending +with: “Packs are reported as varying from 5 to more than +100 which, while leaving the figures open to doubt, cannot +be entirely an optical illusion.”</p> + +<p>The promised letter of information from Moscow did not<span class="pagenum" id="Page_172">[Pg 172]</span> +come, but I secured Moscow and general U.S.S.R. information +from other sources. Waldemar Jochelson, distinguished +Russian traveler and anthropologist, was then in New York +and wrote me twice concerning the Wood article, July 27 +and August 11, 1927. The letters do not say it outright, but +there is to be inferred from them a view that wolf-packs do +exist, or at least may exist. In this Jochelson resembles most +Russians whom I know. But, again like most, he holds this +belief, or this willingness to believe, in spite of, rather than +because of, his own experience. He says in the August 11 +letter:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“As to my own observations in Siberia before the railroad was +built and in places far away from the railroad after its construction +I may say that I never saw a single wolf in my numerous +voyages except puppies taken from wolf’s den.</p> + +<p>“I was told by my reindeer drivers of instances when single +wolves attacking herds of reindeer seized calves in spite of the +presence of the herdsmen. I remember one case when a reindeer +of my team came running and fell exhausted at the entrance of +my tent and the team driver told me that the reindeer was pursued +by a wolf.</p> + +<p>“Siberian hunters told me the following on the habits of the +Siberian wolf. He does not like the woods, preferring the tundra +and other open places, where he can see and smell his prey from +a distance. Grown up wolves do not like company. Wolves have +separate dens and she-wolves abandon their puppies when they +become able to hunt for themselves.”</p> +</div> + +<p>The outstanding foreign wolf tale of 1927, not so much in +itself as in what it led to, was printed as an <i>Associated Press</i> +release by the New York <i>Times</i>, February 9:</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_173">[Pg 173]</span></p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p class="c less">CAUCASUS WOLVES BOMBED FROM AIRPLANE;</p> + +<p class="c less">HUNGRY PACKS INVADE TOWNS, KILLING PEASANTS</p> + +<p>GENEVA, Feb. 8 (AP).—Wolves in the Caucasus have become +so numerous that the military authorities there sent an airplane +to the infested districts, where poison gas bombs were dropped +on packs, killing 200 of the invaders, say reports received by the +League of Nations.</p> + +<p>Wolves are becoming a menace to the lives of peasants in remote +regions of Russia, Poland and some other countries of East +Central Europe, the reports say. Ferocious from hunger, these +beasts, which have multiplied surprisingly, are reported as frequently +making attacks on villages, and in some cases have killed +and devoured helpless peasants.</p> + +<p>Austria reports that one farmer kept twelve wolves at bay with +an axe, wounding them all with powerful swinging blows, and +that he was finally rescued by villagers, who saved his life by +quick bandaging of bleeding arms and legs.</p> + +<p>In the district of Vilna, Poland, packs of wolves, maddened +by cold and hunger, descended on the town of Ostrovsk and +boldly attacked the inhabitants, who, during several hours, were +obliged to put up an organized defense with rifle and shotgun +before the savage enemy retired. Poland is reported to have +mobilized several regiments to carry on an offensive against +wolves.</p> + +<p>From Russia come even more terrifying stories. In the rural +region wolves by hundreds attack villages and even boldly enter +the smaller cities in broad daylight. At Verchofourye five peasants +were slain by the beasts before the packs were driven off.</p> + +<p>At Orenburg three packs entered the town from different +points, throwing the population into a panic and forcing all to +barricade themselves in their houses, from which they launched<span class="pagenum" id="Page_174">[Pg 174]</span> +a steady fire, finally killing all the wolves, which tenaciously +refused to abandon their attack.</p> +</div> + +<p>Perhaps through too much Edgar Wallace and E. Phillips +Oppenheim I got on this story a slant which appears from +a letter written by N. M. Stiles, Foreign News Editor of the +<i>Associated Press</i>, to their Geneva correspondent, Joseph E. +Sharkey, on February 24:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“Please recall your Wolf story which you sent us by mail. We +used it on February 8, but before it got to the wires we sent out +a note to editors suggesting its elimination for two reasons, the +first being that the incidents described were so extraordinary, +the second being that the statement that wolves travel in packs +has been disputed. However, although the story did not get on +the wires, two of the New York papers nevertheless printed it—the +New York <i>Times</i> putting it in a box on the front page.</p> + +<p>“Now comes a letter from Vilhjalmur Stefansson, in which he +asks the following somewhat startling and curious question:</p> + +<p>‘Do you suppose the wolf dispatch you carried about two +weeks ago from Geneva could possibly have been some sort +of a cipher message on behalf of almost any sort of secret +organization? If so, you are the people to do detective work +on its origin. I am putting out two or three lines to trace it +from the pseudo-natural history point of view.’</p> + +<p>“As you recall we cabled you for confirmation of the story, +and you replied that the reports were received unofficially leanations +(League of Nations) circles also printed widely Swiss +newspapers.’ Now when you come to read this story with the +thought in mind that the word ‘wolves’ might be a code word +to identify some sort of an organization, as for instance an +anti-Bolsheviki outfit, the dispatch does read most interestingly.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_175">[Pg 175]</span> +One can imagine that the organization was putting these messages +over on the Swiss newspapers.”</p> +</div> + +<p>Meantime I tried to find out directly how the League was +connected and wrote to the League of Nations Non-Partisan +Association of New York City. Their librarian, A. G. F. +Aylmer, replied February 24 that they could not understand +how the wolf stories should interest the League, and while, +like me, they had seen the press despatch, they had no direct +information of any similar kind from Geneva. Their office +would let me know if they found later that there had been +some League connection.</p> + +<p>The Stiles letter brought a reply from Sharkey, dated +March 12. It puts the case reasonably and shows, particularly +in the last of our quoted paragraphs, how normal it is in +Europe to read, pass on, and believe wolf-pack stories.</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“Answering your letter of February 24 concerning the wolf +mail story let me say that this was founded on stories and despatches +appearing in Swiss newspapers and on confirmatory talks +with secretaries of the League of Nations....</p> + +<p>“The League interest in the wolf reports is chiefly economic. +The reason was explained to me at the time by ... member of +the League information section....</p> + +<p>“He told me about recent cases of wolf-packs attacking peasants +in the outlying districts. I have never before heard disputed +the statement that Russian wolves ‘carry on’ in packs. When I +was in Siberia in the winter of 1918-19 a detachment of the +British Hampshire regiment which ‘en-sleighed’ from Omsk to +Ekaterinburg was attacked by a pack of wolves. The soldiers +killed most of them. Participants told me the story personally<span class="pagenum" id="Page_176">[Pg 176]</span> +and I wrote it at the time. The whole history of Russia shows +that wolves, desperate with hunger, will attack in packs. The +word pack means what it says.</p> + +<p>“Since mailing you my story there has appeared a despatch +from Constantinople declaring that wolves had attacked people +in the outskirts. There is a general idea that the lack of arms in +Russia (the Soviet government not favoring extensive arsenals +in the outlying districts) has led to a big increase in wolves +while the present severe winter has brought the beasts out into +the open to secure food. I am sorry I have thrown away all my +clippings. Certainly Mr. Stefansson’s theory is startling and interesting +and I shall follow any new wolf despatch from a new +angle, letting you know, of course, the result.</p> + +<p>“The wolf narratives have created no stir in Europe whatsoever +because they are regarded as entirely probable, given the +circumstances outlined above.”</p> +</div> + +<p>In due course a letter came from the Information Department +of the League of Nations, dated Geneva, March 14, and +signed by Arthur Sweetser. This letter vouches for the +generally high character of the American press representatives +at Geneva, the particularly high character of Joseph E. +Sharkey, and the authenticity of the news conveyed by +Sharkey so far as concerns its having been received by the +League of Nations organization and passed on by them. +The general tenor of Mr. Sweetser’s long and careful statement +is that, without being exactly able to prove the truth +of the stories, he really knows them to be correct, and that +therefore the League is neither a victim of propaganda nor +indulging in any when it passes on information of this kind. +One section of his letter reads:</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_177">[Pg 177]</span></p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“... it is a fact that one of our officials has seen 6, 8, or 10 +(he does not remember the exact number) despatches from +Eastern European countries regarding the increasing depredations +and boldness of wolves.... The official in question is a native +of that part of Europe and his information, and the experience +of his friends as to the habits of wolves, differs from that of Mr. +Stefansson.”</p> +</div> + +<p>On June 1, Sharkey wrote me from Geneva:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“... there may be an inherent difference in the wolves found +in North America and those found in Russia, including, of +course, Siberia. I personally spent three months in Siberia during +the winter of 1918-1919, and persons who had long lived there +frequently spoke to me about the depredations of wolves which +seemed to run in packs....</p> + +<p>“... I want to bring to your attention the testimony of a +young Frenchman who with others was conducting an aeroplane +trip over Ukraine during the latter part of the war.... He +said: ‘I think I can throw some light on that question, for when +I and my colleagues were flying over Southern Ukraine we +distinctly saw a pack of wolves marching slowly and somewhat +solemnly through an opening in the woods. The band seemed +to have a distinct formation with one wolf striding some feet +ahead of the main pack as if he were their leader. Stragglers +were seen in the rear, but the whole band seemed to have a +distinct and almost military formation under a distinct leader.’</p> + +<p>“I have talked again with the Polish friend whose father did +a good deal of hunting of wolves, and he repeated that there is +no doubt but that in Poland, where the wolves run over from +Russia, the animals operate in packs or groups.”</p> +</div> + +<p>The <i>Associated Press</i> received as late as March 23 pack<span class="pagenum" id="Page_178">[Pg 178]</span> +despatches from Geneva, “where interest in news of wolf +activity is chiefly economic.” One of the despatches closed +with these three paragraphs:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“There is a general belief here that the lack of arms in the +Russian country districts has led to a big increase in the number +of wolves, while the severe winter has brought the beasts into +the open to secure food.</p> + +<p>“Despite the assertions of many naturalists that wolves do not +hunt in packs those who have personal knowledge of wolf hunting, +particularly in Poland, assert that wolves, desperate with +hunger, will attack in packs.</p> + +<p>“In the winter of 1918-19 a detachment of the British Hampshire +regiment in Siberia which went by sleigh from Omsk to +Ekaterinburg reported an attack by a pack of wolves. The soldiers +killed most of the animals by rifle fire.”</p> +</div> + +<p>These despatches, though I saw them through the kindness +of the <i>Associated Press</i>, were not sent out to the newspapers—for +the reasons given in the already-quoted letter +from their Foreign News Editor. On June 22, Stiles wrote +further:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“I have just read your article on wolves in the <i>American +Mercury</i>, and am reminded that I intended to send you a mail +story on the subject that we received some time ago from our +then correspondent in Moscow, Mr. James A. Mills. We did not +make use of it, as it was for the most part a denial of the wolf +story that came from Geneva to which you called our attention +and which we had already endeavored to ‘kill.’”</p> +</div> + +<p>The Mills contribution is valuable as a statement of the +time from Moscow and is, of course, wholly authentic to the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_179">[Pg 179]</span> +extent that it is a report of what was believed there then +about wolves. We accordingly use more than three-quarters +of it:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“Moscow, March 17.—Soviet Government officials were +amazed at reports reaching the League of Nations recently that +Russia was overrun with wolves to such an extent that in the +Caucasus region the military authorities had to dispatch airplanes +with poison-gas bombs to kill the invaders. The wolves had become +so numerous and ferocious, the League reports said, that +they devoured human beings and terrified whole cities and +towns.</p> + +<p>“‘A wolf story is always as good as a fish story,’ said a prominent +Soviet official to the correspondent. ‘The more it is exaggerated, +the better it sounds. But such stories ought to be left +to those whom the late President Roosevelt called “Nature +fakers.” It is in poor taste for a dignified, serious organization +like the League of Nations to issue them. The story about an +airplane being sent in pursuit of packs of these wolves is pure +fiction. Russia has its share of wolves, but they are no more +numerous nor savage than those of any other country.’</p> + +<p>“That Russian wolves are no more abundant or ferocious than +their brother-wolves in other countries, is however, not strictly +accurate; for statistics show that not only are wolves on the +increase in Russia, but their depredations are much more extensive +and costly than formerly. The animals are also considerably +larger, stronger and fiercer than the average wolf. The increase +in their number is attributed to the peasants’ lack of +rifles and shot with which to hunt them. It is only within the +last year that the Government, yielding to complaints of the +peasants that wolves were menacing their sheep and cattle, organized +special detachments of professional hunters to exterminate<span class="pagenum" id="Page_180">[Pg 180]</span> +the wolves, giving a premium for each animal killed.<a id="FNanchor_14" href="#Footnote_14" class="fnanchor">[14]</a></p> + +<p>“The loss in sheep, cattle and horses caused by wolves during +the last year is estimated at $6,500,000. A full-grown Russian +wolf can easily kill a horse, cow, or even a bull. But he rarely, +according to Russian authorities on natural history, shows sufficient +courage to attack a man. Indeed, the wolf usually runs in +terror at the sight of a human being. Even when travelling in +large packs, these Russian experts say, wolves avoid meeting a +man in daylight; they become dangerous only at night, when +they may collectively attack a person along a lonely, dark road +in the country.</p> + +<p>“Throughout the day they usually sleep, wandering and hunting +in search of prey only in the dark. At such times, say the +Russian authorities, the most formidable weapon against the +animals is not a loaded gun, but a simple flare of artificial light, +like a burning match, a bonfire or an illuminated candle, wolves +having mortal fear of anything resembling fire.</p> + +<p>“Wolves always live in families—the father, mother, two +young wolves born the previous year and two baby wolves born +in February or March. Throughout the Summer and Autumn +they never leave the neighborhood where their young were born. +It is only during the mating season in December and January +that the male wolves, seeking their female kin, form packs and +roam for scores of miles at night.”</p> +</div> + +<p>This statement would have been more convincing with +the last paragraph omitted. For perhaps the Russians might +err on packs when they were so wrong, or at least so far +from what naturalists think they know, about mating habits +and size of litters among wolves. The usual view is that<span class="pagenum" id="Page_181">[Pg 181]</span> +instead of being whelped in pairs, as these Moscow informants +had it, wolves are born in litters ranging up to twelve, +and that they do not accompany the mother beyond six or +eight months. It is a fresh contribution, too, that wolf-packs +consist of males that are searching for females.</p> + +<p>For the time being the packs had it—Sharkey’s suggestion +(and Nelson’s and Merriam’s) that wolves might be different +in Europe seemed to be carrying the day.</p> + +<p>But there was the matter of wolves attempting to devour +the Hampshire regiment of British troops on its sleigh journey +from Omsk to Ekaterinburg in 1918-19. Sir Sidney +Harmer of the Natural History Museum, South Kensington, +was a student of animal habits and of animal lore. He should +be able to get in touch with members of the Hampshire +regiment, and I wrote him June 23. The Museum’s Keeper +of Zoölogy, W. G. Calman, replied on the Museum’s behalf +July 21 that the Hampshire story was fading “as wolf stories +generally do when they are more definitely enquired into.” +He forwarded a letter dated July 19 from H. M. Howgrave-Graham, +who is Secretary of the Metropolitan Police of +London and was (says <i>Who’s Who</i>) “Captain in the 1/9 +Batln. Hampshire Regiment in India and Siberia, 1914-19.”</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“I was in Colonel Johnson’s Battalion (the Ninth Battalion of +the Hampshire Regiment) and it happens that I was in charge +of the only party which made any considerable sledge journeys +during the winter 1918-19.</p> + +<p>“My party tried to get to Orenburg from Omsk but didn’t get +so far. We went by train to Troitsk and from there we made two +sledge journeys, one to Verkhne Uralsk and back and one to +Orsk and back. I remember being told that we might see wolves<span class="pagenum" id="Page_182">[Pg 182]</span> +and had hopes of doing so as we travelled a good deal at night. +But we were disappointed and never saw or heard any signs of +wolves at all....”</p> +</div> + +<p>Junius B. Wood said in his above-quoted letter to me:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“Your statement ‘You know, of course, that of all wolf-pack +stories published by the American newspapers, more than 75 per +cent are without any foundation whatever, and that most of the +rest are based on some misapprehension’ indicates a clairvoyance +worthy of your fellow explorer ‘Doc’ Cook. It is the first suggestion +which has come to me that I ‘know,’ or even admit such a +theory ... unless you can show that you have tabulated and +checked the individual inaccuracies of ‘all’ the newspaper stories +which you so sweepingly include, I am extremely sceptical of +your ‘75 per cent’ and have serious doubts of your impartiality +on the gregariousness of wolves.”</p> +</div> + +<p>It had never been my intention to claim that three-quarters +of all cases had already been studied and found without any +vestige of truth. What I meant was that several students +whom I know, among them the Chief of the United States +Biological Survey, had been investigating for years the cases +which came to their attention and that three-quarters of +these had proved without foundation—while most of the +rest, and perhaps all, were based on misquotations, misunderstandings, +and the like.</p> + +<p>Particularly with regard to a distant and vast realm like +the U.S.S.R. it is hard to study all the cases reported. With +increasing frequency through my investigations I began to +run upon the name of Sergius Buturlin as a lifelong student<span class="pagenum" id="Page_183">[Pg 183]</span> +of Russian and Siberian wild life and as the foremost authority, +among other things, on wolves. Accordingly, I wrote +him July 14, 1927, requesting as much general information +and as definite information as he felt like giving. He replied +August 18:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“I began hunting when about 8 years old, now—I am sorry to +say—some 46 years ago. And though my chief interest was always +with birds, and my first ornithological paper was published (in +<i>Okhotnichia Gazeta</i> or <i>Hunter’s Journal</i>, Moscow) in 1888, I +was, and am still, very fond indeed of big game shooting (bears, +moose, wolves).</p> + +<p>“I hunted much in the basin of middle Volga (governments of +Simbirsk—now Ulianovsk—Penza, Kazan, Nijny, Nijny-Novgorod) +in governments of Tula and Orel, in Livonia and Esthonia, +in governments of St. Petersburg—now Leningrad—and Novgorod, +in Kirghiz country (between Irtysh and Ob), Kulunda +steppe, gov’ts. of Tomsk and Irkutsk, and in the north: Arkhangelsk +and Olonetz gov’ts., Kolguev, Novaia Zemlia, Yakutsk, +Verkhoiansk, middle and lower Kolyma, some parts of Chukchee-land +and Kamchatka.</p> + +<p>“As from 1888 on I was always an active contributor to almost +all our hunters’ journals, Russian and German (we had <i>Baltische +Waidmann’s Blätter</i>), and from 1898 always took part, as now, +in the editorship of our best hunter’s periodicals, I had a vast +amount of correspondence with our most experienced shooting +men.</p> + +<p>“I can fairly say that we have now too much wolves in our +country, but I remember years—for instance, about 1900—when +in my native Simbirsk gov. and Penza gov. they were as plentiful +as now.</p> + +<p>“And never in my life have I seen more than 14 wolves in one<span class="pagenum" id="Page_184">[Pg 184]</span> +pack, and this only twice. And never have I heard a reliable +account of such a case. And I have known many old and experienced +professional trappers and hunters.</p> + +<p>“Usual number is about 5-8.</p> + +<p>“But I have seen—it was about half-past five in the morning on +the 13th Oct. 1893, near my grandmother’s estate Lava in the +middle part of Simbirsk gov., Sura basin,—when a pack of 5 +attacked a herd of about 10,000 sheep, frightened about a thousand +of them in a narrow ravine and in a few minutes slayed 153 +sheep—without even taking away a single sheep, as I drove them +away.</p> + +<p>“I suppose if I didn’t happen to ride near by I would be informed +afterward by shepherds that they were attacked by 50 +wolves. It was of course too dark to see, but though there was no +snow, the ground was soft from rains, and I could count all their +footprints in the morning in the bush and woodland near this +ravine.</p> + +<p>“I am quite sure that wolves (at least in Russia and Siberia) +hunt only in family packs, that is, papa, mamma, young ones of +the year and often some ones of the previous brood. And this +amounts to 5-8, more rarely 9-10, and quite exceptionally 14 +specimens.”</p> +</div> + +<p>Privately we had disposed of the Russian packs of the +winter 1927 but in the newspapers they continued to do well. +There appeared in Miami, Florida, (and no doubt elsewhere), +a despatch which we copy from the <i>News</i> of June +12:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“MOSCOW, June 11—Ten families were rushed to the Pasteur +institute at Moscow from Kalujsky, a small village of the Kuban +district, after a large pack of mad wolves had swept down the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_185">[Pg 185]</span> +village street, invading gardens and even entering several homes, +biting the residents.”</p> +</div> + +<p>By now the <i>Associated Press</i> was keen on wolves—indeed +had been for six months when Stiles wrote on September 30 +that there was in his office a Polish representative who believed +stoutly in wolf-packs and that they had received (and, +I gather, killed) a press despatch from Warsaw:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“Polish military patrol Russian border attacked by pack wolves +dispersed them with gunfire.”</p> +</div> + +<p>I had long been thinking to write my classmate John B. +Stetson who was Minister to Poland. This gave occasion, +and he replied June 8, 1928:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“A long time ago I had your letter regarding the possible +attacks of wolves....</p> + +<p>“While there is much talk about the danger of wolves attacking +human beings and while people relate incidents which occurred +to them when they have seen wolves which they thought +were going to attack them, etc., it is extremely difficult to find +specific instances when attacks have been made by wolves....</p> + +<p>“I asked the Chief of the Frontier Guards to make an investigation +of the various border posts to see if any attacks had been +noted along the 1500 kilometer front between Russia and Poland. +This region is wild and not densely settled. I enclose herewith +the letter which I have received from him.”</p> +</div> + +<p>The letter from General Minkiewicz had specific information +on two cases of wolves, each time three in a group, that +had been fired on by frontier guards.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_186">[Pg 186]</span></p> + +<p>As to whether wolves attack in large packs, the General +says:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“Accounts of wolves attacking men sometimes appearing in the +press have their origin in the phantasy of correspondents seeking +sensational news.</p> + +<p>“In a few cases, however, we have noted a very aggressive attitude +displayed by wolves and, if they did not dare to attack me, +it was only due to the fact that there were but few of them....”</p> +</div> + +<p>The general commanding the frontier guard, then, had +apparently never heard that (around September, 1927) “Polish +military patrol Russian border attacked by pack wolves +dispersed them with gunfire.”</p> + +<p>Lee Smits had suggested my writing David C. Mills of the +National Association of Fur Industries as likely to be informed +on wolf-packs. Mills wrote from New York, December +9, 1927. A summary of his three-page letter is:</p> + +<p>Vladimir Eitington (of Eitington-Schild Co., 226 West +30th Street, New York City) was once followed by wolves +in Siberia until he camped and built a fire. He thought there +might have been 15 or 25, “but he says that in the dark and +under such circumstances, he could not make a rational +estimate.”</p> + +<p>Many animals have the following habit. Mills cites from +his own experience wolves (two), coyotes (several), and +bears.</p> + +<p>Writer’s opinion, and that of his friend, is that wolves +never kill people. Specially cited here is John B. Burnham, +noted American authority on wild animals, former secretary +of the American Game Protective Association.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_187">[Pg 187]</span></p> + +<p>Mills thinks that “common knowledge” of wolves and +suchlike is usually wrong. Then he has his own summary:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“The information from Russian sources in re. the wolf myth +is—</p> + +<p>“1st There has never been a scientific investigation of the +question.</p> + +<p>“2nd That wolves, under ordinary conditions, do not attack +humans.</p> + +<p>“3rd That mad wolves sometimes enter villages and snap right +and left at anything or anyone. I presume this means rabies, +as that disease is also found in America among coyotes.</p> + +<p>“4th That they have no knowledge of any authenticated case of +wolves in packs attacking travelers in sleighs, etc., but do +not know that it has never happened.”</p> +</div> + +<p>In 1928, perhaps for variety, the newspaper wolf-packs +transferred their chief European activities to districts other +than hackneyed Poland and Russia. The American papers +informed us soon after the New Year (we quote the New +York <i>World</i> of January 6) that:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“... eleven peasant girls of the Czechoslovakian town of Maramaros +Sziget were devoured by wolves when returning from a +neighboring village through the forest.”</p> +</div> + +<p>The Consul General of Czechoslovakia gave preliminary +reply to my inquiry on January 10, warning that stories of +wolves “especially stories from Vienna are always greatly +exaggerated.” On April 2 he wrote that “we have here the +reply of the Administration of the Sub-Carpathian Ruthenia +stating that the report of killing of eleven peasant girls by<span class="pagenum" id="Page_188">[Pg 188]</span> +wolves in Maramaros Sziget is not true.” Further on the +letter says that some wolves were seen near Maramaros Sziget +in January “and this was the possible foundation for the wild +report of <i>Neue Freie Presse</i>.”</p> + +<p>November 7 the <i>Evening Standard</i> of London, England, +printed a Moscow despatch of even date:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“Wolves are becoming a menace to life in the country districts +of North Russia and Siberia....</p> + +<p>“... A pack of several hundred attacked a priest and his wife +while they were driving from one village to another 100 miles +south of Moscow.</p> + +<p>“While his wife held the reins, the priest beat off the wolves +with a whip. Suddenly a wolf bit one of the horse’s legs. It +lurched forward, throwing the priest from the wagon. He was +killed by the wolves. The horse carried the woman to safety.</p> + +<p>“Similar attacks on persons are reported daily from all parts of +the country.—International News Service.”</p> +</div> + +<p>On this the Chairman of the Amtorg Trading Corporation, +Saul G. Bron, wrote me November 25:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“These are termed in the Soviet Union as the ‘big Russian cranberry +tree’ tales. Nevertheless, there is no doubt that malicious +white-Russian propaganda agencies ... are working overtime +and that the comparative scarcity of reliable information about +the U.S.S.R. in this country makes a fertile field for the circulation +of stories about uprisings, wolves roaming the countryside, +etc.”</p> +</div> + +<p>October 25, C. K. Ogden (whom H. G. Wells has since +discussed in the Fifth Book of <i>The Shape of Things to<span class="pagenum" id="Page_189">[Pg 189]</span> +Come</i>) wrote me from the Royal Societies Club, London. +He told that the De Reszke cigarette had small prize cards +in their packages and that the one on The Wolf said “dogs +and wolves hunt in packs.” He wrote them and they replied:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“We are sorry that we cannot give you any zoological authority +to maintain the view that wolves hunt in packs as stated on the +back of picture No. 26 of our Zoological Studies.... The error +will be corrected should we have a reprint of the series.”</p> +</div> + +<p>Through laxity, or real failure of the sources, my wolf +record is blank for Europe and Asia during 1930 and 1931—there +is no account of tenderly-nurtured wolf children from +India, of babies devoured in Siberia, of forays of Rumanian +wolves into Czechoslovakia. But in 1932 the times were more +abundant and my records are bulky.</p> + +<p>On January 10, 1932, Duncan Campbell Scott, president +of the Canadian Authors’ Association, descended to his more +factual role of president of the Royal Society and wrote from +Ottawa with concern for my wolf studies. He sent a press +cutting headed “From Our Own Correspondent, Vienna, +Sunday”:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“While an express train from Bucharest was snowbound near +Zloty and awaiting help, a pack of hungry wolves bore down +upon it.</p> + +<p>“Having no firearms, the train staff emptied a luggage van and +threw into it raw meat from the restaurant car.</p> + +<p>“Twenty or more wolves jumped into the van and began to +fight one another for the meat. The doors were promptly locked +and later the train proceeded on its journey to Kischinev, Bessarabia. +On arrival 18 wolves were found alive, the rest having been +torn to pieces.”</p> +</div> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_190">[Pg 190]</span></p> + +<p>In view of the style of this despatch I have looked up +Karel Capek in <i>Who’s Who</i> and <i>Britannica</i> but cannot determine +from the brief sketches whether he was in Vienna +during January, 1932.</p> + +<p>How wolf stories rotate appeared two years later when +C. K. Ogden sent me what is essentially the same tale—though +with a new city of origin, a new date line, a few +new frills. The cutting is unfortunately from an unnamed +paper of London, England—I dare not guess which paper, +though I think I recognize the style. It was from Budapest, +December 19, 1933. Like the one of two years earlier it was +“From Our Own Correspondent.” It ran:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“An unpleasant adventure which overtook the direct train from +Bucarest to Budapest is reported from Bucarest.</p> + +<p>“During the night the train was held up by snowdrifts and +obliged to stand nine hours in an uninhabited part of Roumania. +To the terror of the passengers a pack of wolves surrounded the +train, and the situation was only saved by the wit of a conductor.</p> + +<p>“An order was given that the luggage van should be emptied, +and some raw meat from the kitchen was then placed in the van +and the doors thrown open. When all the wolves were safely +inside the van the doors were shut, and the train continued its +journey with these unusual passengers.</p> + +<p>At the station of Chrisina, in Roumania, the wolves were transferred +to cages which had been prepared for them.”</p> +</div> + +<p>It is usually difficult to trace stories from the Balkans, +perhaps because their Ministers and Consuls there get tired +of answering questions about all the strange things we print +from their part of the world. For instance, I still covet the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_191">[Pg 191]</span> +real truth on what appeared, as Special Correspondence, in +the New York <i>Times</i>, February 28, 1932, from Bucharest:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“Two peasants on the way to market in Oradea Mare were +attacked on the highroad today by a pack of starving wolves. +They were unarmed and, after a brief attempt to beat off the +animals with sticks, were pulled down, killed and partly devoured.”</p> +</div> + +<p>I queried the Roumanian Legation on this but never had +a reply.</p> + +<p>I have had better luck with the northern countries, perhaps +because there I know the ropes. The Director of the +University Museum, Philadelphia, wrote March 21 on behalf +of himself and one of his vice-presidents, passing on to me +heartrending news:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p class="c">WOLVES KILL GIRL IN FINLAND;<br> +INVADE VILLAGES FOR FOOD<br> +Wireless to The New York <i>Times</i>.</p> + +<p>“HELSINGFORS, March 4.—Villagers in Eastern Finland +were terrorized this week by an invasion of hungry wolves, +roaming southward from the frozen plains of Lapland.</p> + +<p>“The beasts entered villages and even the outlying districts of +towns in search of food. The young daughter of a farmer in +middle Finland was attacked and killed by wolves while she was +walking on a highway near her home. Her parents found only +bones and fragments of clothing after the tragedy....”</p> +</div> + +<p>I wrote Helsingfors, sending a copy of the <i>Times</i> despatch. +The Intendent of the Zoological Museum replied March +20th:</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_192">[Pg 192]</span></p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“... it is not true that a young daughter of a farmer was +attacked and killed. A similar notice was found in our press, so +that the telegram to New York is therefore explicable. By an +official investigation, the whole thing turned out to be a manifestation +of too vivid imagination—somebody had found a bloody +rag on the road, and thus the story was immediately given. In the +same way it is a real nonsense that the wolves had penetrated +into villages and towns. The whole thing was about a couple of +animals which killed a number of dogs before they were driven +away and killed.”</p> +</div> + +<p>The cruel ingenuity of man towards wolves is a defensive +reaction to the cruel rapacity of wolves toward man. In fact, +the wide dissemination of stories about packs is a necessity +in justifying the extensiveness of the war we wage and the +character of the weapons and tactics we use. We would not +be half so successful in protecting the chickens of the farmer +and the sheep of the rancher if we did not constantly circulate +reports of how wolves will attack anything from a child +playing on a cabin floor in Michigan to a regiment of British +troops in Siberia.</p> + +<p>Some of the methods used against wolves are commonplace, +not worth describing, though we might name a few +of them—trapping, shooting, the use of poisoned bait, the +finding of dens and smoking out of the pups to be clubbed +to death. One method is so peculiar that we describe it.</p> + +<p>Under date of March 12, 1927, the <i>Associated Press</i> received, +but did not issue to the newspapers, information upon +the extent and manner of wolf hunting in Poland.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_193">[Pg 193]</span></p><div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“... for centuries wolf hunts have been carried out by Poles +(1) by the aristocrats as a sport, (2) by peasants as a means of +livelihood. The same method, which is gentle, as you will see, has +been employed by nobility and peasant.</p> + +<p>“A live pig is attached by a leather rope at the rear of sleigh +or sled in which six or seven men take their places, all heavily +armed. The sleigh is drawn by two or three horses. Two men +devote themselves exclusively to protecting the horses from the +onslaught of the wolves which, led from their lairs by the screams +of the suffering and dying hog, rush in a pack after the swiftly +moving sleigh. Two other men empty their rifles at wolves from +either side and two others do their execution from the rear.</p> + +<p>“... (Our informant) said his father has often hunted wolves, +which attack in packs, after this fashion.”</p> +</div> + +<p>I might have traced this account through my aforementioned +classmate the Minister to Poland, and would have +done so but for chancing upon remarks of Sir Albert Gray +before the Royal Geographical Society of London as they +are reported in that society’s <i>Journal</i> for June, 1921, p. 445. +They are to the effect that people continue holding strange, +romantic, beliefs no matter how often these are exposed. He +has in mind chiefly the idea that wolves run in packs and +quotes the (for the time and place) annihilation of the idea +by Baddeley in his <i>Russia in the Eighties, Sport and Politics</i>, +(London, 1921). I was on the track of wolf-packs then and +followed Sir Albert’s clue. I found the author demolishing +the pack to his own satisfaction and that he also pays his +respects to various beliefs regarding the methods of hunting +wolves.</p> + +<p>John F. Baddeley spent in Russia, of which a large section +of Poland was then a part, most of the decade following<span class="pagenum" id="Page_194">[Pg 194]</span> +1879 and much of those years in hunting and in the company +of sportsmen and naturalists. After denying that wolves +ever go in packs and after denying also that wolves are +numerous in Russia, he says, beginning on p. 149:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“The idea that wolves are very numerous in Russia has gained +substance, also, from the very natural tendency of certain sportsmen +to exaggerate their performances; and more especially is this +the case in regard to that form of sport in which wolves and +sucking-pigs are supposed to play the chief parts. According to +published accounts—I have one or two before me but will not +pillory the writers—you have only to take a sucking-pig (in good +voice) and drive along the highroad in a sledge any winter’s +night, trailing behind you a bundle of straw at the end of a string +to represent piggy—who meantime must be made to squeal his +loudest—to enjoy excellent sport with the numerous wolves that +will assuredly come to the lure the first time of asking. Here +again I am regretfully forced to say that I never knew a man of +proved veracity who claimed to have bagged even one wolf by +this method, while one honest friend assured me that he had tried +it no less than seventeen times in places where wolves were +known to exist, but had only once had a shot at what he thought +might be one.”</p> +</div> + +<p>It may be, as claimed by this author, that wolves do not +swarm in from Polish forests at the squeals of a pig, but the +belief that they do is useful. Faraway, in Michigan for instance, +stories detailing the alleged Polish ingenuities will +tend to lead American woodsmen to cleverness of wolf-killing +that, in the long run, saves the local farmers a good +many chickens and lambs.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_195">[Pg 195]</span></p> + +<p>A reporter friend tells that the wolf-pack is a standard +joke among the foreign correspondents in Europe, certainly +in Vienna, and he has passed on to me a crystallization of +their attitude, as expressed by the correspondent for a London +paper:</p> + +<p>The yarn is that the Orient Express was held up by a +pack of wolves. They began at the front end, eating the engineer +and fireman, and proceeded towards the rear, devouring +everyone as they went until, in the last car, they came upon a +correspondent whom they spared on his promise that he +would give them adequate publicity.</p> + + +<p class="c less pad">CRUMBS FOR PACK BELIEVERS</p> + +<p>The evidence has been, then, that wolf-packs which +come up to motion picture and folklore standards do not +exist. But there still may be a foundation of reality upon +which the imaginative and inventive have built their fabrications.</p> + +<p>Students who scout the pack as ordinarily defined and +pictured have nevertheless agreed on certain things which, +by multiplication, magnification and misinterpretation, +could start the pack idea going, or at any rate might keep +it going.</p> + +<p>Obviously wolf pups will remain with their mother until +weaned. Doubtless the family breaks up before the young +are quite full grown, or when they are between five and +eight months old. There may be as many as twelve in a +litter, fourteen by some views. When you meet stories of +packs with five to fifteen in them you can thus have a true<span class="pagenum" id="Page_196">[Pg 196]</span> +report of a family hunting, traveling or living together. If +the story describes a “gigantic leader of the pack” you may +be sure that a family is involved. With the even-sized pups +taken for normal wolves, mama looks colossal. If there are +two gigantic leaders, then papa must be traveling along.</p> + +<p>A foremost authority for America, Nelson, and a foremost +one for Eurasia, Buturlin, differ on one point, though only +in degree. Nelson is somewhere between thinking it rare +and thinking it improbable that last year’s pups will be +found still traveling with their mother after this year’s become +large enough to hunt; Buturlin thinks it rare but sees +no improbability. Accordingly, when Nelson credits a report +of say twenty wolves he is inclined to think that two families +have come together accidentally for a few moments, or are +only following each other accidentally instead of really +traveling together. Buturlin feels these are probably one +mother’s litters of two years and that they are in semi-permanent +company.<a id="FNanchor_15" href="#Footnote_15" class="fnanchor">[15]</a></p> + +<p>With such family groups for nuclei, the traveler’s tale, the +peasant’s yarn which the reporter believes, become easy. Just +multiply by ten and you have packs of 50, 100, 200. Zero is +nothing. So what is a zero more or less in a good yarn?</p> + +<p>There are methods other than simple multiplication which +can lead reasonably to packs of great size.</p> + +<p>In the Arctic and sub-Arctic I have stood at vantage points +from which I could see in one, two, or several directions +from me scattered wolves which, counted together, would<span class="pagenum" id="Page_197">[Pg 197]</span> +make a “pack.” These are no more really a pack of wolves +than the scattered and unconnected pickpockets of a city +are a band of thieves. But assume the story is thrice repeated. +First version: I saw 100 wolves from one place. Second +version: Jones saw 100 wolves in one place. Third version: +Brown says Jones saw a pack of 100 wolves.</p> + +<p>It might happen that two wolf families scent a caribou +or a band. Running up the wind they might so nearly come +together, without really joining, that a careless observer seeing +the two packs running in the same direction would take +them to be one pack—this all the more because groups that +are indubitably a mother with pups will sometimes string +out half a mile as they lope in pursuit of caribou. But two +families strung out, say a mile from the first to the last of +them, would not make a pack in the sense of a band working +systematically and semi-permanently together.</p> + +<p>With considerations such as these in mind, we examine +seemingly reliable testimony for considerable numbers of +wolves having been observed together.</p> + +<p>“Considerable” needs defining. The wolf-killing service of +the U. S. Biological Survey were polled by Nelson and voted +for two, three, and at highest five wolves being seen together, +these always mother or parents with pups. Many have testified +for seven in a family, however, among them the zoologist, +Dr. R. M. Anderson, Chief Biologist, Ottawa, who has +in Canada an official position similar to Nelson’s in the +United States. A few apparently good witnesses have testified +to nine. We are, then, chiefly concerned in this section +with numbers larger than nine and with their interpretation—were +they really together and then in what sense?<span class="pagenum" id="Page_198">[Pg 198]</span> +How permanently were they together? Were they family +groups?</p> + +<p>My voluminous correspondence on packs was, as said, +begun in 1922 when I realized that my own belief in wolf-packs, +begun in <i>The Friendly Arctic</i> (see that book’s index) +was untenable. We have already used that part of the correspondence +which attempted to trace packs reported between +1922 and 1936, finding all that could be traced wanting. +We now canvass the rest of the evidence, using it in the +main chronologically.</p> + +<p><i>The Encyclopedia Britannica</i>, Fourteenth Edition, says in +its article on wolves that: “Except during summer when the +young families of cubs are being separately provided for by +their parents they assemble in troops or packs.”</p> + +<p>That edition is dated 1929. Seven years before, on March +27, 1922, Anderson wrote to Nelson that during several years +spent in Arctic and sub-Arctic Canada and Alaska:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“... I never saw more than seven wolves in any band nor did +I hear of any larger bands than seven. A reliable Eskimo in my +employ told me that he was once followed by nine wolves on a +river near Herschel Island, and in the Joint Report, <i>Survey International +Boundary, 141st Meridian</i>, 1918, there is a report of nine +wolves seen in a band on the boundary.</p> + +<p>“In that region the wolves are more often seen in bunches of +two or three, or singly, and the bunches of five or more are probably +an old female with her cubs of the year. Several that we +killed out of such a band at Langton Bay were all immature....</p> + +<p>“I have heard occasional vague rumors of larger bands of +wolves in more southerly parts of Canada, but have never been +able to verify any such reports....”</p> +</div> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_199">[Pg 199]</span></p> + +<p>In passing on to me, November 25, 1922, the information +given by Anderson, Nelson added:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“... I am satisfied that the stories of great packs of wolves +banded together to pursue caribou or any other game are based +on the fertile imagination of the writers and not on observations +in the field. It is common knowledge that the wolves pair more +or less permanently and are in no sense gregarious animals. At +the end of each breeding season and until well into the following +winter, my field experience and the information which has come +to the Biological Survey from its large force of hunters destroying +predatory animals in the western states, coincide in enumerating +packs of wolves not exceeding the ordinary normal number of +the two parents and the litter of the season which may vary from +three or four animals up to ten or twelve. Such bands of parents +and their young of the year hunt together until well into the +following winter but with the approach of spring they separate +to mate.... There is a bare possibility that in pursuing bands of +reindeer or caribou, several of these family packs of wolves might +accidentally come together in pursuit but such union would be +purely fortuitous and of very temporary endurance.</p> + +<p>“My observations and personal information obtained at first +hand extends from the mountains bordering the valley of Mexico, +north to the Arctic circle in Alaska and also the observations of +our large corps of hunters numbering several hundred men, who, +during the progress of their campaign against predatory animals +in the western states have killed between four and five thousand +of these animals within the last six years.”</p> +</div> + +<p>Nelson wrote me January 4, 1923, after a fresh study of +some Russian evidence, that clearly they have there the same +situation as we have here, “the wolves running in family<span class="pagenum" id="Page_200">[Pg 200]</span> +parties exactly as they do in North America, running in +great bands only in literature and folklore.”</p> + +<p>On January 18 Harkin sent me a long quotation from a +story he had found in “one of our local papers, under date +the 17th instant.” It is a long statement, generally claiming +that wolves are not dangerous. A section bearing on our +present theme is under the subhead “Whole Pack Fled.” In +northern Ontario the sledge was crossing a lake, on a winter +evening, toward an island:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“We were just making the point of this island, and what should +we meet coming from the other side but a pack of wolves. We +just met there. The leader, a big, grizzled, long-legged old chap, +looked me over from a distance of about twenty feet; the rest of +the pack ranged behind and alongside of him, their tails straight +out for just about as long as it takes to stiffen them out with fear. +Then they broke. They just flattened out on the ice and flew—twenty-one +of them.”</p> +</div> + +<p>We have used in another connection parts of a letter from +Inspector Jennings of the R.C.M.P., Edmonton, April 20, +1923, one of the most informative of the whole wolf correspondence:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“... it appears timber wolves are becoming more numerous in +the McKenzie Delta, but do not appear to be running in packs. +At Baillie Island where a number were killed in the winter of +1921-22 they appear to be running in packs of from four to seven. +We have also paid bounties at Tree River Detachment for wolves +killed in the Coronation Gulf. C. Klinkenberg, whom you remember, +told me in 1921, when I was North, of a fight he had<span class="pagenum" id="Page_201">[Pg 201]</span> +with a she wolf and five yearling pups. He was attacked by all +of them, and only by the fortunate appearance of his son with his +rifle was his life saved.... The general impression is that such +bands, or what may be called a band, is generally a family, and +that it is only occasionally, when hunting for food, that two or +more families might come together and constitute a real pack.</p> + +<p>“In regard to the McKenzie District, an old prospector who has +travelled from the headwaters of the Thelon River to the British +Columbia boundary in the West states that while east of the +McKenzie River wolves may be plentiful when Caribou are numerous, +he has never seen them in what may be called a pack, +although at times in the open several wolves may be seen together, +but evidently working independently. Below Simpson and also +on the Liard River in the Foot Hills, he has seen as many as +twenty under one leader, but generally the pack is from five to +nine. The band of twenty was following a moose track. At another +time he states that when his party had killed a moose, +shortly after, a large grey wolf was seen on the opposite side of +the river. This wolf called a few times and was soon joined by +others to the number of ten....</p> + +<p>“One of my officers in February, 1916, while traveling on the +McKenzie, about 30 miles below Simpson, came upon a band of +seven, at a place where a moose had been killed the previous +day.”</p> +</div> + +<p>December 19, 1924, Nelson reaffirmed his lack of evidence +for believing that two or more families ever made up a +“temporary pack.” He also defined the terms under which, +for sake of argument, he might concede theoretically, in the +absence of evidence, that unions might take place.</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“I am still skeptical about the formation of wolf-packs which +are made up of two or more families hunting in companionship.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_202">[Pg 202]</span> +I have no knowledge of any such combination, and knowing the +habits and characteristics of wolves doubt this occurring except +under what might be termed fortuitous circumstances. Two or +more family parties of wolves might incidentally come together +in the pursuit of the same game animal and join in the kill; but +if they did so I should expect a fierce battle to ensue between the +different parties of wolves, strangers to one another, just as would +happen in the case of strange dogs. Furthermore, I believe that +should two or more family parties of wolves thus come together +in the immediate pursuit of game, they would promptly spread +into their original units as soon as the kill was made or the chase +ended. Wolves have much the same nature as dogs, and the hostility +that strange dogs show one to another is a good indication +of what might be expected on the part of wolves....”</p> +</div> + +<p>C. Hart Merriam wrote January 12, 1925, quoting his own +<i>Mammals of the Adirondacks</i> (New York, 1882):</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“Comparatively few wolves are now to be found in the Adirondacks, +though twelve years ago they were quite abundant, and +used to hunt in packs of half a dozen or more.... The amount +of noise that a single wolf is capable of producing is simply +astonishing, and many amusing episodes of camp lore owe their +origin to this fact. More than one ‘lone traveler’ has hastily taken +to a tree, and remained in the inhospitable shelter of its scrawny +branches for an entire night, believing himself surrounded by a +pack of at least fifty fierce and hungry wolves, when, in reality, +there was but one, and (as its tracks afterwards proved) it was +on the farther side of a lake, a couple of miles away.”</p> +</div> + +<p>Merriam further quotes Theodore Roosevelt’s <i>Hunting +Trips of a Ranchman</i> (New York, 1885):</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_203">[Pg 203]</span></p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“According to my experience, the wolf is rather solitary. A +single one or a pair will be found by themselves, or possibly with +one or more well-grown young ones, and will then hunt over a +large tract where no other wolves will be found; and as they +wander very far, and as their melancholy howlings have a most +ventriloquial effect, they are often thought to be much more +plentiful than they are.”</p> +</div> + +<p>In its care to avoid nature faking the <i>Associated Press</i> +refused to circulate a story which they received from +Winnipeg and which Jackson S. Elliott, Assistant General +Manager, sent along for my wolf files July 8, 1926. That +account, however, runs well within family limits and so has +the probabilities for it. The applicable section runs that “the +hunter noticed a string of seven grey wolves crossing the +prairie. He waited until they approached and was successful +in bringing down five of them.”</p> + +<p>The story seemed probably correct and gave a lead to further +information, so I wrote A. Brabant, Fur Trade Commissioner +of the Hudson’s Bay Company, Winnipeg, and +received through him a valuable letter from their A. C. +Clark, Norway House, Manitoba, August 3:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“Carl Sherman, the trapper who killed the wolves referred to, +is at present in this locality, and I have been able to get the details +of the story referred to.</p> + +<p>“Sherman is trapping on the Hayes River, about 150 miles +north of Oxford House Post. He was travelling north one day +early in November ... and saw about 14 or 15 wolves making +for the point on which he stood. When they got to within 75 +yards of him, he fired and brought down the leader. By the time<span class="pagenum" id="Page_204">[Pg 204]</span> +they got out of sight, he had killed five.... They were all full +grown, and all males. The wolves were not dangerous, but made +for safety, as soon as they got over the surprise of the first shot. +The wind was in the wrong direction for the wolves to get the +scent of Sherman.</p> + +<p>“I can vouch for the above story being correct....”</p> +</div> + +<p>This, then, is a remarkable story. The reader will find +several things in which it contradicts, or seems to contradict, +Nelson, Buturlin, and Anderson in so far as he was quoted +(above) by Nelson. It fits badly with the rest of our evidence +but is nevertheless impressively vouched for.</p> + +<p>Information similarly difficult came in an undated letter +July, 1927, from Fred B. Kniffen of the Department of +Geography, University of California, Berkeley:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“... I have seen two wolf-packs.</p> + +<p>“I had occasion to spend the winter of 1923-24 prospecting in +the upper Tanana region of Alaska. I hunted considerably as caribou +meat furnished an appreciable part of my diet and almost all +of that of my dogs. One afternoon I was seated on a little hill +about a quarter of a mile from a small lake. Through the natural +pass below me the caribou had been passing at the rate of several +hundred a day. As I watched, a file of wolves emerged from some +brush on the opposite side of the lake, skirted the shore and went +off in the direction the caribou were going. They seemed to be +running roughly in a column of twos and I counted about +twenty-eight in the pack.</p> + +<p>“One night I was awakened by the howls of my dogs responding +to those of some wolves. I stood in the doorway of my cabin +and a little later could distinguish the forms of five wolves against +the snow of the river, perhaps seventy-five yards away. The dogs<span class="pagenum" id="Page_205">[Pg 205]</span> +were now growling, apparently in fear. One shot dispersed the +wolves....</p> + +<p>“These events all occurred in late winter. It is quite possible that +an old she wolf and her pups may have accounted for a large part +of this but the large pack could hardly be explained away in this +fashion.”</p> +</div> + +<p>Kniffen himself suggests a family explanation for his second +pack. On July 14 I suggested in a letter to him that +<i>possibly</i> the first set were not a pack, either,—in the sense +of having banded together for cooperative hunting. I said +that: “The wolves you saw following each other, though +there were twenty-eight, were (then) no more necessarily a +pack than eleven college men walking towards an athletic +field are necessarily the college team.”</p> + +<p>The well-known and highly-regarded student of Canadian +wild life, Tony Lascelles, wrote for the Winnipeg <i>Free Press</i> +of April 25, 1936, an article, “The Mammals of Manitoba.” +A paragraph in it can be read as supporting the traditional +wolf-pack—I did not so read it but thought others might. +But Lascelles writes from Mistamick Lodge, Dauphin, Manitoba, +May 15, 1936, with reference to his use of the key word, +that “the pack is a family group and the maximum pack is +a maximum family.”</p> + +<p>With this we close the section of our discussion which is +written for those who like to believe that even the seemingly +most absurd folklore tale has developed from a nucleus of +fact.</p> + + +<p class="c less pad">WOLVES AND BABES</p> + +<p>The misanthropy of wolves, dramatic in their pursuit of +wedding parties and in the siege of stalled trains, is particularly<span class="pagenum" id="Page_206">[Pg 206]</span> +horrible toward little children. They eat them all up, +rather jocularly in Red Riding Hood, grimly in our newspapers. +See, for instance, the tragic story “Copyright, 1928, +by the New York Times Company. By Wireless to The New +York <i>Times</i>:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“RIGA, Jan. 1.—A woman of the Unciany district of Lithuania, +riding with a child in a one-horse sleigh and pursued by a +pack of wolves, made a desperate effort to escape, but after a +short, sharp race the horse collapsed.</p> + +<p>“The wolves tore the child from its mother’s arms, devoured it, +and then fell on the mother. Some peasants, hearing her cries, +hurried to the scene and rescued her, torn but still alive.</p> + +<p>“As a result of the severe weather the depredations by wolves +in many parts of Russia are unusually alarming. The Soviet +authorities are carrying out an organized campaign against the +danger by offering rewards for wolves’ heads. In some districts +detachments of the Red Army are used.</p> + +<p>“Packs of wolves have appeared in many parts usually immune, +especially in the Crimea.”</p> +</div> + +<p>Reporters naturally have time for cabling such stories but +ministers at Washington and consuls-general in New York, +though frequently kind and helpful, are at times so buried +in humdrum that you cannot get them interested. I failed in +tracing this despatch from Riga. Therefore we can but deal +in likelihoods and refer to the Michigan story of February 3, +1927, reported <i>ante</i>—it was nearer home and so we were able +to enlist the help of local investigators.</p> + +<p>We are reluctant to pursue further this gruesome child-eating. +The case against the wolf in this respect is indeed<span class="pagenum" id="Page_207">[Pg 207]</span> +black enough, what with the inclusion of many babes among +the people devoured already in this chapter by the ravenous +hordes. We turn with relief to a brighter side of the case. +In warm contrast are the maternally kind and otherwise +friendly wolves that have nursed and cared for children, +sometimes even twins, as in the case of Romulus and Remus. +In our present century there is never a decade, there is seldom +a year, when newspapers do not bring us well-attested +cases.</p> + +<p>Through the <i>Associated Press</i> the New York <i>Times</i> +reported October 22, 1926 (from London, October 21):</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“Two little ‘wolf girls’ were found recently living in a wolf’s +den near an isolated village in Bengal, British India. The story +is told by <i>The Westminster Gazette</i>, which received it from India, +vouched for by the Rev. Jal Singh of Midnapur, Bengal, and +Bishop Pakenham Walsh of Bishops College, Calcutta.</p> + +<p>“Bishop Walsh relates that about the end of August, while +visiting the Rev. Jal Singh’s orphanage at Midnapur, Mr. Singh +recounted how he discovered the ‘wolf girls.’</p> + +<p>“In a distant part of his district not long before, the villagers +pointed out to him a path they avoided because it was haunted by +demons. Investigation revealed a wolf den in which there were +several wolf cubs and two girls, about two and eight years of age, +both exceedingly fierce, running on all fours, uttering guttural +barks and living like wolves.</p> + +<p>“The supposition was that they were abandoned as babies by +their mother or mothers and were found and adopted by the she +wolf. With much difficulty, the children were rescued, but the +younger died soon afterward.</p> + +<p>“The elder child survived and is now at the orphanage. She +was gradually weaned from her savage ways, but she fought<span class="pagenum" id="Page_208">[Pg 208]</span> +fiercely against wearing clothes, and tore them off even after they +were sewn on her. For a time she refused to be washed and ate +with her mouth in a dish. Eventually she was taught to use her +hands and say a few words.</p> + +<p>“She still is weak mentally and neither cries nor laughs, but is +gentle with animals, preferring the company of dogs to children.”</p> +</div> + +<p>Sir Sidney Harmer, British student of wolves, wrote November +15, 1926, that the <i>Westminster Gazette</i> had told him +they knew the bishop of the story existed and believed the +wolf children also were real. Sir Sidney closed:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“I have myself no information on the subject, and I do not +know of anyone else who could help you. We are inclined to be +a little sceptical.”</p> +</div> + +<p>I never did get farther with the investigation of this +particular case.</p> + +<p>Reports that were traced, though not by me, appeared +several times the next year. The first, “Copyright, 1927, by +The New York Times Company—Special Cable to the New +York <i>Times</i>, Allahabad, British India, April 5,” said that:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“Herdsmen near Miawana, seventy-five miles from here, found +a small Indian boy supposed to be about 10 years of age, in a +wolf’s den. From marks in the den it was obvious that the boy +had been living there. He was unable to talk or to walk properly, +but went on all fours, lapped water and ate grass.</p> + +<p>“The boy was brought here, put in a special lockup and supplied +with food and medicine. At night he barked, bit himself +and other people and had to be tied down. He is very thin and +emaciated, but his limbs are otherwise well formed. He has a +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_209">[Pg 209]</span>terrible scar on one side of his face, as if he had been mauled by +some animal.</p> + +<p>“He has been taken to Bareilly for treatment at a mental +hospital.”</p> +</div> + +<p>The <i>Times</i> furnished a supplementary note:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“This is the third case of Rudyard Kipling’s ‘Jungle Book’ +hero, Mowgli, in real life which has been discovered in India +within the last ten months. Last September Bishop Walsh wrote +to the Indian <i>Social Reformer</i> of Bombay of the case of two little +girls who had been found by the Rev. J. Singh in a wolf’s den +near Bengal. They revealed the same characteristics as the boy +described in the Allahabad dispatch. One of them soon pined +away and died, but the other rapidly became ‘humanized’ in +Singh’s orphanage at Midnapur. It was supposed that the girls, +as is sometimes the case in India, had been abandoned in the +jungle by their parents on account of their sex and had been +mothered by a she wolf which had just been deprived of her +young.</p> + +<p>“The same explanation would not account for the presence of +the boy in a wolf’s den near Miawana.”</p> +</div> + +<p>Further news, similarly special and copyrighted, came by +wireless from London and was published April 27:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“Further information is now available about the so-called ‘wolf-child’ +whose discovery near Miawana, British India, seventy-five +miles from Allahabad, provoked so much discussion. Some travelers +tell of similar discoveries extending back many years, but +medical authorities are inclined to dismiss them as fables.</p> + +<p>“The boy found in Miawana is judged to be between 7 and 12<span class="pagenum" id="Page_210">[Pg 210]</span> +years old and in general appearance is said to be little different +from an ordinary child, but in his actions betrays signs that are +declared to point to his bringing up with wolves. He can stand up +and walk, but sometimes prefers to crawl, sitting on his haunches +with legs curled up and propelling himself forward with the +palms of hands....</p> + +<p>“He is said to display certain instincts even lower than those +of his alleged foster parents....”</p> +</div> + +<p>On July 10, a long, undated communication marked “London,” +said that:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“News of the discovery of another alleged wolf-child in India +has started a brisk controversy here over the authenticity of such +children. No previous wolf-child has occasioned so much stir +in scientific quarters as has the boy discovered by Indian herdsmen +a few weeks ago in a wolves’ cave near Miawana, seventy-five +miles from Allahabad.</p> + +<p>“Some of the best known medical men in London have called +the story incredible. Old Indian army officers have replied by +asserting that they have actually seen wolf-children....”</p> +</div> + +<p>whereupon the <i>Times</i> devotes more than a column to a +statement generally in support of the India despatches. +Among those in favor is:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“Rudyard Kipling, whose Mowgli of the ‘Jungle Book’ is the +best known wolf-child in fiction, has for once withdrawn his veto +on newspaper interviews, and is quoted as saying that wolf-children +‘are by no means impossible.’ The author goes on to say:</p> + +<p>“‘There have been other instances of them. They say that the +Miawana boy crawls on the hands and knees: I think it much<span class="pagenum" id="Page_211">[Pg 211]</span> +more likely that it would be the knees and elbows. That was the +way of the other children who, like Mowgli, were adopted by +wolves and knew all the mysteries of the jungle. That way leaves +their hands free to seize their prey and to defend themselves.’”</p> +</div> + +<p>This long article, dealing with many cases of wolf-children, +says that:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“... the one commonly known as the Secundra wolf-boy, is +the best authenticated case within the memory of living man. +This boy was captured in 1867 by a shooting expedition in the +unfrequented jungles of Bulandshahr. The hunters surprised a +stray wolf, which they followed to a small mound of earth with a +flat-topped rock sticking out of the mound. A small, strange-looking +animal was asleep in the sun on the rock. To the amazement +of the hunting party, it proved to be a boy, who leaped from +the rock as soon as he saw the hunters and, running on all fours, +disappeared into a cave along with the startled wolf.</p> + +<p>“The hunters were either unable or afraid to go further; but, +feeling that something ought to be done, they returned to Bulandshahr +and consulted the Magistrate. They were advised to go +back to the cave and smoke out the wolf and its weird companion. +This they did. The wolf was shot as soon as it rushed out +and its companion was pounced upon and captured after a severe +struggle, during which several members of the party were bitten. +Two wolf cubs were also killed and the party returned to the +Magistrate to claim a reward for the dead wolf and the dead cubs, +and to exhibit the human being they had captured.</p> + +<p>“The wolf bounty was paid and the wolf-boy was sent to the +Secundra Orphanage. He was thought to be about 7 or 8 years +old. For a long time he tore off the clothes that were supplied him +and persisted in eating his food from the ground. As the years<span class="pagenum" id="Page_212">[Pg 212]</span> +went by he became more docile and eventually was baptized, +taking the name of Sanicher, which is Hindustani for Saturday, +the day on which he was captured. His head was small, his forehead +low and narrow; his eyes were large and gray and restless. +He squinted incessantly and when walking lifted his feet high +like a man walking through wet grass, his entire body moving +in a series of jerks as he stepped along.”</p> +</div> + +<p>Interest, sympathy, resentment were among the feelings +commonly expressed by those who wrote “Letters to the +Editor” during the outstanding wolf-child year of 1927. An +undated cutting from the New York <i>Times</i>, probably around +July 15 or 20, has a letter from Jacqueline Nollet:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“Have men for ‘humanity’s sake’ the right to take this Miawana +boy away from his mother-wolf and from his brotherly playmates, +from the jungle’s new and enthralling life, and to condemn him +instead to an existence devoid of companionship and a life of +utter misery...?</p> + +<p>“Since the wolf-man is no longer free to pursue his own mode +of living and is considered as a near-animal, could not the Society +for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals interfere and have a law +voted to the effect that a child saved from starvation, loved and +protected by the wolves against ferocious beasts, might be left to +live with his wolf family? And if the boy must be taken away +from the wild, could not man take a lesson and be as merciful +as a wolf and spare the life of the foster-mother and her cubs?</p> + +<p>“Let us hope never to see repeated the act of the magistrate +of Bulandshahr who planned and rewarded the murder of the +wolf family of the Sanicher boy....”</p> +</div> + +<p>The scientists were more hard-boiled. For instance, Herman +B. Sheffield, M.D., of New York City, wrote July 10,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_213">[Pg 213]</span> +evidently fresh from reading the long historical summary in +the <i>Times</i> of that date:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“Judging by the article on the ‘New Wolf Child Found in +India,’ I surmise that there are still a large number of civilized +people, including scientists, who seriously believe that ‘wolf-children’ +exist in reality instead of in fiction. As a matter of fact, +such ‘wolf-children’ are frequently met in daily practice and are +nothing but microcephalic idiots.</p> + +<p>“These children are born with small, often dome-shaped, heads +in consequence of undeveloped, small brains. Owing to their +extreme restlessness and awkward power of locomotion, their +habit to hop from place to place often resembles that of a rabbit, +goat or monkey.”</p> +</div> + +<p>As the <i>Times</i> reported, there was keen interest in London. +The Over-Seas League was naturally concerned and published +in their journal <i>Over Seas</i> a statement by “A Member” +which says that:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“Valentine Ball (previously quoted) mentions that he asked an +eminent surgeon of his day what he thought of all these stories, +and the reply was, ‘I don’t believe any of them.’ The medical +profession of to-day seems to share this lack of conviction....</p> + +<p>“No one, apparently, has ever found a child living in an animal’s +lair and left it there, returning from time to time to observe +how it was progressing and to find out how it was fed. There is +no trustworthy evidence to show that the children so far reported +as wolf-children have ever survived for more than a few hours +or days away from human care before they were discovered and +restored to such care. There is no recorded case which could not +be explained on the theory that the child had wandered from<span class="pagenum" id="Page_214">[Pg 214]</span> +home or been abandoned within a day or two of its being rescued, +and it is a well-known fact that Indian mothers will sometimes +‘lose’ in the jungle mentally defective children, which goes far to +account for the imbecility of all so-called wolf-children....</p> + +<p>“All the stories of alleged wolf-children rest on native evidence, +and native evidence is by no means always to be relied upon as +faithful records of fact. The world of reality has its limits. The +world of imagination, especially of Eastern imagination, is boundless.”</p> +</div> + +<p>Somewhere in the reports on most children nurtured by +wolves there is comment that, even after they had been +taught by their human captors to eat meat, they continued +fond of roots, and even of grass. Is it possible, then, that the +wolves which bring up children are of a kindlier disposition +than ordinary wolves for the reason that they are +vegetarians?</p> + + +<p class="c less pad">WOLVES FOR POSTERITY</p> + +<p>As said at the beginning of this chapter on wolves, we +write for every shade of belief. This last section is for a group +first in our thoughts, because largest—the lovers of romance, +the enemies of the cant of science, the vast multitude of free +believers in the freedom to believe.</p> + +<p>True, the attacks on the wolf-pack are numerous. But what +do they amount to? They are not campaigns by great armies, +they are at most guerrilla warfare. More accurately, they are +sniping.</p> + +<p>For example, the chief of a biological survey writes letters +to a friend of his, poohpoohing wolf-pack stories, and the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_215">[Pg 215]</span> +friend perhaps shows them around a bit. Not half of the few +who see the letters will be affected—everybody knows what +scientists are, a self-elected Brain Trust dictating to all of us +as to what we may and may not believe. If the letter is shown +in any place like a smoking room, it is talked down by +several who know people who know other people who have +been treed, pursued, or at the very least scared half to death +by immense packs of wolves.</p> + +<p>Or a pack story in the newspapers gets a large head on +the front page; the denial comes a week later in small type +on an inside page where no one reads it. Again the pack +triumphs.</p> + +<p>The disgruntled may have for a time the active support +of a news-gathering organization, as above mentioned for +the <i>Associated Press</i>, but the most they can do is to caution +their own direct employees to be careful. They may not dictate +to their affiliates, as, for instance, the <i>Associated Press</i> +trying to dictate to the <i>Canadian Press</i> or to <i>Reuter’s</i>. Besides, +they could not hold their own as purveyors of readable news +if they left to rivals the wolf-children of India, the sieges of +trains by wolf-packs in the Balkans, or that increase of +wolves in the U.S.S.R. which (everybody at that time +agreed) resulted from the substitution of communism for +capitalism.</p> + +<p>You may manage, perhaps, to get printed a diatribe against +packs in a highbrow journal, as I once did in the <i>American +Mercury</i>. But you cannot make new disbelievers in wolf-packs +by addressing the readers of such a magazine, for the +badge of their sophistication is that they are disbelievers +already in whatever the rest of the world believes. If you ever<span class="pagenum" id="Page_216">[Pg 216]</span> +made nearly everybody sceptical on wolf-packs the <i>Mercury</i> +clientele would start believing in them—which is, of course, +a digression.</p> + +<p>We shall close this chapter with a triumphant, because +sufficient, proof that wolf-packs are a reality. To accomplish +this we use the democratic method, adjudication by majority +vote.</p> + +<p>We shall have support for wolf-packs from that most +popular appeal to the people, our greatest of weeklies, the +<i>Saturday Evening Post</i>, with its millions of sold copies and +no doubt several readers per copy. We shall have on our +side, too, the most orthodox and the broadest appeal to the +scientists, which is through the American Association for the +Advancement of Science and through their kind of affiliate +<i>Science Service</i>. They do not have so large a membership as +that of the <i>Post</i>, but it is effective since it overlaps but slightly +the circle of the <i>Post’s</i> readers. The members of the Association +include most professors and other teachers of science +in our various schools and colleges, most scientists in the +employ of commercial companies (at least those in the +higher brackets), and most of those employed by the national, +state, and other governments. Their official journal, +<i>Science</i>, goes to every library of consequence in the United +States, and widely through other countries. <i>Science</i> is read +for excerpts and for ideas on behalf of newspapers and magazines. +Then a great many of the papers subscribe to <i>Science +Service</i>, and even use it.</p> + +<p>If we can show that the <i>Post</i> and <i>Science</i> (including +<i>Science Service</i>) are on the side of the wolf-pack, we have +it winning hands down.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_217">[Pg 217]</span></p> + +<p>On January 9, 1932, C. B. Ruggles had in the <i>Post</i> an +article, “Neighboring With Wolves.” We are told, or given +to understand, in this and other of his <i>Post</i> contributions, +that Ruggles yields to few in the extensiveness and intensiveness +of his northern lore. He has not merely been in Alaska; +he has actually lived there. He must have been way up north, +for he tells about the sun that “it would, for one hour and +fifteen minutes, skirt the earth’s rim before sinking below +the horizon for another twenty-odd hours of opaque-lidded +slumber.” We have been told a little earlier about a Light of +Delusion—“The Eskimos call this kind of light Woosha +Kua”—which plays strange tricks with your eyesight. Still, +apparently, it was not, in the Ruggles judgment, due to the +Woosha Kua that he saw wolves pursuing caribou in great +detail and that “There were twenty-seven wolves in the +pack.”</p> + +<p>About this time I happened to give a talk before a small +group at the University Museum, Philadelphia. I must have +said something about wolf-packs and the Director, Dr. +Horace H. F. Jayne, must have given my address to Max C. +Goodman, of 3143 West Diamond Street, Philadelphia, who +in turn must have written to C. B. Ruggles, at Freedom, +Oklahoma, telling that Ruggles and I seemed in disagreement +on wolf-packs. These things are inference, for there +is a gap in my records. I have, however, a copy of a letter +from Ruggles, dated January 19, 1932, sent me by Goodman, +which runs in part:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“Nature causes wolves to gather in monstrous packs in all parts +of the wilderness the last part of December or the first part of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_218">[Pg 218]</span> +January. Eskimos call these large wolf-gatherings, ‘KA-MA-CHUA’ +(Mate choosing season) for this is about four or five +weeks prior to wolf mating time and the Eskimos as well as the +Northern trapper believe nature has brought these gatherings +about for the young and unmated wolves to choose their mates, +believed for life.</p> + +<p>“I am writing you the above for the sole purpose of you taking +it up with the greatest and most noted naturalist that you might +find. If you should find that Mr. V. Steffenson’s statement is +false, kindly investigate other positive statements that he has +made regarding the Arctic....</p> + +<p>“I hope to hear from you again and in regard to the results of +your investigation of my statement as well as the investigation +of the statement of V. Steffenson.”</p> +</div> + +<p>Goodman was to submit the Ruggles statement and mine +about wolves to “the greatest and most noted naturalist that +you might find.” So I wrote Goodman on January 25 a letter +in about 90 per cent disagreement with Ruggles and taking +substantially that position contrary to his which is stated +in the first section of the present chapter. Goodman submitted +this letter and the Ruggles one, which we quoted +just above, to the often-mentioned Chief of the U. S. Biological +Survey, Dr. E. W. Nelson. Nelson wrote Goodman +from the Hotel Johnson, Visalia, California, February 10. +Again we quote in part:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“Your letter came to me just as I was preparing to leave Washington +for California—hence, the delay in my reply.</p> + +<p>“I have been interested by the letters from Ruggles and Stefansson +and am in complete accord with the statements in Stefansson’s +letter. Mr. Ruggles appears to be imbued with the old folklore<span class="pagenum" id="Page_219">[Pg 219]</span> +idea about huge packs of wolves roaming wild regions of the +North.</p> + +<p>“In common with most people, as a young man, I had the same +ideas derived from the commonly published misstatements on the +subject. Then for more than twenty years as a field naturalist, +much of the time in wolf country and later for more than that +length of time administrating the field work of other naturalists +and hunters in wolf country, I came to a definite knowledge that +the typical wolf-pack consists of the two old wolves and their +young of the previous spring. These ‘packs’ may number from +three to more than a dozen animals, according to the number of +survivors of the litter of young. Sometimes a wolf may have a +dozen young. There is no doubt that, by chance, two or perhaps +more litters might come together, but such association would be +extremely brief. I have never known or had definite information +of such an instance and it is given as a mere possibility.</p> + +<p>“For many years, the Biological Survey in Washington investigated +every published account of devastations and of the killing +of people by wolf-packs in the United States and Canada by +writing to the postmaster or others living near the scene of the +alleged work of wolf-packs and without a single exception, they +proved to be purely imaginary.</p> + +<p>“Under my direction, one of the best field naturalists in the +Government Service spent more than a year in the Tanana River +country of Alaska in the very district where Alaska papers published +accounts of great wolf-packs destroying caribou and although +he traversed that country in various directions in winter, +he saw only occasional wolf tracks in the snow and never a sign +of the alleged packs....</p> + +<p>“My information is from my own observations and from hundreds +of other reliable men in the field in wolf country.”</p> +</div> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_220">[Pg 220]</span></p> + +<p>Once more there is, superficially, a defeat of the wolf-pack. +Really the pack won, for the <i>Post</i> is read by several +million people of the type who believe what they see in +that sort of publication, while the quadrangular Goodman-Nelson-Ruggles-Stefansson +correspondence could have had +an effect upon only one of the four. Ruggles knew already +there were packs, so we could not convince him there +weren’t. Nelson and I knew there weren’t any, so Ruggles +could not convince us there were. Goodman remained the +only one who may have been affected, and he may have +swung either way. I believe Dr. Jayne saw the correspondence, +but from his record I think he was likely enough +prejudiced already against the pack. Perhaps a dozen or two +of Goodman’s friends saw the correspondence, and perhaps +some of them were influenced. If so, they may have gone +in either direction. Therefore, the balloting, <i>Post</i> readers +against some of the letter readers, must have gone something +like a million to one in favor of the pack.</p> + +<p>The authenticity of the wolf-pack might have been secure +for years on the strength of just the one Ruggles article in +the <i>Saturday Evening Post</i>. But they have carried more articles +by Ruggles, and may have carried further eyewitness +testimony. Then certainly there are many journals, only a +little down from the <i>Post</i> in their sway of the public mind +which have borne witness. Packs are going strong in the +movies and, as shown heretofore, they appear frequently in +the daily press. The general verdict is, therefore, clear.</p> + +<p>But we said above that we would range scientists with the +true believers. This we do by referring to the previously<span class="pagenum" id="Page_221">[Pg 221]</span> +described journal <i>Science</i>, from which we quote in part an +item that appeared in the issue of February 28, 1936:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“Wolf fighters, skilled in warfare against these voracious pack-hunting +beasts, are asked for in an emergency wire from Governor +John W. Troy, of Alaska, recently received at the Department +of the Interior.... Vicious gangs of wolves have been +raiding the reindeer herds owned by natives of northern Alaska.... +Native hunters have proved unable to cope with the animals, +but it is believed that about four hunter leaders, each with a few +assistants, could in a swift campaign break up the marauding +bands.”</p> +</div> + +<p>Thus we have the official journal of a foremost scientific +body vouching for wolves as pack-hunters, as being in gangs +and in bands.</p> + +<p>But a testimony from Canada is in a way more striking +than any can be from the United States, for wolves are by +common consent more numerous and widespread there. As +in the United States, the Canadian Government takes special +cognizance of them, for they prey on flock and fowl. There +is, then, <i>Bulletin No. 13, New Series</i>, Dominion of Canada, +Department of Agriculture, “The Habits and Economic +Importance of Wolves in Canada,” by Norman Criddle. On +p. 6 we read:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“Parent wolves live in pairs during the summer months, but +as the young develop they form with them small bands, which +meeting with other families in their wanderings, acquire the proportions +of packs. These packs break up again in February....”</p> +</div> + +<p>We close our case by repeating and insisting that attacks<span class="pagenum" id="Page_222">[Pg 222]</span> +on wolf-packs are not serious—they are no more than sporadic +sniping.</p> + +<p>The <i>Saturday Evening Post</i>, <i>Science Service</i>, and the Department +of Agriculture of the Dominion of Canada, powerful +and worthy of all respect and confidence, are in this +relation spokesmen too for a popular and a scientific multitude. +The wolf-pack, then, is secure even as things stand. But +conditions are bound to trend steadily in their favor. As +living beasts, wolves are getting fewer with the colonization +of the wilderness, but wolf-pack stories do not thereby get +fewer—witness how they come again and again from districts +where wolves no longer exist. The fewer the living +wolves the less the chance of their being so studied that +evidence against the pack habit can be gathered. Finally +there will be no wolves left, except in zoos. The belief in +packs will have survived the means of refuting it. It will +have become a truth.</p> + + +<div class="chapter"> +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_223">[Pg 223]</span></p> + +<div class="figcenter2" id="c6"> +<img src="images/fig1.jpg" alt="decoration"> +</div> + +<h2>CHAPTER VI.</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c large sp"><span class="smcap">Beyond the Frontier</span></p> + + +<p><span class="more">THE FOLLOWING CHAPTER WAS ORIGINALLY A SERIOUS COMPLAINT</span> +against the schoolbooks of Canada, but, in the light +of more mature thinking along the lines of standardization, +it appears to us now that the points we have made against +the textbooks are really points in their favor. We have established +(Chapter I.) that the standardization of error would +simplify our thinking, thus making life easier and, to that +extent, better. We must commend Canada for her pioneer +work in our theory, especially when, as we readily perceive, +it is done at the expense of her own development, therefore +in a spirit of true self-sacrifice.</p> + +<p>The lower schoolbooks we shall quote in this statement, +for contrast with university teaching, are: <i>Ontario Public +School Geography</i>, authorized for use in the public schools +of Ontario; <i>The Teacher’s Manual</i>, authorized for use of +teachers in Ontario; <i>Public School Geography</i>, authorized +for use in the public schools of Alberta; <i>Manual of Geography, +I</i>, authorized for use of teachers and high school +students of Alberta; Dent’s <i>Canadian Geography Readers</i>, +Book II, optional or supplementary reading in several provinces;<span class="pagenum" id="Page_224">[Pg 224]</span> +<i>The Canadian School Geography</i>, authorized for use +in the public schools of British Columbia, Manitoba, Nova +Scotia, Quebec and Saskatchewan; <i>Canadian Readers</i>, authorized +for use in the public schools of Manitoba, Saskatchewan, +Alberta and British Columbia. Most of these books are +dated 1928 or 1929. All of them were bought from displays +for the present school season.</p> + +<p>The observed temperatures about to be quoted in this +article for contrast with the textbooks are, unless otherwise +stated, taken from the records of the Dominion Meteorological +Service. Some of the other facts used are from +Government reports; most of the rest are from my own +observation through ten winters and thirteen summers spent +in the Arctic, during which I traveled there afoot about +20,000 miles—a good opportunity to see conditions as they +are.</p> + +<p>Studying the books purchased, I found that practically +all of the geographies were still holding to the ancient Greek +philosophical view that the farther north you go the colder +it is, no matter what the time of year. One book expresses it, +“The temperature steadily decreases from the Equator to the +Poles,” and the others have the same idea worded differently. +The climate of the North is “especially unfavorable for both +plants and animals.” In the Arctic “terrible blizzards often +rage for days together.”</p> + +<p>Postponing our discussion of the more important season +of summer, what are the facts about the Canadian winter? +One is that children in certain wheat-raising sections of +Alberta, who probably shudder with sympathy for the poor +Eskimos, are themselves living in a region that has minimum<span class="pagenum" id="Page_225">[Pg 225]</span> +winter periods colder than any Eskimo is known to have +lived through. Few Eskimos have ever seen sixty below zero. +The probable lowest temperature for the North Pole itself +is twenty degrees warmer, say fifty-eight or sixty below. The +lowest temperature recorded on the north coast of Canada is +fifty-two below. But we have the following minima from +the southern third of Canada: Quebec, sixty-three below; +Ontario, sixty below; Manitoba, sixty-three below; Saskatchewan, +seventy below; Alberta, seventy-eight below.</p> + +<p>There is probably, then, no Eskimo living who has felt a +temperature as low as thousands of our children face going +to school in prosperous communities of southern Canada. If +there are Eskimos who have felt cold equal to that of some +of our farming communities, they belong to tribes that winter +inland, well to the south of the coast dwellers.</p> + +<p>As to blizzards and snowfall: excluding the Atlantic and +Pacific coasts, the line of heaviest snowfall in Canada is +approximately at the Canada-United States border. Storms +are, on the average, fewer and milder in the Arctic than in +any other equally large area on earth, as the great explorer, +Nansen, pointed out more than thirty years ago. It is for +these reasons among others that trans-Arctic flying is steadily +pushing to the front as the practical solution of commerce +by air between the Old World and the New.</p> + +<p>However, from the strictly economic point of view, it +makes little difference what we teach in the schools about +the winter temperatures of Canada. Mining, for instance, +can be carried forward in any climate, for among the successful +coal mines are those of Alabama, 1,000 miles south of +Winnipeg, and those of Spitsbergen, 2,000 miles north of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_226">[Pg 226]</span> +Winnipeg. In factory work the expenditure for fuel varies +and is an important charge against operation, but still there +are great industrial centers developing all the way from +Birmingham to Montreal.</p> + +<p>Blizzards are perhaps unpleasant. I have met in the Arctic +numbers of Royal Canadian Mounted Police who had been +stationed at Regina, in southern Saskatchewan, not so far +from the United States border, and I don’t remember finding +one who did not think Regina blizzards as bad as any +they had seen on the north coast of Canada. Yet Regina is +considered one of the fine Canadian cities and its chief handicap +of late years has been not the cold nor blizzards of +winter—it has been the dryness of the hot summers. July +temperatures are frequently higher in that part of Saskatchewan +than in the Miami part of Florida.</p> + +<p>Cold may distress you, but Montreal is larger than New +Orleans. Of the two Red River valleys, the one in Louisiana +is warmer, but the one in Manitoba is better for wheat. Winnipeg, +which handles more wheat than any city in the world, +has an average temperature for the year that is just at the +freezing point—thirty-two F.</p> + +<p>Winter temperatures, then, have little effect upon the prosperity +of lands or the growth of cities, nor do blizzards +signify. It is the summer temperatures that matter, and the +length of the summer, for upon them depend the economic +vegetations that give food to the people and feed to grazing +animals.</p> + +<p>The greatest economic damage to Canada that is wrought +by the public schools is, therefore, in describing incorrectly +its northern summers. For the schools teach as a principle<span class="pagenum" id="Page_227">[Pg 227]</span> +that the farther north you go the colder the summers become. +They do further harm by misrepresenting not only +the summer temperatures of Arctic and sub-Arctic Canada +but also the length of the growing season.</p> + +<p>As to the heat and length of the northern summer, and +some of their direct results, the textbooks approved by various +provinces teach the following things among others: “In +northern Canada and northern Alaska ... during the short +summer the very slanting sunlight is unable to raise the +temperature much above the freezing point,” says a geography +approved by several provinces. “There is no warm season +(in the Arctic),” is how we are told the same thing in +a manual of geography authorized by a department of education +for the guidance of teachers, and printed not by a +commercial house, but by a King’s Printer. Every province +has some officially approved textbook that states or implies +that hot weather—eighty to ninety degrees in the shade—does +not occur in the Arctic at all, and that it occurs rarely +even in those parts of the Northwest Territories that lie +between the Arctic Circle and Edmonton—which is just +south of 54° and corresponds to Leeds in England, Copenhagen +in Denmark, and Moscow in Russia.</p> + +<p>This would be sad if true. But the summer temperatures +in the Mackenzie district of the Northwest Territories hard +up against the Arctic Circle really go to ninety-six degrees, +while the highest for Prince Edward Island, in southeastern +Canada, is only ninety-two. The highest temperature recorded +since 1900 in Winnipeg is one hundred degrees and +the same temperature has been recorded in Alaska by the +United States Weather Bureau at Fort Yukon, north of the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_228">[Pg 228]</span> +Arctic Circle. Temperatures ranging from eighty to ninety +degrees are common both in the Canadian and Alaskan +Arctic.</p> + +<p>Some of the lower school geographies give the real facts +of Arctic summer temperatures, but do not correlate them +so as to enable an ordinary student to realize that what the +textbook says elsewhere about the summer never being warm +must be incorrect. The texts state, for instance, that in midsummer +the sun delivers about half as much heat per hour +in the Arctic as it does at the equator. Elsewhere they mention +that the Arctic day is twenty-four hours long and the +equatorial day only twelve hours long. What they do not +draw attention to, thus failing to enlighten the careless +reader, is that there is no difference between the result of +half the heat-delivery for double the time and double the +heat-delivery for half the time.</p> + +<p>It is just because half the heat for double the time is as +good as double the heat for half the time that you expect, +and do get, tropical heat in those north polar lowlands (and +they are extensive) where sea breezes do not seriously +interfere.</p> + +<p>Having described the climate in such unfriendly terms, +perhaps it is consistency that impels the Canadian textbooks +to make the vegetation correspond with it. “Much of this +vast area,” says one, “is a treeless wilderness of rock and +swamp, covered with mosses and lichens which provide food +for the caribou and musk ox.” “In the extreme north,” says +another, “(there is) a cold desert where, however, vegetation +is not entirely wanting; for in the marshes in summer the +ground becomes covered with reindeer moss on which the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_229">[Pg 229]</span> +caribou and musk oxen feed.” “Why cannot trees grow +there?” asks a third, to which the general textbook reply is +that the winters are too cold for them. A reading selection +continues the work of the geographies with, “In that land +there is little but ice and snow.”</p> + +<p>But what are the facts? One is that inside the Arctic +Circle mosses and lichens are not so prevalent as they are +inside the textbook covers. By tonnage they comprise less +than ten per cent of the vegetation. The other ninety per +cent is represented by flowering plants. In all my Arctic +experience I have never found a region where mosses and +lichens prevailed over the flowering plants. I had to visit a +section near Churchill, Manitoba, 600 miles south of the +Arctic Circle, to see that sort of country.</p> + +<p>What about trees? A hundred miles north of the Arctic +Circle in Canada the Forestry Branch of the Department of +the Interior has reported trees seventy feet high, straight, +and fourteen inches through. Similar trees go at least twice +that height beyond the Circle in Siberia. Moreover, the textbooks +imply in most cases, and specify in one, that winter +cold limits the growth of trees; but the coldest known spot +north of the equator—Verkhoyansk, in the Yakutsk Province +of Siberia—has a dense forest of both evergreen and +deciduous trees, although the recorded temperatures go +down to ninety-three degrees below zero.<a id="FNanchor_16" href="#Footnote_16" class="fnanchor">[16]</a> The Prairie Provinces +which have approved this book are themselves in part +treeless. Would they appreciate the intimation that this is<span class="pagenum" id="Page_230">[Pg 230]</span> +because of the cold? And if so, how can they reconcile the +teaching of their schools with the fact that the largest treeless +sections of the Prairie Provinces themselves are in their +southern parts, the largest forests in the northern?</p> + +<p>The Canadian textbook allegation that in the Arctic “there +is little but ice and snow” conveys to the child among other +things the idea that there is a heavy snowfall. Instead, the +snowfall, as previously mentioned, is heavier in the most +southerly hundred miles of Canada than in the most northerly +hundred. Or again, the pupil may think the statement +means that in July and August there is more snow or ice +on the ground in the North. But the fact is that British +Columbia has ten times as much snow in July (permanent +snow) as the whole of the much larger section of our continent +designated the Northwest Territories. The part of +Alaska which lies in the temperate zone has a hundred times +as much permanent snow as there is in the Arctic section +of Alaska. In the south Alaska mountains the snow line +comes down to sea level; in the north Alaska mountains it +is 4,000 to 6,000 feet above the sea.</p> + +<p>Lest the child may think that the desolation and worthlessness +are largely confined to the Arctic Circle proper, a +fifth-year Canadian reader instructs him in part as follows: +“Long before the treeless wastes are reached, the forest ceases +to be forest except by courtesy.... On the shores of Great +Bear Lake—which is, of course, in the Temperate Zone—four +centuries are necessary for the growth of a trunk not so +thick as a man’s wrist.... Still farther north the trees become +mere stunted stems set with blighted buds that have never +been able to develop themselves into branches; until, finally,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_231">[Pg 231]</span> +the last vestiges of arboreal growth take refuge under a thick +carpet of lichens and mosses, the characteristic vegetation +of the Barren Grounds.”</p> + +<p>The textbook editor borrows this heartening description, +and much other cheerful information about Canadian resources +and climate, from a book entitled, humorously +enough, <i>Greater Canada</i>. If a country thus described be indeed +a “Greater Canada,” then we wonder what those may +believe who are really pessimistic.</p> + +<p>Against this “Greater Canada” view let us set the facts, +uncontested by those who have lived on Great Bear Lake +and have traversed the forest north of it to where it meets +the Arctic prairie. Instead of being no bigger around than +your wrist, the larger trees on Bear Lake are a foot and a +half through, and a hundred feet high. There is no such +gradual diminution in size as the author makes out. We have +already mentioned, for instance, the Forestry Service report +which describes trees seventy feet high a hundred miles +north of Great Bear Lake and within five miles of the beginning +of the Arctic prairie. Again there is Big Stick Island, +northeast of Great Bear Lake, a clump really beyond the tree +line. It is only a few acres, and yet the trees are a foot +through, tall and straight.</p> + +<p>I have come in from the Arctic prairie to the northernmost +forest at various points on the thousand-mile front +ranging from the Colville to the Coppermine, and I have +never seen the peculiar trees of <i>Greater Canada</i> with +“blighted buds that have never been able to develop themselves +into branches.” Once, for instance, when I discovered +trees just a few miles inland from Franklin Bay in a section<span class="pagenum" id="Page_232">[Pg 232]</span> +where I did not expect them, I entered in my diary the +unusually (for me) poetic description that I had seen “a +little band of Christmas trees climbing the hillside.” They +were of such proportions as to branch and stem that they +would have been saleable at Yuletide in any of our cities.</p> + +<p>We have commented before on the textbook idea that +the chief vegetation of the Arctic, or even of the “Barren +Grounds,” is mosses and lichens. Here we comment rather +on the name itself—Barren Grounds. According to a bulletin +of the Department of the Interior, the epithet “Barren +Grounds” was originally applied to the prairie districts between +Winnipeg and Calgary. When growing knowledge +showed how absurd the name was for that section, it was +not abolished as it should have been, but was, so to speak, +lifted up and transported from the southern prairies across +the northern forest to the northern prairies and there set +down to do its part in holding back the development of the +North as it already had held back for awhile the development +of the West.</p> + +<p>I was born and brought up in that West which was originally +called “Barren Grounds,” and have often said that had +I been transferred in my boyhood by magic from the prairies, +across which I used to ride as a cowboy, to the prairies of +Banks Island, 200 miles north of the north coast of Canada, +I should have known on waking up that I was not in my +home district, but I could not have decided offhand that I +was not somewhere in northern North Dakota or southern +Saskatchewan. Dropping on my knees and playing Sherlock +Holmes, I could have decided by careful study of the vegetation +and soil that I was in a strange place, but looking off to<span class="pagenum" id="Page_233">[Pg 233]</span> +the sky line I should have felt at home. There would have +been the same rolling prairie, with perhaps somewhat less +grass but with a great many more flowers. Had it been +winter there would have been snow on the ground in both +places, but less in Banks Island than in Saskatchewan.</p> + +<p>With such experience of the trees, grasses and flowers of +southern and of northern Canada, it is easier for me to read +the lower school textbooks as works of humor than of sober +instruction. But children take them seriously, and it is difficult +to look upon the results as merely funny.</p> + +<p>The ground frost of northern Canada is made a handicap +in the textbooks. But in real life as often as not it is useful. +“Fields of ice and snow and a permanently frozen subsoil +effectively limit man’s movements in the Arctic ... regions,” +says one of them, and that is a just sample of what most of +them say or imply.</p> + +<p>The first advantage of frozen subsoil is that there can be +no dry season. The growers of cereals and vegetables now +count on that in Alaska. So do the reindeer ranchers. For if +the season has less rain than usual it means only that the +ground will thaw deeper than usual, and the roots of the +plants will reach farther down for their water. The only +thing the rancher has to guard against is the trampling out +of the forage vegetation by the animals, just as he would if +he were an Australian sheep farmer. So far as dry seasons +are concerned, he can graze the same numbers on a given +ranch for any period of years, a thing the Australian cannot +do, for his feed varies with the rains.</p> + +<p>A second advantage, less important, but spectacular and +about to come much into public view, bears upon flying. For<span class="pagenum" id="Page_234">[Pg 234]</span> +where there is a frozen subsoil there is no underground +drainage, and rain and thaw waters stay where they fall. +This creates innumerable lakes all over the country, providing +flyers with natural landing fields for pontoons in summer +and skis in winter. That is one reason why accidents +are fewer in the Arctic than in temperate or tropic flying. +If you are a mile high and you develop engine trouble, you +can always glide to a safe landing where the subsoil is +frozen.</p> + +<p>Those who have kept track of the advance of the Hudson +Bay Railway from The Pas to Churchill, even if it be only +through press despatches, are familiar with a third advantage, +for the ground frost has simplified and made cheaper +and easier the building of that important pioneer line. In so +far as the cost of construction is derived from taxes, the +people of the whole of Canada have benefited in purse from +the very condition which they formerly thought would increase +the building costs.</p> + +<p>Coming back again to Arctic vegetation in the textbooks, +we find a reader approved for school use in four provinces +saying: “There are no trees in this cold land, but there is a +kind of hard brown moss that grows under the snow.” There +are known to be more than 300 species of Arctic moss. These +the textbook ignores along with more than 700 kinds of +flowering plants. And why does this one moss that is known +to the textbook compiler do its growing under the snow? +Isn’t it poor judgment for even a moss to wait idle during +the hot summer and to begin to grow in the fall when snow +comes? Or—and I gather this from the complete selection—perhaps +the author believes that a snow covering is permanent<span class="pagenum" id="Page_235">[Pg 235]</span> +in the Arctic. The fact is, of course, that Arctic land is +permanently snow-covered only on or near mountains. Most +Arctic lands are low and, like the Prairie Provinces, they +have snow in winter and none in summer. In Peary Land, +the most northerly land on earth, there are bees and butterflies +in the rolling meadows of flowers and grass.</p> + +<p>The textbook statement that musk oxen feed on moss is +perhaps a minor error from the point of view of this article, +but it shows how widespread are the inaccuracies. All those +who have studied this animal report that it lives mainly on +grasses, sedges, and browse.</p> + +<p>Up to this point, the geographies have, in the main, agreed +to disagree with the scientists. On the question of animal +life they begin to disagree with each other. Some of them, +having talked so convincingly of sparse vegetation, continue +this idea. For, since many of the Arctic animals are herbivorous, +if the text admitted that there are large numbers of +them, the children might well begin to puzzle as to what +they lived on. Therefore we find one author saying that the +Eskimos live almost wholly on animals and that their “available +food supply is scanty.” A school reader has it that “there +are very few (musk oxen) left. They keep them in a park +with a high wire fence about it.”</p> + +<p>Others, however, report large herds of caribou and musk +oxen, and some go so far as to mention polar bears, wolves, +foxes, hares, seals and fish. But we gather from the texts +that these animals lead a precarious existence.</p> + +<p>As a fact, few known waters are richer in fish, whales and +seals than those of the Arctic. The caribou of Arctic and +sub-Arctic Canada number several hundred for each single<span class="pagenum" id="Page_236">[Pg 236]</span> +Eskimo, and yet travelers who have described bands of thousands, +and even herds of a hundred thousand moving together, +have never reported any noticeable depletion in the +vegetation.</p> + +<p>In the case of musk oxen, there are probably 4,000 wild +for every forty that are in fenced parks. These wild musk +oxen are in no danger of extinction at present, for most of +them are on islands that are uninhabited, many of them +never even visited by Eskimos.</p> + +<p>Having invented a fictitious country and named it Eskimoland, +the textbooks find it necessary to invent a fictitious +people, and the Eskimos are misrepresented even more than +the territories they inhabit. They are supposed to be all alike, +though some of them live farther away from others than +Canada is from Mexico, and have less contact. Their climate +has only one description in most textbooks, although they +really live in several different climates. The materials of the +description of land and people, so far as they are not invented +have, however, been gathered from many Eskimo countries, +many Eskimo climates, and many Eskimo peoples. The +result is a patchwork portrait which resembles no Eskimo +who ever lived. Then they make this patchwork man live in +a patchwork country. One is as real as the other.</p> + +<p>The schoolbook accounts of the Eskimo presumably arouse +in the child both pity and amusement. Here are some of the +quotations:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“The Eskimo has an environment which forces him into constant +conflict with Nature. He is in continual danger of freezing +and starving to death.”</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_237">[Pg 237]</span></p> + +<p>“The Eskimo suffers from intestinal diseases, malnutrition and +scurvy, and his resistance to disease is greatly lowered.</p> + +<p>“The ravenous eating of tallow candles and soap by Eskimo +children is well attested.”</p> + +<p>“When the Eskimo boy is thirsty, he drinks oil.”</p> +</div> + +<p>Against this picture stands in my mind my own experience +of living more than ten years as an Eskimo among Eskimos. +To me it seems that as a race they have more leisure than +city dwellers, for instance. Some of the geographies mention +their ivory carving and ornamental ceremonial dress, but +they leave it a mystery how a people under terrific strain for +a livelihood find time for such things. My observation has +been that in many communities the needed work to provide +food, shelter and clothing requires from the Eskimo less +than half of our standard eight-hour day. Four hours of +work and eight of sleep give him twelve hours of leisure. +Accordingly, a man will spend a week carving an ivory +handle which he could have made plain in half a day. A +woman who could sew a warm coat in two days will spend +two months making one not so warm (but in her opinion +prettier) by cutting up whole skins and piecing them together +in complicated designs. Entire communities spend +weeks singing and dancing and listening to story-tellers +spinning out long tales of adventure with spirits and with +men. The winters, so frightful in the textbooks, are their +holiday season, spent in carrying out elaborate festivities.</p> + +<p>Most of the textbooks say or imply that most or all Eskimos +live in snow or ice houses in winter. This is geographical +hodgepodge. No Eskimos live in ice houses, or at least<span class="pagenum" id="Page_238">[Pg 238]</span> +I never heard of it. Some live in snow houses, but more than +half the Eskimos in the world have never seen them. In the +textbooks all snow houses are called “igloos,” but the word +<i>iglu</i> simply means house in general, or dwelling. It is misleading +to imply that snow houses are known to all Eskimos +and used by most of them. In many districts the snow house, +being unknown, is not even represented by any word in the +vocabulary. Many Eskimos live in houses built of earth and +wood, or with bone rafters and walls of stone and earth. +There are several other types of dwelling.</p> + +<p>The case is worse about the use of oil. According to the +above textbook quotation and many similar, they drink it. +Before my recent study of Canadian lower school texts, I +had heard that they did this for two other reasons—one that +they liked it, and the other to keep warm. It remained for +a Toronto textbook to advance the new explanation that they +do it to quench thirst. But to have this true, the laws of both +physiology and chemistry would have to be changed. Physiology +teaches that thirst is quenched only by water, and +chemistry that there is in oil no water which the human +stomach is capable of extracting.</p> + +<p>The Eskimo stomach is similar to your stomach. If you +think he drinks oil for any reason, I would suggest that you +take about a water tumbler of whatever oil you prefer. If +you have a strong will you may be able to get it down, but +the chances are three in four that you will not be able to +keep it down. If you are the one in four who can keep it +down, you will very soon wish that you weren’t.</p> + +<p>The truth is that Eskimos use oil with their food, as we +do salad oil or gravy. They eat it but they don’t drink it, and,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_239">[Pg 239]</span> +therefore, instead of being weird monstrosities, they are just +like us in this respect, as they are in most fundamental human +things.</p> + +<p>One textbook says that a cold climate produces people who +are stunted in mind and body. For body the Eskimo might +be described as of average stature rather than small. Mentally +their teachers usually report them to be near the European +average.</p> + +<p>That brings us to the question of the spread of European +education in the Far North. A school reader says: “There +are no books in that land and (the Eskimos) could not read +them if there were.” If this were true, it would bear out the +allegation that the Eskimos are stupid, for the Danes began +trying to teach them reading and writing about two centuries +ago. They found them apt pupils, the knowledge +gained by one or a few spreading by native instruction from +house to house and village to village. The work since then +has been shared by two governments, the Danish and that +of the United States—Canada has, as yet, taken no direct +educational action. Effective cultural work has been done +by the churches, among them the Anglicans, Lutherans, +Moravians, Presbyterians, Quakers, and Roman Catholics. +It would be strange if the efforts of all these bodies, some +going back two hundred years, left it still a justifiable criticism +of Eskimos that they cannot read or write. As a matter +of fact, more than half the total Eskimo population of Greenland, +Labrador, Canada and Alaska can read and write some +language, generally their own. They publish some of their +own books and have (in Greenland) a magazine that has +appeared regularly since 1867. Editors, proof-readers, type-setters,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_240">[Pg 240]</span> +engravers, printers, subscription solicitors and the +rest have all been Eskimo through all that time. No other +language has been employed in connection with the journal. +It is as Eskimo as the <i>Spectator</i> is English.</p> + +<p>Which, by the way, is more interesting, the fiction that +“the Eskimo” does not know what a book is, or the fact that +one of the older journals in the western hemisphere is in +Eskimo?</p> + +<p>That Eskimo children eat soap is ridiculous on the face of +it. I have never seen Eskimos eat candles, nor heard of a +case. But if they did eat tallow candles it would be no +stranger than the eating of tallow in any other form. Tallow +is only suet, and many a well-ordered meal in our country +still includes suet pudding.</p> + +<p>As for the “deficiency diseases and scurvy,” the Eskimos +are, as far as we know, free from them so long as they live +on their own accustomed diets. Once they begin to live on +white men’s groceries and neglect to secure fresh meat, +these diseases grow. Dr. William A. Thomas, of Chicago, +found in Labrador, for instance, that the Eskimos who suffered +most were those nearest the trading stations and most +supplied with white men’s food. In the sections beyond the +reach of the traders, or little affected by them, the deficiency +troubles vanished.</p> + +<p>As to commercial dealings with the outside world, we are +instructed by the geographies in contrary ways. On page 12 +of one of them, the printed matter says: “The Eskimos have +almost no trade with other people. They must depend on +their own country to supply their wants.” But on page 123 +of this same book, there is a photograph of six power<span class="pagenum" id="Page_241">[Pg 241]</span> +schooners—not whaleboats—with the caption “Eskimo +Whaleboats, Fort McPherson!”</p> + +<p>It is, as a matter of fact, one of the important industries +of Edmonton to supply Eskimos with power schooners. I +have seen a photograph from the Arctic, sent me by an officer +of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, showing $100,000 +worth of these in a single view. The same engines that produce +electric light for these Eskimos on shipboard in summer +are used by them sometimes to light their houses in winter. +Some have separate Delco electric lighting systems for their +homes.</p> + +<p>But the teachers of Edmonton, the city which furnishes +most of these supplies, use now, or did use recently, textbooks +which state or imply that the Eskimos have no boats +except skin canoes, and no light except seal-oil lamps. Nor +can you defend the books by suggesting that they are talking +of fifty or a hundred years ago. The context shows that these +allegations are supposed to fit the present.</p> + +<p>To balance all these unfavorable truths about the northern +half of Canada, I have been able to discover in the school +texts one—and only one—favorable mistake. A geography +says, “Mosquitoes are found all over the North American +continent except in the extreme north.” Anyone who has +been there will tell you that the contrary is the fact. Until +you approach the Arctic you do not know how bad mosquitoes +can be.</p> + +<p>A thing which the incorrect schoolbooks are doing is to +dampen that current enthusiasm about the Far North of +Canada which is due to the beginning of actual mining in +the Middle North, where Flin Flon and Sherritt Gordon are +already words to conjure with.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_242">[Pg 242]</span></p> + +<p>For these mines are in the sub-Arctic, which, according to +the textbooks, is almost as bad as the Arctic itself, a land +barren because of the cold. Mining is expensive where food +is not produced locally and where no one lives except the +miners and their dependents. There is, in consequence, a +fundamental need to colonize even the richest mineral districts +with a food-producing population. Sunlight and rainfall +are, therefore, the most important resources of any district, +and the younger generation of Canadians should be +permitted to grow up with a true understanding of how +heat and water are distributed, and how these are used by +nature for the production of those plants upon which all +animal life, including the human, must in the last resort +depend.</p> + +<p>Canada is two things, a people and a country. We need +truthful histories for a reasonable judgment of our past; we +need accurate geographies for planning the future. The +schoolboys and the schoolgirls of today, most of them without +university training, will step into control of this land +tomorrow. Their chief equipment for that task is their education. +What the university courses teach in advanced geography +and climatology is not propaganda but truth. Why +not give the pupils of the common schools the advantage of +the same correct description of the climate and its results, +so that they, too, will know how to prepare for the great +spread of settlements northward that must continue till inhabited +Canada becomes as broad as it is long, a nation drawing +power from all its territories, even the farthest islands +in the northern sea?</p> + + +<div class="chapter"> +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_243">[Pg 243]</span></p> + +<div class="figcenter2" id="c7"> +<img src="images/fig1.jpg" alt="decoration"> +</div> + +<h2>CHAPTER VII.</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c large sp"><span class="smcap">Olof Krarer</span></p> + + +<p><span class="more">IN THE SCHOOLS OF MANY LANDS, INCLUDING THOSE WHICH</span> +speak English, the Eskimos are studied during the early +grades. In my youth I learned many strange things concerning +them. We spoke of Eskimos and of Eskimoland as if the +people were all alike and lived in one place.</p> + +<p>The Eskimos are a godsend to the schools. From their +simplicity you can get a parallel to the simplicity of our +own remote ancestors and also a contrast to the multiplicities +of civilization. It is easy to teach and to learn that, while +in our land it is sometimes hot and sometimes cold, there is +a district south of us where it is always hot and another +north of us, Eskimoland, where it is always cold. This impresses +upon the child-mind that there is a balance and symmetry +in nature, which has been a favorite doctrine since +Greek times.</p> + +<p>Heat is life-giving (the school instruction went on); the +hot lands are luxuriant and beautiful. Cold is deadening; the +cold lands of the Eskimos are sterile, bleak, forbidding. +Things develop to large size in heat; cold has a stunting<span class="pagenum" id="Page_244">[Pg 244]</span> +influence. Therefore, trees become smaller and smaller as +you go north until you come to the last cringing shrubs. +Beyond them, in a treeless waste, are the Eskimos, a little +people, themselves stunted by the cold. In their bitter struggle +to eke out the scantiest of livings they cower, wrapped +in furs, inside huts of snow which give them bare shelter +from the furious Arctic blizzards. To keep warm they eat +the most warming food, which is fat; so they live on +blubber. They grease their bodies with oil as a further protection +from the cold, and they drink oil. Though we need +varied meals, a balanced ration, the Eskimos are strangely +able to live on animal tissues alone and they eat their meat +raw, usually warm from a recently slaughtered beast or else +frozen.</p> + +<p>But, marvelous to relate, in spite of all these things, the +Eskimos are a jolly, happy little people. They serve thus a +double moral purpose. The gruesome view of their land and +of their life makes us better contented with ours; we see +from their happiness under conditions of misery that really +it isn’t so bad, in comparison, to be poor and jobless down +here. We should all, therefore, be contented and happy.</p> + +<p>In view of the large place held by Eskimos in our scheme +of child training, the misfortune is serious that our educators, +particularly the writers of our schoolbooks, have been +forced to get their Eskimo material at second hand from +the writings and lectures of explorers. The situation was +made worse in that a good many explorers lacked the imagination +and the literary gifts necessary for making possible +the desired insight into the heart and soul of these present-day +survivors of Stone Age man.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_245">[Pg 245]</span></p> + +<p>It is a major good fortune that American educators have +had opportunity for close relation with at least one Eskimo, +Olof Krarer.</p> + +<p class="gtb">******</p> + +<p>The autumn 1912 I came south after four consecutive +years in the Arctic, making several reports, one of them +that among some hundreds of Eskimos who were not known +to have been in touch with Europeans I had seen ten or +more who were as light in complexion and eye color as if +they were anything from one-quarter to three-quarters +European. A reporter changed my statement to convey the +impression that I had found near Coronation Gulf several +hundred Eskimos all of whom were blond. This reporter +has since claimed, probably with more right than anybody +else, that he made me famous. Certainly there was a big +newspaper hubbub.</p> + +<p>In a barrage of letters to the press there came one from +Ithaca, New York. The writer was a professor of Cornell. +He tried to bring into an acrimonious discussion a quiet, +urbane tone. It was not fair, he contended, to denounce +Stefansson as a charlatan for having claimed to discover a +new race of blond people in the Far North, for these people +indubitably exist. But neither was it fair to praise his “discovery” +vociferously, as some were doing, for blond Eskimos +were so well known that they were, for instance, a matter +of his own experience and that of his family. For he and his +wife had had the pleasure some years ago to entertain in +their home one of them who had come to Ithaca as a lecturer. +She was a woman named Olof Krarer, small of stature +like the rest of her people, with light hair and with blue<span class="pagenum" id="Page_246">[Pg 246]</span> +eyes of quite the Scandinavian type. She had made a favorable +impression.<a id="FNanchor_17" href="#Footnote_17" class="fnanchor">[17]</a></p> + +<p>The letter from Cornell stirred childhood recollections. I +had heard my mother and the neighbors talk of a strange +and pathetic girl who came with them on the emigrant +ship from Iceland in 1876. She must have been nearing +twenty but she was small for a child of ten, a dwarf. She +was vivacious, ambitious, and talked of the opportunities for +distinction and advancement which awaited her in the New +World. Her fellow-immigrants did not know whether to +laugh or weep. She was clever, but her physical handicap +seemed more than her gifts could surmount.</p> + +<p>The party of colonists landed in Nova Scotia. After a year +in that province many of them traveled west through the +Great Lakes and by way of the Red River of the North to +Lake Winnipeg, where my parents settled and where I was +born.</p> + +<p>In 1880 our family moved to Dakota Territory and so did +Olof’s, but she had gone off on her own and was probably +in Winnipeg. Some years later we heard in North Dakota +that she was in a circus exhibiting herself as an Eskimo. +The Icelanders (who until recently were proud of being +about the least adulterated Nordics in Europe) were at first +scandalized and inclined to attempt stopping the imposture. +On second thought most if not all of them felt that little +harm could be done to their nationality by the fraud compared +to the tragedy it would be for this handicapped +woman to be exposed and deprived of the one thing which<span class="pagenum" id="Page_247">[Pg 247]</span> +gave her a livelihood and a tolerable life. We know now +that she even won respect and affection—witness the above +Cornell testimony and much shall be hereinafter cited.</p> + +<p>There was presently in the Icelandic community in North +Dakota a connected story of Olof Krarer. I do not know +whether it was brought or whether it just grew. No doubt +it was partly imagination; equally without doubt it was +partly true.</p> + +<p>Our North Dakota version of the story ran that Olof had +been waitress in a hotel. Seeing how small she was, the +guests asked about her and were told, sometimes by herself +and sometimes by the hotel people, that she was an Icelander. +The comeback was usually: “How interesting! We never saw +an Eskimo before.” Olof would then explain that Icelanders +were not Eskimos and that their blood was chiefly Norwegian +with a little mixture of Irish.<a id="FNanchor_18" href="#Footnote_18" class="fnanchor">[18]</a> The interest waned. +There were plenty of Norwegians around; the Irish were +no rarity. That sort of dwarf was hardly a seven days’ +wonder.</p> + +<p>But there were new guests in the hotel daily, new questions +about Olof, and new accents for the tiresome: “How +interesting! We never saw an Eskimo before.” She became +bored, annoyed, outraged. Finally she stopped explaining +that Icelanders were not Eskimos and simply flounced off. +The interpretation of that was, poor thing, she was ashamed +of being an Eskimo. Her silence now gave consent.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_248">[Pg 248]</span></p> + +<p>One day a local clergyman appeared. He said that the +young people of his church had a mid-week meeting and +they would be so interested if Olof would come down and +talk to them informally about the Eskimos. They would be +glad to pay her five dollars.</p> + +<p>I go back to what my mother said of the pathetic ambition +and anticipations of the dwarf. I imagine how, perhaps at +first through embarrassment Olof did not correct the +minister. When his invitation came to the five-dollar offer +she was already realizing that her chance had come. She +agreed to give the talk.</p> + +<p>Combining testimony of the Cornell professor with that +of my mother, I imagine further that Olof went to the town +library next day, or to some bookish friend, and read up on +the Eskimos. Then, to the best of her ability, she improvised +a story of an Eskimo childhood and gave it at the mid-week +church meeting. It was accepted and she was on that road +which took her to the lyceum platform and the circus. As +we shall see, it took her to other places, to fame and to a +lasting influence upon American education and thought.</p> + +<p>My memories, temporarily revived in 1912 by the Cornell +professor’s letter, had receded vaguely into the background +when, in 1922, I had a secretary, Miss Dorothy Daggett. +She came from a week-end one Monday morning and asked +whether a young man whom she had met at the house party +might come and consult me about an extraordinary yarn +which he had picked up in Florida and which he had already +sold tentatively to a magazine. She had urged him +not to print without consulting me, for the story was about +an Eskimo and seemed to her spurious. She did not think<span class="pagenum" id="Page_249">[Pg 249]</span> +that a young man ought to risk publishing that sort of thing +at the beginning of a literary career.</p> + +<p>In due course John Schoolcraft arrived and told the following +story which I quote from notes made at the time:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p class="c less">THE STORY OF OLAF CRERAR</p> + +<p class="c">as told by</p> + +<p class="c">John Schoolcraft</p> + +<p>The Eskimo woman, Olaf Crerar, says she was born on the +north coast of Greenland in a village of thirty or forty houses, +with an average of four people in each house. A family of eight +children in that country is equivalent to one of twenty in this. +The average family has two or three.</p> + +<p>One day two big white men came into their village, the first +big men they had ever seen and the first whites. The North +Greenland Eskimos are blond themselves, but owing to the smoke +in their houses they didn’t know it. The two big men were Icelanders. +After living in the village about a year, they persuaded +Olaf’s father to go on a long journey with them. He had no idea +where he was going but he consented, and, as is always the case +on long hunting trips, he took his family with him. They started +across the ice and it took them something like three months to +make the journey from northern Greenland to northern Iceland. +When they came to the Gulf Stream it was partly open. There +they went from one ice floe to another, like Eliza crossing the +Ohio. They finally got to Iceland.</p> + +<p>Olaf was about sixteen when she left Greenland (or perhaps +she was twenty). She stayed in Iceland something like four and +a half years. At the end of that time, all of her family were dead +except herself and her father. They died from the change in +climate. There was a missionary there who took a great interest<span class="pagenum" id="Page_250">[Pg 250]</span> +in her and baptized her into the (Lutheran) church. Her Eskimo +name was Ahbo. The missionary, in giving her a Christian name, +wanted to get one as close to the Eskimo as possible, so he called +her Olaf. I don’t know where she got her last name, which sounds +like Crerar.</p> + +<p>Olaf suffered so from the Icelandic climate that the missionary +decided to send her and her father with some friends of his to +Canada, thinking its climate would probably be better for them +both than the Icelandic. He started them off on a boat with a +company of Icelanders, and there may have been some Swedes +and Norwegians. They landed at Quebec.</p> + +<p>Olaf was knocked around from pillar to post in the United +States and Canada for awhile, with this funny little father of +hers. At that time she was 40 inches high, 45 inches around the +waist, and weighed 136 pounds. Her father was smaller than she.</p> + +<p>She told that she had been a nursemaid and implied that she +had worked in hotels. On one occasion she was taken sick in a +hotel in St. Paul and a doctor visited her who had been in Greenland +and who knew a few words of her language.</p> + +<p>Then Mr. Slayton of the Slayton Lyceum Bureau ran across +her and thought she would be a good lecturer, so he took her +into his home and together they worked up a lecture. She went +around the country for something like twenty-five years (she is +sixty-two now) lecturing. For the last few years of this time she +was not only a lecturer but a sort of collector for Mr. Slayton. He +would give these (lyceum) courses and she would be the last one +on the course and would collect the money from those who had +sponsored the course. The understanding was that at his death +she was to have a home in his house as long as she lived. She did +live with Mrs. Slayton for a number of years.</p> + +<p>While in Florida she met the people named Stone who took +her back to Michigan with them—Mr. I. K. Stone, Maple Street,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_251">[Pg 251]</span> +Battle Creek, Michigan. She is living there now and has been +with them two or three years. She is always telling them how in +Greenland people always tell the truth. It is a great shock to her, +she says, to come into a civilization where they don’t tell the truth. +So in the household, when they aren’t kidding each other, they +have the saying, “This is Greenland.”</p> + +<p>Olaf says that the people up in northern Greenland where she +was born continue to grow until they are thirty-five. When mature +they are very small, like herself, and they mature slowly. +They don’t marry until they are twenty-five, and children don’t +walk until they are three. She says that the mothers do not nurse +their children at all. As soon as a baby is born they give him a +piece of whale meat and tell him to carry on. Many life processes +there seem greatly slowed down.</p> + +<p>However, a person of sixty is very old. They die off rapidly +from what Olaf thought was something like tuberculosis. It was +a wasting disease and usually ended with hemorrhage. She +thought it was brought on by the change in going from the +heated hut into the cold air outside.</p> + +<p>North Greenland children are born either in the light time or +in the dark time (the well-known six-month day and six-month +night). When a child is born, the mother picks out a certain +kind of bone. Since they live on polar bears, walrus and seals +more than anything, it might be a bone from one of these animals. +She has a little bag on the wall and drops into it a certain +distinctive kind of bone for each child, and as each light time or +dark time comes around she drops another bone of this same sort +into the bag. In that way she can keep track of the children’s +ages. The children are forbidden to touch that bag, and if they +do the punishment is severe.</p> + +<p>Olaf said these people believed in one big good spirit and one +big bad spirit, and there are also little good spirits and little bad<span class="pagenum" id="Page_252">[Pg 252]</span> +spirits. The big good one sent the little good ones around, and +similarly with the bad spirit. When a person dies he becomes a +good or bad spirit according to the way he has lived. Asked what +was their standard of good and bad, she replied that if during this +sickness, which evidently came on them all, the man or woman +was patient and unselfish, then he turned into a good spirit. +Those who were cross and complaining turned into bad spirits.</p> + +<p>If a woman is sick she is put into one corner of the hut and +no one pays any attention to her. If she is given anything, it is +given furtively. In the case of a man he is taken off and put in a +hut by himself. The reason is that sickness is brought about by +one of the bad spirits, and if you favor the sick person you bring +the bad spirit’s attention to yourself.</p> + +<p>The language is extremely simple, with a great many words +which by different intonations mean different things. They count +up to ten and have one word which means ten and some more, +which may be eleven or eleven million. The hardest thing for +her to do in Iceland and in this country was to learn to think. +The Eskimos talk a little about the fire and a little about the +polar bear and walrus, but have no abstract ideas. The vocabulary +is very small. There is absolutely no vegetation in North +Greenland, with the exception of some seaweed. The reindeer +there, which are very poor and which the people do not use for +food purposes at all, live on fish.</p> + +<p>These Eskimos have no steel, and when a man goes on a long +trip where he can’t carry a fire, he makes a fire by striking a stone +against a walrus tusk. He may work hours and hours to get a +spark.</p> + +<p>When a young man wants to marry, he picks out the girl he is +interested in and stops hunting. He goes to the house of this girl +and gets his food there for some time. If the girl’s parents continue +to make him welcome, he knows he is acceptable. Then he has<span class="pagenum" id="Page_253">[Pg 253]</span> +to get the girl out of that house into some other house in the +village (it doesn’t matter which one) without being seen. His +success constitutes the wedding ceremony. If he fails, he is punished +by death. Failures occur and the death penalty is actually +inflicted.</p> +</div> + +<p>The facts on Olof put Schoolcraft in a position from +which he could find no escape. His literary conscience would +not permit him to use the story in its original form, after +he had found that it was a hoax; his humanitarian instincts +would not allow him to expose the old lady, who was, after +all, harmless in his view compared to the hordes of charlatans +who get by. As long as her friends believed in her +she would have a home, and these were probably her last +few as well as her declining years. Schoolcraft, who needed +both money and <i>kudos</i>, gritted his teeth and canceled his +bargain with the editor.</p> + +<p>You have guessed it. The young and high-minded author +received his reward. Dorothy Daggett is now Mrs. John +Schoolcraft.</p> + +<p>No more than Schoolcraft could we publish, until Olof +Krarer’s death. But the responsibilities we feel towards that +small minority who seek the facts, dictated eventual publication +and therefore the immediate gathering of testimonies, +documents, and explanatory theories.</p> + +<p>The first step was to enlist the help of Miss Thorstina +Jackson, a graduate student at Columbia University, whose +father, Thorleifur Joakimsson Jackson, had been historian +of the Icelandic colonization in North America—chiefly +Minnesota, North Dakota, Manitoba, Saskatchewan and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_254">[Pg 254]</span> +Alberta, but also Nova Scotia and Utah. Many of his studies +had been published, but there were others in manuscript. +On canvass, these sources did not yield much directly, but +Miss Jackson (now Mrs. Emile Waters) knew just how to +follow up the investigation.</p> + +<p>From the various replies to her letters it was possible to +establish Olof’s baptismal name, the names of her parents, +her birthplace and date of birth. For a time we were following +the wrong track on these points, for the first answer +to our queries stated that Olof was the daughter of Jonatan +Halldorsson. Jackson’s pioneer sketches did not list Olof as +a child of this family and a later correspondent, G. J. Hallsson, +of Hallson, North Dakota, in a letter dated May 26, +1926, gave the right clue:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“... I feel certain I know the person you refer to. It must be +Olof Solfadottir, from Langamiri in Hunavatnsysla. This girl +was a dwarf in stature....”</p> +</div> + +<p>At this time Miss Jackson made a trip to Iceland. While +there she went to the Government library in Reykjavik and +obtained from the <i>Kirkjubok</i> (Book of Church Records) a +copy of Olof’s birth certificate. We quote a translation of the +Icelandic document which she forwarded:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p class="c less">BIRTH CERTIFICATE</p> + +<p class="c"><i>Ólöf Sölvadóttir</i></p> + +<p>Born 15 February 1858 baptized 17th of the same month.</p> + +<p>Parents: Sölvi Sölvason and Solveig Stefánsdóttir, man and wife +of Outer Langamyri.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_255">[Pg 255]</span></p> + +<p>The above is correct according to the register of Audkul Parish.</p> + +<p class="c">Certified</p> + +<p>The National Archives, Reykjavik, 13 July, 1926.</p> + +<p class="r">(Signed) Hannes Thorsteinsson.</p> +</div> + +<p>The following year the identification was further confirmed +and documented by B. L. Baldwinson, of 729 Sherbrook +Street, Winnipeg, Manitoba, as will appear.</p> + +<p>All the accounts of Olof’s early years in Canada, before +she assumed the character of Miss Krarer the Eskimo, swayer +of American educational destinies, are vague and the details +vary, but the general outlines are similar. As a continuation +of the above Hallsson letter, we quote a version, differing +somewhat from my memory of my mother’s:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“... She (Olof) had been living with her father in Winnipeg +and left him in 1880 to live with an English couple. They were +then resident in Winnipeg but I have no doubt they were really +traveling players who had some connection with a large company +of actors. I believe that shortly thereafter they left Winnipeg for +the United States, for (soon) after she got south across the line +she was recognized as the same girl, although she had then already +assumed her Eskimo character. Why she did this, I am +unable to explain. I knew her very well and lived in the same +neighborhood. For that reason I would consider it remarkable if +she did anything seriously reprehensible so long as her conduct +was fully governed by her own desires. She seemed to have a good +and firm character and was intelligent above the average.</p> + +<p>“According to my understanding, it seems clear that the +woman who adopted her came to be largely in control of whatever +she did.”</p> +</div> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_256">[Pg 256]</span></p> + +<p>The most complete and thoroughly documented information +came from Baldwinson, who enclosed with his letter +on November 16, 1927, a statement which we quote in full.</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p class="c">“<i>Olof Solvadottir</i></p> + +<p>“Born at Ytri Longumyri in Blondudal in Hunavatnssyslu in +Iceland about the year 1860 or 1861.</p> + +<p>“Her father Solvi Sölvason, farmer.</p> + +<p>“Her mother Solveig Stefansdottir: his wife.</p> + +<p>“Solvi lost his wife in Iceland and remarried there; his second +wife was Soffia Eyjolfsdottir, a widow. They emigrated from Iceland +to Canada in the year 1876 and settled a short distance north +of the town of Gimli in Manitoba and remained there for about +3 years until they moved to Winnipeg in or about the year 1879, +where they resided for a period of 2 years. They then moved to +Hallson in N. Dakota, built a house and resided there for several +years, until they moved to Seattle in the state of Washington. +There they built a house in Ballard and remained there until +their death.</p> + +<p>“Olof Solvadottir is a dwarf. She left her family while they +lived in the Gimli district and went to Winnipeg to secure work. +There she joined up with an American traveling tent show and +has since been lost to all her relatives though she is known to be +alive and well and in the care of wealthy benefactors in the United +States. Her nearest relatives are:</p> + +<p>(Here followed names and addresses of three brothers and a +sister, in the U.S.A. and Canada, and of a relative in Iceland.)</p> + +<p>“This information is given by Magnus Bjornson, 11 McDonald +St., Winnipeg, who is a foster brother to Olof since she lost her +mother in Iceland, and also by her brother at Westbourne as to +names and addresses of her brothers and sisters. The two photos<span class="pagenum" id="Page_257">[Pg 257]</span> +herewith enclosed are taken from photos the property of Magnus +Bjornson.”</p> +</div> + +<p>The accompanying letter from Baldwinson said in part:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“... Magnus Bjornson, Olof’s foster brother ... ran into Olof +in a circus a few years after she had begun to exhibit herself. She +then pretended not to recognize him, which he said suited him +well enough, for he did not want to be the cause of her getting +into trouble about her (pretended) nationality.”</p> +</div> + +<p>An earlier letter from Baldwinson contained an explanatory +note on some photographs which were enclosed.</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“I have also secured two pictures of her, one by herself, the +other with the man that she is said to have been married to—both +of them are wearing wedding rings.”</p> +</div> + +<p>This photograph shows the figures of equal stature. The +body proportions are those of dwarfs.</p> + +<p>Following these inquiries my activities in the Olof Krarer +case were long suspended. And then, in Utica, New York +(1932), I met Miss Frances A. Finch who, as a child, had +known Olof Krarer in Florida. She told me something of +her childhood recollections of this interesting character, +and later confirmed them by a letter which I quote in part, +dated from Skaneateles, New York, November 27, 1932:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“As you requested, I have gone into the question at home, but +I think that the enclosed material (photographs) is all I have that +would be of interest to you....</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_258">[Pg 258]</span></p> + +<p>“Print No. 1 is the one I mentioned as having been taken during +the winter of 1917-1918. I was ten years old at the time. Miss +Krarer and I are standing on the same step. I presume I was of +average height, for now, at the age of twenty-five, I am about five +feet two and a half inches tall. (The picture shows the girl of ten +considerably taller than the old “Eskimo.”)</p> + +<p>“Miss Krarer was about fifty-eight years old when these pictures +were taken, and print No. 2 shows Miss Olaf with a bouquet presented +her at that year’s celebration of her birthday....</p> + +<p>“... The woman with whom Miss Krarer lived was Mrs. +(H. P.?) Slayton.... Although Mrs. Slayton was considered the +owner of the Seven Gables Apartments, rumor had it that Olaf +Krarer had a substantial interest. I’ve been unable to verify the +location of the Seven Gables Apartments, pictured in print No. 3, +except that it stands at a corner of Williams Park in St. Petersburg, +Florida.”<a id="FNanchor_19" href="#Footnote_19" class="fnanchor">[19]</a></p> +</div> + +<p>In November, 1934, my friend, Miss Gretchen Switzer, of +Columbia University, told me that she was about to visit +St. Petersburg. For reasons two or three paragraphs ahead, +she was interested in the case of Olof Krarer. She followed +up the information given by Miss Finch. In St. Petersburg +she was able to verify the name and address of Mrs. Slayton +(Mrs. W. P. Slayton) and the location of the Seven Gables +Apartments. She also talked with the clerk of the Princess +Martha Hotel, H. B. Boardman (now of The New Hotel +Delaware, Ocean City, New Jersey) who said that Olof was +known there only as Olof the Eskimo. To the best of his<span class="pagenum" id="Page_259">[Pg 259]</span> +knowledge she had gone to Battle Creek and at that time +(1934) was in Chicago.<a id="FNanchor_20" href="#Footnote_20" class="fnanchor">[20]</a></p> + +<p>Some years ago I became interested in the similarity between +the Krarer tradition and the views about Eskimos +held in Teachers College, Columbia University. I asked Miss +Switzer, then a member of the New College staff of Teachers +College, where she had obtained her ideas and it seemed she +could trace a number of them to having studied in the lower +grades a book published by Rand McNally and Company, +<i>Eskimo Stories</i> (copyright 1902). A check showed that the +author, Mary Estella E. Smith, of the Jenner School, Chicago, +had for the last paragraph of its introduction, dated +June 14, 1902:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“The author acknowledges her appreciation of the valuable +suggestions made by Miss Olof Krarer, who read the book in +manuscript, and whose interesting autobiography appears at the +close of the volume under the title, ‘The Story of a Real Eskimo.’”</p> +</div> + +<p>A little earlier in the introduction Miss Smith says that</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“... various books have been consulted and drawn upon for +basic material, but special acknowledgment is due ‘My Arctic +Journal,’ by Josephine D. Peary, and ‘The Children of the Cold,’ +by Frederick Schwatka.”</p> +</div> + +<p>Clearly Miss Smith did get a considerable part of her +material from the dry-as-dust fact school, and perhaps three-quarters<span class="pagenum" id="Page_260">[Pg 260]</span> +of her book would be in humdrum correspondence +with things as they physically are. But some of the more +entertaining portions, likeliest to cling to the mind of a +learner, are seemingly based on the “valuable suggestions +made by Miss Olof Krarer.” Though perhaps small in quantity, +beside the contributions by Mrs. Peary and Lieutenant +Schwatka, the Krarer section of the schoolbook was bound +to impress itself, for the author says to the teacher at the +head of the Krarer autobiography, <i>The Story of a Real +Eskimo</i>, that “this story should be read to the children before +they begin reading the book.”</p> + +<p>We quote portions of <i>The Story of a Real Eskimo</i>:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“I was born on the east coast of Greenland, the least known to +civilization, about one thousand miles north and a little west of +Iceland. I am the youngest of eight children. As nearly as I can +remember,<a id="FNanchor_21" href="#Footnote_21" class="fnanchor">[21]</a> my father’s house was on a low plain near the seashore....</p> + +<p>“Our house was built of snow....</p> + +<p>“... Outside of the door was a long, narrow passageway, just +high enough for one of us little Eskimo people to stand up +straight in. That would be about high enough for a child eight +years old in this country; and it was only wide enough for one +person to go through at a time. If one wanted to go out and +another wanted to come in at the same time one would have to +back out of the passageway and let the other go first....</p> + +<p>“Our fireplace was in the center of the house. The bottom was +a large flat stone with other stones piled about the edge to keep<span class="pagenum" id="Page_261">[Pg 261]</span> +the fire from getting into the room. When we wanted to build a +fire we would put some dried meat and bones on the stone; then +a little dry moss was put in, and then my father would take a +flint and a whale’s tooth and strike fire upon the moss. Sometimes +it took a long time to make it burn. After the fire started +he would put some blubber upon it....</p> + +<p>“... Our food is eaten raw and frozen. We have only the salt +ocean water, and if we had soft, fresh water we would not dare +to use it, for it would be like poison to our flesh with the thermometer +80° or 90° below zero. So, when we eat, we take a piece +of raw meat in one hand and a chunk of blubber in the other, +and take a bite of each until it is eaten. Then we carefully rub +the grease and fat all over our hands and face, and feel fine +afterwards. My people have long hair, made dark by the smoke +and grease.</p> + +<p>“There was no chance to play and romp inside the snow house. +We just had to sit still with our arms folded. It was in this way +that my arms came to have such a different shape from people’s +arms in this country. Where their muscle is large and strong, I +have but very little; and instead of that, I have a large bunch of +muscle on the upper side of my arms, and they are crooked so +that I can never straighten them.</p> + +<p>“Sometimes we used to get very tired in the dark snow house +and then we would try a little amusement. Two of us would sit +down on the fur carpet, and looking into each other’s faces, guess +who was the best looking. We had to guess at it, for we had no +looking-glass in which to see our faces.</p> + +<p>“The one whose face shone the most with the grease was called +the prettiest. If at any time we grew tired of it all, and ventured +to jump about and to play, we were in danger of being punished. +When a child was naughty, mother would place a bone on the +fire, leaving it there until it was hot enough for the grease to boil<span class="pagenum" id="Page_262">[Pg 262]</span> +out. Then she would slap it on the child. She was not particular +where she burned her child, except that she was careful not to +touch the face....</p> + +<p>“But it was not always so that we had to stay in the snow house. +Once in a while father would come in and say it was not so +cold as usual, and then we would have a chance to look around +outside the snow house. We never took long walks. There were +some steep, jagged rocks in sight of our village, and during the +long daytime enough of the snow would melt off to leave the +rocks bare in a few places....</p> + +<p>“Now, in order that you may understand our way of living +better, I will explain that we have six months night in Greenland, +and during that time nothing is seen of the sun.... Before and +after the night-time there was about a month of twilight....</p> + +<p>“In the long day we had the hardest time, for then the sun +shone out so brightly that we would be made snow-blind if we +ventured far from home. The day was four months long, and if +we did not have food enough stored away in an ice cave to last +us through, we would be in great danger of starving.</p> + +<p>“... My father’s name was Krauker, my name was Oluar. +On arriving in Iceland I was baptized Olof Krarer.</p> + +<p>“One thing had a great deal of interest for us all. When the sun +shone out at the beginning of the daytime, it marked the first of +the year, as New Year’s day marks the beginning of the year in +this country. Then our parents would take out the sacks, each +one of the family having one of their own. In each sack was a +piece of bone for every first time that person had seen the sun. +When ten bones were gathered, they would tie them into a bundle, +for they had not words to count more than ten. In such a +land was I born, in such a home was I brought up. In such +pleasures I rejoiced until there were about fifteen bones in my +sack.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_263">[Pg 263]</span></p> + +<p>“Then something happened which changed my whole life. Six +tall men came to our village. They proved to be Iceland whalers +who had been shipwrecked in a storm and who finally reached +Greenland. When they returned to Iceland my father’s family +went with them....</p> + +<p>“Eskimos have no idea of a book.... They think, in their +ignorance, they are the only people, and are consequently contented +and happy.</p> + +<p>“June 16, 1902. <span class="pad4">“Olof Krarer.”</span></p> +</div> + +<p>By her own account Miss Krarer had been born an Eskimo +in Greenland; those who claim to be her relatives state she +was born an Icelander in Iceland. Both countries, and the +sea between them, are hazy to the average reader and so a +few remarks may be worth while.</p> + +<p>Iceland is the largest country now inhabited by Europeans +which had no aborigines when discovered. It is, too, the +largest in the northern hemisphere of those islands which do +not show, archeologically or historically, any evidence of +pre-white human occupation.</p> + +<p>The Irish discovered Iceland around or before A. D. 795; +the Norsemen first visited the country around 850 and say +they found ahead of them no people except the Irish. These +things, so far as we know, are undisputed.</p> + +<p>The part of Greenland, where Olof claimed to have been +born around 1860, “a thousand miles north and a little west +of Iceland,” can never have been inhabited during the last +several thousand years, since that distance takes you far into +the interior, up on the inland ice where, so far as we understand +it, neither humans nor the animals upon which hunters +depend can have lived since prior to that Ice Age which,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_264">[Pg 264]</span> +millenniums back, gave the land its present cap of snow.</p> + +<p>Be liberal with Olof and place her family on the seacoast +of Greenland north and a little east from central Iceland. +We then have a district that is believed by anthropologists +and explorers not to have been inhabited by Eskimos at or +anywhere near the time when Olof was born. If you wanted +to be extremely generous, you might connect her story up +with the few Eskimos seen by Clavering, near what is now +Shannon Island, in 1823. Shannon is, true enough, some 500 +miles south of Olof’s claimed birthplace, but then it is also +500 miles north of where her alleged family claim she was +born. That is kind of fifty-fifty.</p> + +<p>The Clavering people were, by his account and that of +Sabine, apparently just ordinary Eskimos, looking more or +less as if they were Chinese. Olof tells that her Eskimo +relatives were blond, but then she mentions that they did +not know they were blond, they were so blackened with the +smoke from their lamps. Most travelers have explained that +Eskimos trim their lamps so carefully that they rarely smoke—but, +if we start out to be generous, why haggle over a few +smudges of lampblack?</p> + +<p>Except Olof’s there is no account of Icelanders going to +eastern or northeastern Greenland near the time she says, +nor ever any time for many decades before and after. So far +as known, Europeans never visited northeastern Greenland +(1000 miles north of Iceland) until after Miss Krarer became +a prominent lecturer. Those Europeans were Danes, +not Icelanders.</p> + +<p>Olof seems to be the only person who has claimed that the +sea was ever so frozen, or so filled with ice, between Greenland<span class="pagenum" id="Page_265">[Pg 265]</span> +and Iceland that people could walk across in the manner +described by her, or in any manner.</p> + +<p>I know of one Eskimo having been in Virginia; I cannot +find testimony, except Miss Krarer’s, that any Eskimo ever +was in Iceland. Just possibly at some time during the Middle +Ages some Icelander may have brought an Eskimo from +Greenland, but, if so, there is no account of it. There is +one account of a medieval Icelander who did see Eskimos +on the southern east coast of Greenland, but the narrative +explicitly states that when he sailed from there he left the +Eskimos behind.</p> + +<p>Iceland is among the countries which do not feel, or at +least did not until very recently, any such need for Eskimos +in their system of education as we feel in ours. You can see +through authorities such as Professor Ellsworth Huntington +of Yale, in his <i>The Character of Races</i>, that they are comparatively +a learned people, so you would expect book +knowledge of the Eskimos which Olof might have picked +up. But other writers, for instance, Bayard Taylor in his +<i>Egypt and Iceland in the Year 1874</i>, have pointed out that +the Icelandic learning, next after dealing with their own +antiquities, is heavily preoccupied with Greece, Rome, and +the Mediterranean countries generally. The Icelanders tend +to be classicists in their schooling and reading.</p> + +<p>It was, therefore, in one way unfortunate that Olof, when +she came to formulate the accounts of her Greenland childhood, +had little groundwork derivable from her Icelandic +education or from the knowledge of her friends and family. +But in another way it was fortunate that she had to pick up +her ideas in America. For this made it simple to fit herself<span class="pagenum" id="Page_266">[Pg 266]</span> +to traditional beliefs, avoiding conflict with her hearers. So +in Miss Krarer’s account, as in the view previously common, +the Eskimos are (for instance) a small people, they grease +themselves with oil, they all live in snow houses, and they +suffer long periods of uninterrupted darkness followed by +long periods of uninterrupted light.</p> + +<p>The Krarer version of Arctic lore does introduce a few +novelties, as, for instance, where she says that:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“... we have six months night in Greenland.... Before and +after the night-time there was about a month of twilight.... The +day was four months long.”</p> +</div> + +<p>That replaced the six-month day and six-month night. +After all, she had to contribute something novel or there +could have been little advantage in getting knowledge for +American textbooks and supplementary readers straight +from a real Eskimo.</p> + +<p>There is an almost tragic contrast between the Krarer +division of daylight and darkness and the one which has +recently forced its way into American school teaching, disturbing +its symmetry. Like Miss Krarer’s, this view attacks +the even division between light and dark but (and here is +the tragedy) where Miss Krarer arrived at a darkness period +much longer than the daylight, the astronomers who are +bothering the schools claim a daylight period much longer +than the darkness. Their ratio is practically the same as hers, +only reversed.</p> + +<p>What a triumph it would have been for the little Eskimo +had she only reversed the naming of her four-month and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_267">[Pg 267]</span> +eight-month periods! The astronomers, right enough, are +talking for the mathematical North Pole and Miss Krarer +for a point only a thousand miles north of Iceland; but +that discrepancy would not have been so hard to explain +away. After all, Miss Krarer was born at a time when many +geographers still believed Greenland extended to and beyond +the North Pole, and she might so easily have been mistaken +as to whether she was born one thousand or sixteen hundred +miles north of Iceland.</p> + +<p>As mentioned, it was the opinion among the Icelanders +in North Dakota that Olof Solvadottir, the normally blond +and blue-eyed Nordic dwarf, born in Iceland, had been induced +by “the English couple” who adopted her to take the +character of the Eskimo Olof Krarer, born in northeastern +Greenland. The first the Icelanders knew of her changed +status was when they discovered her as a freak in a circus. +According to my mother’s version of how Olof came to assume +the Eskimo character, she went straight from waiting +on table in a hotel to lecturing on a lyceum circuit—there +was no mention of an intervening circus career. But there +was a circus period, that seems clear. Perhaps the sequence +was small-time lecturing, circus, big-time lecturing.</p> + +<p>At any rate, there is no reason to doubt the testimony +which connects Olof with a foremost bureau of lyceum’s +heyday.</p> + +<p>Some of the leaders in the modern celebrity business are +old stagers from the lyceum and Chautauqua days. Among +these are O. B. Stephenson, head of the long successful +Emerson Lyceum Bureau, Orchestra Building, South Michigan +Avenue, Chicago, and the veteran field worker and at<span class="pagenum" id="Page_268">[Pg 268]</span> +present independent bureau manager, William H. Stout, +Bluff Road 37, Greenwood, Indiana. From them and others +we piece together the following:</p> + +<p>At the crest of the lyceum and Chautauqua business one +of the most successful organizations was the Slayton Lyceum +Bureau, dating back also well among the pioneers. They +ranked almost if not quite with such great institutions as +the Redpath Bureau and produced some very successful +managers who later branched out for themselves, as for instance, +Charles L. Wagner, who was secretary for the Slaytons, +a dominant figure with them at that time, and who is +now a New York leader in concert management, with offices +at 511 Fifth Avenue. It seems clear that the Slaytons had +nothing to do with Olof’s change of state but received her +as a full-fledged Eskimo from those earlier patrons who may +have been influential in changing her, or who at any rate +may have been with her at the time she changed and thus +familiar with the stages of the transformation.</p> + +<p>The story of Miss Krarer’s entry into and success in the +big-time lyceum field is succinctly given by W. P. Slayton, +son of the founder of the bureau, who writes from the +Hotel Lorraine, Chicago, June 30, 1936:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“As I recall, my Father, Henry L. Slayton, made a trip to Minnesota +to meet Miss Krarer with a view of making a contract for +her appearance under the management of the Slayton Lyceum +Bureau. At that time she was lecturing on Greenland with bookings +arranged by a personal manager. This was back in the +Eighties, I believe.</p> + +<p>“She was glad to come under our management and we booked +her for the next thirty years or until her eyesight failed and she<span class="pagenum" id="Page_269">[Pg 269]</span> +had to give up platform work. She filled over 2500 lecture engagements +for us, of which over eighty were delivered in Philadelphia +alone.</p> + +<p>“The last two years of her life were spent at the Old Peoples +Baptist Home in Maywood, Ill. She must have been over seventy +years old. Her height forty inches. A very interesting personality +on the platform and she had a host of friends all over the +country.”</p> +</div> + +<p>From the time, then, when Henry L. Slayton discovered +her, Miss Krarer was one of their chief and successful attractions. +She was on the road pretty well constantly, lectured +in schools, universities, churches, auditoriums, and +under summer Chautauqua tents. Wherever she went she +appears to have made a favorable impression personally and +to have conveyed vividly her picture of that northeastern +Greenland where she said she had been born an Eskimo.</p> + +<p>We have further proof of Miss Krarer’s success on the +lyceum and Chautauqua platforms from S. Russell Bridges, +one of the leaders in the lyceum field and now head of the +Alkahest Lyceum Bureau of Atlanta, Georgia. He writes +under date of July 31, 1936:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“Yes, I remember the little Eskimo lady, Miss Krarer, whom +we had on one of our Chautauqua circuits, as I recall, in the +summer of 1911. Then the following winter she came down and +filled a few lyceum engagements. She was an excellent attraction +who always made good with her audiences, and besides, she was a +good box office feature.</p> + +<p>“... I recall trying to meet her when she first came down from +Chicago to begin her tour for us but I missed her at the station<span class="pagenum" id="Page_270">[Pg 270]</span> +and followed her on to the hotel where they had refused to give +her a room until I arrived and identified her....</p> + +<p>“Another incident I recall is that she and William Jennings +Bryan appeared on our Chautauqua at Newnan, Georgia, the +same date, he in the morning and she in the afternoon, but they +were both leaving at the same time and when the train pulled +in at the depot, I took her baggage and went ahead and Mr. Bryan +was following but when I got on the platform of the train, she +was trying to reach the step but could not quite make it. Finally +Bryan picked her up and put her up on the platform as you +would a child.”</p> +</div> + +<p>The way in which Olof Krarer was presented to the +public, the character of her service, and the impression she +made upon her audiences, we try to show more concretely +by quotations from a statement about her made by the +Slayton Lyceum Bureau (then of Steinway Hall, Chicago). +The document we have was likely printed in 1902 or 1903, +according to an informant who was in touch with Miss +Krarer then. It is, therefore, of about the period when The +Little Eskimo was collaborating with Chicago educators +and publishers along those lines which, through <i>Eskimo +Stories</i> and otherwise, have had so profound an influence +upon American schools. The statement runs:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“MISS OLOF KRARER has become one of the best known +lecturers that ever appeared on the lyceum platform. She does +not appear as a freak or a curiosity, but on her merits. The Bureau +always guarantees that she will give entire satisfaction to any +audience, however critical. Large sums of money have been made +from her lectures by churches, charity organizations and lyceums.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_271">[Pg 271]</span> +Many a church debt has been raised and a weak lecture course +freed from debt by the receipts from one of her lectures.</p> + +<p>“For several years after the arrival of Miss Krarer in the United +States it was very difficult for her to live through the summer +months; she has, on the other hand, taken long rides during our +coldest days in winter, with only her ordinary apparel, without +the slightest discomfort, while those accompanying her were +nearly frozen to death.</p> + +<p>“The simple story of her life, as she tells it, is more interesting +than a fairy tale. At the close of her lecture anyone in the audience +is at liberty to ask her any proper questions concerning her +life and native country. Some of the ablest legal talent in this +country have taken advantage of this privilege, but Miss Krarer +is always equal to every occasion and emergency. The Bureau, +in her behalf, takes this occasion to thank the many hundreds of +people and the press of the country for the uniform kindness and +attention received at their hands. During the past Miss Krarer has +delivered more lectures than her strength would really permit, +and for that reason it will be necessary in the future to limit the +number of her engagements, but first applications will receive +most favorable dates.”</p> +</div> + +<p>That the general claims of managers were no empty sales +talk is borne out by the specific statement that Miss Krarer +had already (as of about 1902) lectured 85 times in Philadelphia, +16 times in New York, 14 times in Chicago, 6 times +in Baltimore, 5 times in Jersey City, Cleveland, and Aurora +(Ill.), and 3 times in Albany, N. Y., Syracuse, N. Y., Detroit, +Mt. Pleasant, Ia., St. Louis, Cortland, N. Y., Toledo, O., +Orange, N. J., Newark, N. J., and Dayton, O.</p> + +<p>Before the close of her career she lectured several more<span class="pagenum" id="Page_272">[Pg 272]</span> +years; a corrected tally would give her more appearances in +these cities than here listed.</p> + +<p>The direct statement of the Slaytons is well supported by +representative newspapers from the Atlantic coast to beyond +the Mississippi. We quote them as they are quoted in the +(1902?) booking circular of “Miss Olof Krarer, Esquimau”:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“Newark (N.J.) <i>Evening News</i>: An appreciative audience +greeted Miss Olof Krarer, the Esquimau lecturer, at the Irvington +rink last night. She is a pleasant-faced little woman, only three +feet five inches in height and weighing 120 pounds, who left +Greenland with a party of Icelanders and was educated by missionaries +in Iceland. She told many interesting things about East +Greenland, of which so little is known. In her native land, she +said, ... There is only one social distinction—the man who owns +a flint for making fire is looked upon as a big gun, but he is +bound by custom to loan it freely and without remuneration. +Water—that is, fresh water—is unknown.... The women of her +country, she said, lived a life of pathetic idleness and helplessness, +with no housework, no washing, no fancy work, no amusement +and no cooking. All meat is eaten raw, and this is the sole +food. The main occupation of the men was hunting ... this being +done mainly in the twilight period, lasting four months of the +year. The remainder of the year is made up of four months of +perpetual night, lighted by stars and moon, and four months of +daylight. The latter is the hardest time for the Esquimaux, as +large numbers of them are afflicted with snow-blindness, caused +by the dazzling effect of the sun on the ice and snow.</p> + +<p>“The only record of time kept by these primitive people is by +means of a bone bag—one bone dropped into a fur bag on the +day on which the sun is first seen each year.... Miss Krarer<span class="pagenum" id="Page_273">[Pg 273]</span> +says her people ... are becoming more stunted in growth and +shorter-lived every generation....”</p> + +<p>“Holyoke (Mass.) Paper: Last night a large audience assembled +in the city hall and listened to Miss Olof Krarer’s talk +on ‘Greenland, or Life in the Frozen North.’ Since her visit to +this city two years ago Miss Krarer has increased her knowledge +of English and entertained her audience finely. The lecture was +the same as that given by her when she lectured under the +auspices of the Scientific Association. Last evening, at the close of +her lecture, Miss Krarer appeared in northern costume, a genuine +polar bear skin from its natural state, which she had taken great +pains to secure.... Miss Krarer still finds this climate trying, +and during the summer months seeks the coolest spot she can +find.... Tomorrow she speaks in Westfield, next in Warren. +Almost every night she is engaged and business increases every +season.”</p> + +<p>“West Chester (Pa.) <i>Republic</i>: Olof Krarer fairly captivated +her audiences at the Normal yesterday afternoon and last evening. +The story of the life of the inhabitants of Greenland became +doubly entertaining when related in the quaint broken English of +this bright and witty little native of that frozen land. The Normal +School course of lectures thus inaugurated promises to be exceedingly +popular and will no doubt have a large patronage.”</p> + +<p>“Manchester (Iowa) <i>Union</i>: The lecture on Greenland by Miss +Olof Krarer at the city hall last evening in aid of the Orphans’ +Home was one of the most interesting and instructive lectures +ever heard in this city.”</p> + +<p>“Vicksburg (Miss.) <i>Daily Commercial Herald</i>: Miss Olof +Krarer’s pictures of life from a Greenlander’s standpoint afforded +a very large audience at the opera house, last night, a unique +experience, of which not the least entertaining feature was the +personality of the speaker. She is scarcely taller than a ten-year-old +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_274">[Pg 274]</span>girl, a neat, trim, plump little woman, with very bright eyes +and a countenance that has nothing unfamiliar in its appearance, +such a one as might be seen anywhere in the United States and in +no respect Mongolian or Indian.... Hers is a plain, unvarnished +story, that of a sensible, educated woman, depicting the terrible +conditions of life around the North Pole. It was deeply interesting, +however, and the audience frequently applauded her. She +sang ... an Esquimaux love-song, which would no doubt impress +a damsel of the frozen coast as something too altogether lovely. +The lecture was given under the auspices of the Circle of the +Silver Cross, King’s Daughters, and was a financial success.”</p> + +<p>“Brooklyn (N.Y.) <i>Daily Eagle</i>: The hall of the Young Men’s +Christian Association was well filled last evening by an audience +gathered to hear the lecture of Miss Olof Krarer, an Esquimau +lady from the eastern shores of Greenland, her subject being +‘Greenland, or Life in the Frozen North.’ Miss Krarer is the +only Esquimau lady in the United States and her lecture was +unusually interesting....”</p> + +<p>“Detroit (Mich.) <i>Free Press</i>: The speaker’s platform at +Y.M.C.A. hall last evening presented a very Arctic appearance, +covered with polar bear skins and white draperies, with a silver +fox skin mounted over the speaker’s stand. This was done to be in +consonance with the character of the evening’s entertainment, a +lecture on the Esquimaux of Greenland, by Miss Olof Krarer, a +native of that hypoborean region.... She was decidedly short, +being only 3 feet 4 inches in height, and weighing 100 pounds. +Otherwise her appearance did not vary strikingly from that of +many a German maid, met with daily in Detroit....”</p> + +<p>“Sioux City (Iowa) <i>Journal</i>: At the Y.M.C.A. auditorium last +night Miss Olof Krarer, the Esquimau woman, lectured on the +customs of her people. The audience was intensely interested in +the lecture.”</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_275">[Pg 275]</span></p> + +<p>“Mount Pleasant (Iowa) <i>Free Press</i>: As a psychological study, +the little lady from Greenland, who gave her second lecture in +this city last Thursday evening, is probably unexcelled on this +continent; and as a study in heredity or the influence of vocation +and environment for successive generations upon the body she is +equally so.... Miss Krarer’s person bears corroborative testimony +to the claim of her being a native of Greenland, whose racial +developments are as marked and as universal as color in Caucasia +or Africa; and the indices of nationality in every unmixed people +on earth.... But it is Miss Krarer as an intelligent and agreeable +lady that is most interesting. The evolution from the national, +natal condition of absolute non-exertion, into the consciousness +of being a responsible, immortal, spiritual being; gracious in self-reliance, +dignified in self-respect and potent in an intelligent, +conscious, self-hood; attractive in demeanor, and gracious and +punctilious in every point of social relations, she is certainly the +most interesting personality to the student of mind that it is +possible to find on this continent. The school people who failed +to see and hear this speaker failed to see and hear a most suggestive +object lesson in psychical development under the Christian +idea of the nature of God and man. It is through Mr. Fred Hope +that Miss Krarer was engaged to come to Mt. Pleasant. Having +heard her in Washington, D.C., and knowing the interest she +awakened in her audiences in that city, he induced the people of +the Christian church to bring her here. Should she ever come +again, let those who did not hear her upon this occasion be sure +to do so.”</p> +</div> + +<p>Thus through half a century, nearly forty years of which +were active, did Olof Krarer, blond Nordic dwarf who +may never have seen an Eskimo in her life, continue to +entertain and impress those who saw her and those who<span class="pagenum" id="Page_276">[Pg 276]</span> +read about her. It does not appear from other sources, any +more than it does from press comments, that her authenticity +as an Eskimo was questioned by her friends, her managers, +her audiences or her readers. On this we summarize +representative testimony.</p> + +<p>Obviously a great and careful house like the Rand +McNally Company would not have accepted Olof Krarer +as a collaborator on one of their schoolbooks had they not +at the time believed her to be what their book says and +implies, an Eskimo born in an Eskimo country. If possible, +it is still more clear that Miss Mary E. E. Smith and her +fellow educators were convinced of Miss Krarer’s authenticity. +Plainly the confidence of the educational world in +Miss Krarer is still maintained for, as mentioned above, +what is usually considered the foremost school of education +in America, Teachers College of Columbia University, has +on its staff teachers who until recently developed no suspicion +either of Miss Krarer or of those views which at least +some of them realized came from <i>Eskimo Stories</i>. Strongest +proof of all that the faith still remains is the gratifying continued +sale of <i>Eskimo Stories</i>, which employees of the Rand +McNally Company report as late as July, 1936.</p> + +<p>The testimony is the same from the lyceum fraternity. +Not perhaps quite so meticulously careful as professional +educators and the publishers of educational books, they +nevertheless tried to maintain a high standard for their +“attractions.” Remember, those were the William Jennings +Bryan and uplift days, when gate receipts were more likely +to drop than they are now if lecturers or their management +fell below ethical standards.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_277">[Pg 277]</span></p> + +<p>In a rather careful profession, then, the Slayton Lyceum +Bureau stood high and in considerable part through the +very influence of Miss Krarer. The Redpath Bureau, as +well known in the lyceum world, has been at the very top +in every requirement. I have a letter from Miss Amy M. +Weiskopf, who was in close association when the Redpaths +bought out the Slaytons, and who is with the Redpath +organization still, or with its head, Mr. Harry P. Harrison. +She says that she never doubted Miss Krarer’s authenticity +and that she never heard doubts of it.</p> + +<p>An old friend of mine of high standing in the lyceum +world and still active, is the aforementioned William H. +Stout. He heard Miss Krarer lecture before the University of +Indiana, had no doubts of her authenticity himself, and +heard none expressed.</p> + +<p>Those who knew her respected and liked Olof Krarer. +Through charm of personality she confirmed the interest +of the country, and particularly of the schools, in that frozen +wonderland of the remote north where live those unique +people, the Eskimos.</p> + +<p>Olof died in 1935, but during the season 1936-37 teachers +all over the United States are carrying on her work +through continuing into its fourth decade of usefulness +the book <i>Eskimo Stories</i>, which she read in manuscript, on +which she “made valuable suggestions” and which contains +her “interesting autobiography.” The teachers who use the +book are no doubt being careful to follow the author’s +directions that Miss Krarer’s autobiography, <i>The Story of a +Real Eskimo</i>, which we quoted, <i>ante</i>, should be read to the +children before they begin reading the book.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_278">[Pg 278]</span></p> + +<p>Olof Krarer belonged to three cultural agencies that have +had their ups and downs, the Chautauqua, the lyceum, and +the circus. Chautauqua has faded; the lyceum is emerging +slowly (we hear) from a temporary eclipse by the radio; +the circus does pretty well, what with “Jumbo.” But a greater +cultural agency, the schools, in which Miss Krarer took her +place 34 years ago, has never suffered eclipse. The teachers +go marching on. In their ranks marches the forty-inch spirit +of that good trouper, Olof the Eskimo.</p> + + +<div class="chapter"> +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_279">[Pg 279]</span></p> + +<div class="figcenter2" id="c8"> +<img src="images/fig1.jpg" alt="decoration"> +</div> + +<h2>CHAPTER VIII.</h2> +</div> + +<p class="c sp">HISTORY OF THE BATHTUB IN AMERICA</p> + + +<p><span class="more">THOSE VERSED IN FABRICATED HISTORY HAD MOMENTS OF SHEER</span> +delight the forenoon of May 27, 1936, while listening to +Dr. Shirley W. Wynne, formerly Commissioner of Health +for New York City, as he spoke over station WEAF of the +National Broadcasting Company on the subject “What Is +Public Health”:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“Even ordinary bathing, one of the simple factors in our personal +hygiene, had a hard time getting inaugurated in our grandfather’s +day. The city fathers in the good town of Boston ruled +that it was unlawful to take a bath except on a doctor’s advice; +and that law remained in effect from 1854 until 1862—think of +it. In Philadelphia they were a little more open-minded. The law +in Philadelphia was that you couldn’t take a bath between November +and March. The cities of Hartford and Providence discouraged +bathing by raising the charges for water supply about +400 per cent for people who owned bathtubs. In 1847, in Newport, +Rhode Island, a doctor tried to convert the people to the +habit of washing, though at the same time he conscientiously +warned them that the first bath or two might affect their hearts. +The American Medical Association immediately opposed him<span class="pagenum" id="Page_280">[Pg 280]</span> +and said that bathing was NOT compulsory to health, and the +people needn’t wash unless they just wanted to do so for some +whimsical reason of their own. So you see our great-grandfathers +and even our grandfathers all belonged in that category referred +to inelegantly as the Great Unwashed.”</p> +</div> + +<p>The source of joy to the connoisseurs in hoaxes was that +the learned ex-Commissioner of Health was reciting over +the NBC what sounded a whole lot like an abridgment of a +certain contribution to the history of the bathtub which was +published in the New York <i>Evening Mail</i> of December 28, +1917. We have secured permission and herewith offer what, +in spite of much quoting and discussion, is probably the +first complete reprinting of this (the author is beginning to +feel) overtenaciously successful hoax:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p class="c">“A NEGLECTED ANNIVERSARY<a id="FNanchor_22" href="#Footnote_22" class="fnanchor">[22]</a><br> + +<i>By</i><br> + +<span class="smcap">H. L. Mencken</span></p> + +<p>“On December 20 there flitted past us, absolutely without public +notice, one of the most important profane anniversaries in American +history, to wit, the seventy-fifth anniversary of the introduction +of the bathtub into These States. Not a plumber fired a salute +or hung out a flag. Not a governor proclaimed a day of prayer. +Not a newspaper called attention to the day.</p> + +<p>“True enough, it was not entirely forgotten. Eight or nine<span class="pagenum" id="Page_281">[Pg 281]</span> +months ago one of the younger surgeons connected with the +Public Health Service in Washington happened upon the facts +while looking into the early history of public hygiene, and at his +suggestion a committee was formed to celebrate the anniversary +with a banquet. But before the plan was perfected Washington +went dry, and so the banquet had to be abandoned. As it was, +the day passed wholly unmarked, even in the capital of the nation.</p> + +<p>“Bathtubs are so common today that it is almost impossible to +imagine a world without them. They are familiar to nearly every +one in all incorporated towns; in most of the large cities it is +unlawful to build a dwelling house without putting them in; +even on the farm they have begun to come into use. And yet the +first American bathtub was installed and dedicated so recently as +December 20, 1842, and, for all I know to the contrary, it may be +still in existence and in use.</p> + +<p>“Curiously enough, the scene of its setting up was Cincinnati, +then a squalid frontier town, and even today surely no leader in +culture. But Cincinnati, in those days as in these, contained many +enterprising merchants, and one of them was a man named +Adam Thompson, a dealer in cotton and grain. Thompson +shipped his merchandise by steamboat down the Ohio and Mississippi +to New Orleans, and from there sent it to England in +sailing vessels. This trade frequently took him to England, and in +that country, during the ’30’s, he acquired the habit of bathing.</p> + +<p>“The bathtub was then still a novelty in England. It had been +introduced in 1828 by Lord John Russell and its use was yet confined +to a small class of enthusiasts. Moreover, the English bathtub, +then as now, was a puny and inconvenient contrivance—little +more, in fact, than a glorified dishpan—and filling and +emptying it required the attendance of a servant. Taking a bath, +indeed, was a rather heavy ceremony, and Lord John in 1835 was<span class="pagenum" id="Page_282">[Pg 282]</span> +said to be the only man in England who had yet come to doing +it every day.</p> + +<p>“Thompson, who was of inventive fancy—he later devised the +machine that is still used for bagging hams and bacon—conceived +the notion that the English bathtub would be much improved if +it were made large enough to admit the whole body of an adult +man, and if its supply of water, instead of being hauled to the +scene by a maid, were admitted by pipes from a central reservoir +and run off by the same means. Accordingly, early in 1842 he set +about building the first modern bathroom in his Cincinnati +home—a large house with Doric pillars, standing near what is +now the corner of Monastery and Oregon streets.</p> + +<p>“There was then, of course, no city water supply, at least in that +part of the city, but Thompson had a large well in his garden, +and he installed a pump to lift its water to his house. This pump, +which was operated by six negroes, much like an old-time fire +engine, was connected by a pipe with a cypress tank in the garret +of the house, and here the water was stored until needed. From +the tank two other pipes ran to the bathroom. One, carrying cold +water, was a direct line. The other, designed to provide warm +water, ran down the great chimney of the kitchen, and was coiled +inside it like a giant spring.</p> + +<p>“The tub itself was of new design, and became the grandfather +of all the bathtubs of to-day. Thompson had it made by James +Guinness, the leading Cincinnati cabinetmaker of those days, and +its material was Nicaragua mahogany. It was nearly seven feet +long and fully four feet wide. To make it watertight, the interior +was lined with sheet lead, carefully soldered at the joints. The +whole contraption weighed about 1,750 pounds, and the floor of +the room in which it was placed had to be reinforced to support +it. The exterior was elaborately polished.</p> + +<p>“In this luxurious tub Thompson took two baths on December<span class="pagenum" id="Page_283">[Pg 283]</span> +20, 1842—a cold one at 8 a.m. and a warm one some time during +the afternoon. The warm water, heated by the kitchen fire, +reached a temperature of 105 degrees. On Christmas day, having +a party of gentlemen to dinner, he exhibited the new marvel to +them and gave an exhibition of its use, and four of them, including +a French visitor, Col. Duchanel, risked plunges into it. The +next day all Cincinnati—then a town of about 100,000 people—had +heard of it, and the local newspapers described it at length +and opened their columns to violent discussions of it.</p> + +<p>“The thing, in fact, became a public matter, and before long +there was a bitter and double-headed opposition to the new invention, +which had been promptly imitated by several other wealthy +Cincinnatians. On the one hand it was denounced as an epicurean +and obnoxious toy from England, designed to corrupt the democratic +simplicity of the republic, and on the other hand it was +attacked by the medical faculty as dangerous to health and a certain +inviter of ‘phthisic, rheumatic fevers, inflammation of the +lungs and the whole category of zymotic diseases.’ (I quote from +the Western <i>Medical Repository</i> of April 23, 1843.)</p> + +<p>“The noise of the controversy soon reached other cities, and in +more than one place medical opposition reached such strength +that it was reflected in legislation. Late in 1843, for example, the +Philadelphia Common Council considered an ordinance prohibiting +bathing between November 1 and March 15, and it failed of +passage by but two votes. During the same year the legislature +of Virginia laid a tax of $30 a year on all bathtubs that might be +set up, and in Hartford, Providence, Charleston and Wilmington +(Del.) special and very heavy water rates were levied upon those +who had them. Boston early in 1845 made bathing unlawful +except upon medical advice, but the ordinance was never enforced +and in 1862 it was repealed.</p> + +<p>“This legislation, I suspect, had some class feeling in it, for<span class="pagenum" id="Page_284">[Pg 284]</span> +the Thompson bathtub was plainly too expensive to be owned +by any save the wealthy. Indeed, the common price for installing +one in New York in 1845 was $500. Thus the low caste politicians +of the time made capital by fulminating against it, and there is +even some suspicion of political bias in many of the early medical +denunciations. But the invention of the common pine bathtub, +lined with zinc, in 1847, cut off this line of attack, and thereafter +the bathtub made steady progress.</p> + +<p>“The zinc tub was devised by John F. Simpson, a Brooklyn +plumber, and his efforts to protect it by a patent occupied the +courts until 1855. But the decisions were steadily against him, and +after 1848 all the plumbers of New York were equipped for putting +in bathtubs. According to a writer in the <i>Christian Register</i> +for July 17, 1857, the first one in New York was opened for traffic +on September 12, 1847, and by the beginning of 1850 there were +already nearly 1,000 in use in the big town.</p> + +<p>“After this medical opposition began to collapse, and among +other eminent physicians Dr. Oliver Wendell Holmes declared +for the bathtub, and vigorously opposed the lingering movement +against it in Boston. The American Medical Association held its +annual meeting in Boston in 1849, and a poll of the members in +attendance showed that nearly 55 per cent of them now regarded +bathing as harmless, and that more than 20 per cent advocated it +as beneficial. At its meeting in 1850 a resolution was formally +passed giving the imprimatur of the faculty to the bathtub. The +homeopaths followed with a like resolution in 1853.</p> + +<p>“But it was the example of President Millard Fillmore that, +even more than the grudging medical approval, gave the bathtub +recognition and respectability in the United States. While he was +still Vice-President, in March, 1850, he visited Cincinnati on a +stumping tour, and inspected the original Thompson tub. +Thompson himself was now dead, but his bathroom was preserved<span class="pagenum" id="Page_285">[Pg 285]</span> +by the gentleman who had bought his house from his +estate. Fillmore was entertained in this house and, according to +Chamberlain, his biographer, took a bath in the tub. Experiencing +no ill effects, he became an ardent advocate of the new invention, +and on succeeding to the presidency at Taylor’s death, July 9, +1850, he instructed his secretary of war, Gen. Charles M. Conrad, +to invite tenders for the construction of a bathtub in the White +House.</p> + +<p>“This action, for a moment, revived the old controversy, and its +opponents made much of the fact that there was no bathtub at +Mount Vernon or at Monticello, and that all the Presidents and +other magnificoes of the past had got along without any such +monarchical luxuries. The elder Bennett, in the New York +<i>Herald</i>, charged that Fillmore really aspired to buy and install +in the White House a porphyry and alabaster bath that had been +used by Louis Philippe at Versailles. But Conrad, disregarding +all this clamor, duly called for bids, and the contract was presently +awarded to Harper and Gillespie, a firm of Philadelphia engineers, +who proposed to furnish a tub of thin cast iron, capable of +floating the largest man.</p> + +<p>“This was installed early in 1851, and remained in service in +the White House until the first Cleveland administration, when +the present enameled tub was substituted. The example of the +President soon broke down all that remained of the old opposition, +and by 1860, according to the newspaper advertisements of +the time, every hotel in New York had a bathtub, and some had +two and even three. In 1862 bathing was introduced into the army +by Gen. McClellan, and in 1870 the first prison bathtub was set +up at Moyamensing Prison, in Philadelphia.</p> + +<p>“So much for the history of the bathtub in America. One is +astonished, on looking into it, to find that so little of it has been +recorded. The literature, in fact, is almost nil. But perhaps this<span class="pagenum" id="Page_286">[Pg 286]</span> +brief sketch will encourage other inquirers and so lay the foundation +for an adequate celebration of the centennial in 1942.”</p> +</div> + +<p>Varying motives in the fabrication of history lead to varying +methods. When the purposes are moral or political, as +they seem to have been with Parson Weems in his handling +of Washington, there is no deliberate straining at probabilities, +there are no planted clues. But when the purpose is +outright spoofing, as Mencken says it was with the bathtub, +there is frequently a mendacious plant. Samples of these +in Mencken are that he tells you the bathtub’s first American +home was at the intersection of Monastery and Oregon +Streets, in Cincinnati, in the year 1842, and that a certain +reference to bathing comes from Chamberlain’s biography +of President Fillmore. Now you can discover in any big +library, or by writing the friendly librarians of Cincinnati, +that while one of the two named streets, Oregon, may have +existed there in 1842, the second, Monastery, is not listed +until decades later. They will add that streets of these names +have never intersected in that town. At your local public +library they will report on the telephone that they cannot +find any biography of Fillmore by Chamberlain.</p> + +<p>Having in part given the victim fair warning, the Mencken +type of spoofer proceeds to be reasonable enough to trap +the unwary. Much of his tale of bathtub vicissitudes is, for +instance, so reasonable superficially, so much in accord with +what has actually been the history of the institution at other +times and in other places, that not only are health commissioners +liable to get caught but they have, on being caught, a +pretty fair excuse. For, after all, you could, from so-called<span class="pagenum" id="Page_287">[Pg 287]</span> +real facts, obtain approximately the same pictures and pretty +roughly the same morals as you get from the fiction.</p> + +<p>Indeed, one of the strongest arguments against troubling +to fabricate history or science is that, with judicious manipulation +and suitable reasoning, you can frequently extract +from ordinary facts tales as pleasing and conclusions as ethical +as are commonly based on those facts-by-definition which +some call fictions.</p> + +<p>Mencken probably felt that the numerous planted clews +to his spoofing intent would keep “A Neglected Anniversary” +from remaining long undetected. If so, he discovered +presently that even he had overrated the public’s discrimination. +Then the initial delight with which Mencken had +watched the poor fish biting, started to fade. By 1926 it +seemed to him the yarn was getting altogether too firmly +historical so he began trying to call it off. On May 23 of that +year he owned up that he had invented the tale, pointing out +its absurdities. This confession was printed simultaneously +in thirty American newspapers. One of them, the Boston +<i>Herald</i>, used the article on a leading page, under a four-column +head; three weeks later the same paper reprinted, +as a piece of news, the substance of the story as it had originally +appeared in 1917.</p> + +<p>We give below a classified list, which does not attempt to +be complete, of some of the individuals, institutions and +publications that took one or the other side of the ensuing +controversy over the bathtub hoax.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_288">[Pg 288]</span></p> + + +<p class="c less pad">ACCEPTING THE HOAX</p> + +<p>Support from Journalists:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p><i>Scribner’s</i>, October, 1920.</p> + +<p>A booklet entitled <i>The Story of the Bath</i>, published by the +Domestic Engineering Company of Chicago, 1922.</p> + +<p><i>New York Herald</i>, Paris edition, September, 1925, mainly quoting +an article in the <i>New York Sun</i> by Ruth Wakeham.</p> + +<p><i>Chicago Evening American</i>, December 7, 1926, under heading +“For and About Your Home.”</p> + +<p>March 21, 1927, Colonel W. G. Archer, representing National +Trade Extension Bureau of the plumbing and heating industry, +in an address before the Clearfield, Pa., Commercial Club at the +Jordan Hotel, Clearfield.</p> + +<p><i>Chiropractor</i>, 1927, an article called Splash, by A. J. Pufahl.</p> + +<p><i>Cleveland Press</i>, November 15, 1927, letter from E. Hershey, +D.C., P.C.</p> + +<p>A pamphlet entitled <i>Saga of the Bathtub</i>, by Walt Dennison, +published by the LeRoy Carman Printing Company of Los +Angeles, California, 1929.</p> + +<p><i>American Baptist</i> (Lexington, Kentucky), February 13, 1929, in +an article headed Selected—probably indicating quotation from +some other source.</p> + +<p><i>Baltimore News</i>, March 16, 1929, in a column headed “Baltimore +Day by Day,” by Carrol Dulaney (real name Richard D. +Steuart).</p> + +<p><i>House Beautiful</i>, May, 1930, p. 535.</p> + +<p>W. Orton Tewson, October 11, 1930, in a syndicated column, +“The Attic Salt Shaker,” quoting a Dr. Moody (possibly Dr. +W. R. Moody, who had recently printed a life of his father, +Dwight L. Moody).</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_289">[Pg 289]</span></p> + +<p><i>Golden Book</i>, early in 1931, article by Lenora R. Baxter.</p> + +<p><i>New York Sun</i>, February 17, 1931, review of <i>Puritan’s Progress</i>, +by Arthur Train, indicating the book accepted the hoax as fact.</p> + +<p><i>Baltimore Evening Sun</i>, May 22, 1931, letter signed S. A. Fact.</p> + +<p><i>Tucson Daily Star</i>, December 1, 1931, interview with C. R. King, +manager of the Tucson branch of the Standard Sanitary Manufacturing +Company.</p> + +<p><i>New York Sun</i>, December 22, 1931—quoting the <i>Military Engineer</i>.</p> + +<p><i>New York Sun</i>, October 12, 1933, advertisement of “Blue Coal,” +part of which advertisement was an illustration showing a +policeman, ca. 1842, threatening to arrest a man in a bathtub.</p> + +<p>United Feature Syndicate, April 27, 1933, illustration by Russ +Murphy and Ray Nenuskay under the caption “How It Began”—illustration +showing Adam Thompson in his first bathtub +in Cincinnati.</p> + +<p><i>New York Herald Tribune</i>, March 4, 1934, reprinted portions of +above article by Lenora R. Baxter, under heading “Baths in +Disfavor for Long Periods, History Recalls.”</p> + +<p><i>New York Sun</i>, January 6, 1935, news story.</p> + +<p><i>New York Times</i>, August 4, 1935, news story, “The Bathtub +Wins Wider Patronage.”</p> + +<p>United Press Red Letter for September 26, 1935, “Bathtub Once +Viewed as Curse.”</p> + +<p>J. Vijaya-Tunga, <i>New Statesman</i> (London), October 5, 1935.</p> + +<p>Central Press Association, November 15, 1935, <i>Scott’s Scrapbook</i>, +cartoon.</p> + +<p><i>Digest and Review</i>, December, 1935.</p> + +<p><i>Australia Age</i> (Melbourne), December 31, 1935.</p> + +<p><i>Liberty</i>, March 21, 1936.</p> + +<p>James N. Kane, <i>Famous First Facts</i>, published by H. W. Wilson +& Co. of New York (no date).</p> +</div> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_290">[Pg 290]</span></p> + +<p>Support from Leaders of Thought:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>Dr. John H. Finley (former president of the American Geographical +Society and of the College of the City of New York; +now an editor of the New York <i>Times</i>), in an article in the +<i>Survey</i>, July 15, 1927.</p> + +<p>Alexander Woollcott, radio broadcast for February 24, 1935.</p> + +<p>Dr. Hans Zinsser (professor in the Medical School of Harvard +University), in <i>Rats, Lice and History</i>, Boston, 1935.</p> + +<p>Dr. Shirley W. Wynne (former Commissioner of Health for the +City of New York)—cited <i>ante</i>.</p> +</div> + +<p>Support from Governmental Agencies:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>Federal Housing Administration clip sheet. Vol. 2, No. 9, February, +1935, sent out to newspapers throughout the U.S.</p> + +<p><i>Bulletin</i> of the Department of Health of Kentucky, October, +1935.</p> +</div> + + +<p class="c less pad">EXPOSING THE HOAX</p> + +<p>Exposure by Journalists:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>Western Newspaper Union, November 28, 1930, syndicated article +by Elmo Scott Watson, under the title “James, Draw My +Bawth”—apparently printed in a great many small papers +throughout the United States.</p> + +<p><i>Martha’s Vineyard Gazette</i>, April and May, 1931.</p> + +<p><i>Macon Telegraph</i>, August 31, 1932.</p> + +<p><i>Philadelphia Evening Public Ledger</i>, January 15, 1935.</p> + +<p><i>Editor and Publisher</i>, February 2, 1935, Marlen Pew, commenting<span class="pagenum" id="Page_291">[Pg 291]</span> +on the circulation of the bathtub hoax by the Federal Housing +Commission.</p> + +<p><i>Baltimore Evening Sun</i>, April 16, 1935.</p> + +<p><i>Wilmington Evening Journal</i>, June 24, 1935.</p> + +<p><i>Passaic Herald News</i>, July 26, 1935.</p> + +<p><i>New Statesman</i> (London), November 2, 1935, a letter signed +J.M.G., exposing the story as printed in the October 5 issue +of the same magazine.</p> + +<p><i>Mobile Times</i>, December 28, 1935.</p> + +<p><i>Chicago Times</i>, January 23, 1936, editorial headed “A New True +Story,” first quoting a speaker who addressed the members of +the American Institute of Banking in Chicago. The speaker +had related the bathtub story; the editorial then went on to +expose the hoax.</p> +</div> + +<p>Exposure by Leaders of Thought:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>Rev. Nolan R. Best, executive secretary of the Baltimore Federation +of Churches, letter to the editor of <i>Survey</i>, exposing the +article by Dr. John H. Finley. Paul Kellogg, the editor, wrote +to Finley, who replied July 31, 1927: “The bathtub information +was furnished me by a representative of the Cleanliness Institute.”</p> + +<p>Curtis D. MacDougal, editor of Evanston, Illinois, <i>News Index</i>, +made an investigation of newspaper hoaxes, exposing, among +others, the bathtub hoax. A summary of his report was printed +in the <i>Editor and Publisher</i>, January 12, 1935. Later he embodied +his material in an article for the <i>Journalism Quarterly</i>. +A summary of that article was printed in the Worcester, Mass., +<i>Gazette</i> for August 10, 1935. Dr. MacDougal printed a second +article on the subject in the <i>Evanston News Index</i>, August 9,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_292">[Pg 292]</span> +1935; in it he discussed especially the apparent impossibility of +putting such hoaxes down.</p> +</div> + +<p>Exposure by Governmental Agencies:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>Bureau of Municipal Research, Philadelphia. The Bureau’s exposure +of the hoax was printed in the <i>Philadelphia Evening +Bulletin</i>, July 10, 1933, under the heading Bathtub Myth +Exploded.<a id="FNanchor_23" href="#Footnote_23" class="fnanchor">[23]</a></p> +</div> + +<p>History, whether real or fabricated, may lose or gain, +may remain unchanged or may change with time. These +things are handily illustrated by coupling statements from +Mencken of 1917 and Wynne of 1936:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p><i>Mencken</i>: “Boston early in 1845 made bathing unlawful except +upon medical advice, but the ordinance was never enforced +and in 1862 it was repealed.”</p> + +<p><i>Wynne</i>: “The city fathers in the good town of Boston ruled +that it was unlawful to take a bath except on a doctor’s advice; +and that law remained in effect from 1854<a id="FNanchor_24" href="#Footnote_24" class="fnanchor">[24]</a> until 1862—think +of it.”</p> + +<p><i>Mencken</i>: “... the Philadelphia Common Council considered +an ordinance prohibiting bathing between November 1 and +March 15, and it failed of passage by but two votes.”</p> + +<p><i>Wynne</i>: “The law in Philadelphia was that you couldn’t take a +bath between November and March.”</p> + +<p><i>Mencken</i>: “... in Hartford, Providence, Charleston and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_293">[Pg 293]</span> +Wilmington (Del.) special and very heavy water rates were +levied upon those who had them (bathtubs).”</p> + +<p><i>Wynne</i>: “The cities of Hartford and Providence discouraged +bathing by raising the charges for water supply about 400 per +cent for people who owned bathtubs.”</p> + +<p><i>Mencken</i>: “After this medical opposition began to collapse, and +among other eminent physicians Dr. Oliver Wendell Holmes +declared for the bathtub.... The American Medical Association +held its annual meeting in Boston in 1849, and a poll of the members +in attendance showed that nearly 55 per cent of them now +regarded bathing as harmless, and that more than 20 per cent +advocated it as beneficial. At its meeting in 1850 a resolution was +formally passed giving the imprimatur of the faculty to the +bathtub.”</p> + +<p><i>Wynne</i>: “In 1847, in Newport, Rhode Island, a doctor tried to +convert the people to the habit of washing, though at the same +time he conscientiously warned them that the first bath or two +might affect their hearts. The American Medical Association immediately +opposed him and said that bathing was NOT compulsory +to health, and the people needn’t wash unless they just +wanted to do so for some whimsical reason of their own.”</p> +</div> + +<p>That there is pleasant edification for believers in Menckenized +history we infer from its popularity; that the employment +of the many learned and famous commentators, disseminators +and denouncers has been remunerative, we hope; +that there is occasionally a spot cash return even to the man +in the street we can show by an example:</p> + +<p>A well-named periodical, <i>Liberty</i>, which encourages +among other freedoms the one to believe, has a feature, +“Twenty Questions.” For those who, in view of the following,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_294">[Pg 294]</span> +may desire to try making an honest dollar, we quote +that “Liberty will pay $1 for any question accepted and +published. If the same question is suggested by more than +one person, the first suggestion received will be the one +considered. Address Twenty Questions, P. O. Box 380, +Grand Central Station, New York, N. Y.” Some time before +March 21, 1936 (for we quote from that issue) they had, +then, paid one dollar for what appeared on that date, p. 39, +as question No. 17:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“In which city of the United States was it against the law to +take a bath in 1845?”</p> +</div> + +<p>As directed, we turn to p. 48 and find under 17 the +answer:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“In Boston, Massachusetts. It was then deemed unlawful to +take a bath except when prescribed by a physician.”</p> +</div> + +<p>When, belated, I discovered this in <i>Liberty</i>, I wondered +how the Bostonians were taking what must be a steady barrage, +and wrote the Commissioner of Public Health, Dr. +Henry D. Chadwick, who replied from the State House, +Boston, July 16, 1936:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“The story which you quote from the magazine, <i>Liberty</i>, is +periodically cropping out in various parts of the country.</p> + +<p>“I obtained from W. J. Doyle, City Clerk of Boston, what I +consider a true statement of Boston’s attitude toward bathing in +the early days, and I enclose a copy.”</p> +</div> + +<p>The Doyle statement said in part:</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_295">[Pg 295]</span></p><div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“In several forms during the past ten years an item has appeared +in various publications stating ... that the City of Boston +at some time by ordinance forbade the use of bathtubs, or bathing +except on the advice of a physician.</p> + +<p>“The story has not the slightest foundation in fact. No such +ordinance was ever adopted either by the Town or City of Boston +from its settlement in 1630 up to the present time....</p> + +<p>“... In 1843 an ordinance was enacted requiring that all prisoners +in the Jail or House of Correction should be given a weekly +bath. So much as regards bathing except on advice of a physician. +The statement that bathtubs were prohibited is so silly as to +hardly merit denial, but it is usually made referring to a mythical +ordinance supposedly adopted in 1848 and not repealed until 1870. +No such ordinance was ever adopted and no such ordinance was +ever submitted to the City Council.</p> + +<p class="r">W. J. Doyle,    <br> + +City Clerk.”</p> +</div> + +<p>I was evidently a long way from being the first to query +Boston officials on Menckenized history, for the Clerk’s +original statement, of which I received the above copy, was +dated May 24, 1929. Incidentally, that dating explains his +reference to “the last ten years.” For Mencken’s “Neglected +Anniversary” had been published less than twelve years +before.</p> + +<p>How the Mencken fabricated knowledge is being used +towards the end of its second decade has cultural significance. +We take a few samples.</p> + +<p>Hans Zinsser, A.B., A.M., M.D., D.Sc. (hon.), is professor +in the Harvard Medical School. During 1935 his <i>Rats, Lice +and History</i>, a piece of trenchant writing, was a best seller, +one of the much read books that was also much discussed,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_296">[Pg 296]</span> +filled with novel and startling facts. One of these (perhaps +no longer exactly novel) is on p. 285:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“The first bathtub didn’t reach America, we believe, until about +1840.”</p> +</div> + +<p>During February 1935, the Federal Housing Administration +issued, in Clip Sheet, Vol. 2, No. 9, a statement on bathtub +history:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“In 1842 Adam Thompson startled neighbors in Cincinnati by +installing a box-shaped affair lined with lead in his home. Shortly +after, in 1845, historians on the subject say the city of Boston +passed an ordinance making it illegal to bathe unless a doctor +had so ordered. Not until the early days of the Civil War was the +act removed from that city’s statute books....</p> + +<p>“Further indication of the manner in which early lawmakers +viewed the matter of personal cleanliness is seen in a resolution +introduced about 1843 in Philadelphia under which bathing +would have been prohibited by the city fathers from November +to March! As it turned out, the suggestion was tabled.</p> + +<p>“When Millard Fillmore became President, the tide turned, due +principally to his installing a tub in the White House....”</p> +</div> + +<p>But on July 25, 1936, Robert B. Smith, Assistant to the +Administrator, Federal Housing Administration, wrote:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“After this story was published, we found that the statements +made in it could not be substantiated so far as ordinances and +laws against bathing were concerned. The Health Commissioners +of Boston and Philadelphia both wrote us that they could find no +trace of any anti-bathing ordinances in their records....</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_297">[Pg 297]</span></p> + +<p>“After this bathtub experience, we took care to have the statements +made in the Clip Sheet double-checked....”</p> +</div> + +<p>August 4, 1935, the New York <i>Times</i> was celebrating +progress in America’s metropolis. East Side tenants had +made “demands for the installation of that former luxury,” +the bathtub. This reminded the <i>Times</i> that:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“It was with fear and travail that bathtubs were introduced +in these United States. One of the first bathrooms appeared in +Cincinnati, Ohio, about 1850, and certain clergymen hearing of it +preached that such luxury meant nothing less than degeneracy. +The fading of the glory that was Greece and the collapse of the +grandeur that was Rome were freely mentioned. The baths of +wicked Caracalla also were cited.”</p> +</div> + +<p>The <i>Bulletin</i> of the Department of Health of Kentucky, +October 1935, said on p. 75:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“The first bathtub in the United States was installed in a Cincinnati +home in 1842. It was made of mahogany and lined with +sheet lead. Newspapers denounced it as undemocratic vanity. +Boston, in 1845, made bathing unlawful except when prescribed +by a physician. Virginia soaked the rich by taxing bathtubs $30 +per year.”</p> +</div> + +<p>A letter from J. Vijaya-Tunga was printed in the <i>New +Statesman</i>, London, for October, 1935. We quote an extract +as reprinted in the <i>Australia Age</i> (Melbourne) for December +31, 1935:</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_298">[Pg 298]</span></p><div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“The first American bathtub was built in 1830. It was made of +mahogany and was 7 feet long and 4 feet wide. It was lined with +sheet lead and weighed more than 2,000 pounds. The invention +was not popular. Boston authorities made bathing unlawful, and +Virginia put a tax of $300 on each bathtub. Fifteen years later +Boston declared bathtubs illegal, except on medical advice.”</p> +</div> + +<p>The <i>Age</i> did not fall for the hoax but the <i>New Statesman</i> +apparently did.</p> + +<p>The Chicago <i>Times</i> of January 23, 1936, quotes a speaker +addressing a Chicago meeting of the American Institute of +Banking:</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“‘The hardest job on earth for the average man,’ he said, ‘is +to sit and think. He’ll sit all right, but he won’t think, and that +is why the public always detests a new idea. Why, do you know +that when the first bathtubs were introduced in America intellectual +Boston passed an ordinance making it unlawful to bathe in a +bathtub except on medical advice?’”</p> +</div> + +<p>The <i>Times</i> treated this speaker editorially as the victim +of a hoax which, perhaps naturally, did not influence Vice +Presidential candidate Frank Knox’s Chicago <i>Daily News</i>, +which said July 11, 1936, under the heading “Bathtub +Suffered Same Fate in U. S. as Most Pioneers,” that</p> + +<div class="blockquot"> + +<p>“America’s first bathtub, according to a recent issue of <i>Architecture</i>, +was built in Cincinnati in 1842 and was made of mahogany +and lined with sheet lead.</p> + +<p>“While still accepting the oft-quoted relationship of cleanliness +and godliness, the people of the day were not receptive to such +fantastic innovations, and the tub, suffering the fate of most<span class="pagenum" id="Page_299">[Pg 299]</span> +pioneering ventures, was denounced as a luxurious and undemocratic +vanity. Doctors, according to the magazine, termed it a +menace to health.</p> + +<p>“In 1843 Philadelphia prohibited by ordinance bathing between +Nov. 1 and March 15, and Boston made bathing unlawful except +when prescribed by a physician. Also, bathtubs were taxed $30 +yearly.”</p> +</div> + +<p>A paper of which Knox is publisher stops in the heat of +the Landon-Knox campaign to support Mencken as a historian; +Mencken swerves from other forms of history-making +the while to campaign for Knox as Vice President. +With these things happening at and just after the Republican +convention, we feel that God’s in His Heaven and that all +should be well at any rate with the making of history.</p> + +<hr class="full"> + +<div class="footnotes"><h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_1" href="#FNanchor_1" class="label">[1]</a> This was written when Gertrude Ederle was being showered with ticker +tape. Neither she nor the ticker stood quite so well three years later.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_2" href="#FNanchor_2" class="label">[2]</a> This was written in 1927. The press version of the “Blond” Eskimo +story, as opposed to my book version, is still going strong in 1936.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_3" href="#FNanchor_3" class="label">[3]</a> It can be argued that the first European discovery of the Northwest +Passage was by Thomas Simpson (with whom Peter Warren Dease was +associated) in 1839. If this be not admitted, then the claim falls to John Rae +who worked both before and after the Third Franklin Expedition, on which +the Passage was also discovered. Thus the McClure discovery in 1853 was +either the third or fourth.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_4" href="#FNanchor_4" class="label">[4]</a> Appendix X, Natural History, (p. clxxxix), <i>Journal of a Voyage for +the Discovery of a North-West Passage, 1819-20</i>, by William Edward Parry, +London, 1821.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_5" href="#FNanchor_5" class="label">[5]</a> <i>Three Years of Arctic Service</i>, by Adolphus W. Greely, New York, 1886, +p. 221.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_6" href="#FNanchor_6" class="label">[6]</a> Op. cit., p. 105.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_7" href="#FNanchor_7" class="label">[7]</a> Charles Mair and Roderick MacFarlane: <i>Through the Mackenzie Basin</i>, +Toronto, 1908, p. 175.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_8" href="#FNanchor_8" class="label">[8]</a> Vilhjalmur Stefansson: <i>The Friendly Arctic</i>, New York, 1921, p. 584.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_9" href="#FNanchor_9" class="label">[9]</a> Fridtjof Nansen: <i>In Northern Mists</i>, London, 1911, Vol. I, p. 131.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_10" href="#FNanchor_10" class="label">[10]</a> Nansen: Vol. I, p. 133.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_11" href="#FNanchor_11" class="label">[11]</a> Tyson’s winter latitude, to which he here refers, was 81⅔° N. For +our quotation see Tyson’s <i>Arctic Experiences</i>, New York, 1874, p. 195.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_12" href="#FNanchor_12" class="label">[12]</a> Dr. Nelson died some five years after this paper was printed.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_13" href="#FNanchor_13" class="label">[13]</a> Most authorities consider 105 to 110 pounds as very large for northern +male wolves.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_14" href="#FNanchor_14" class="label">[14]</a> The United States has long had this type of service. As mentioned, <i>ante</i>, +it is administered from Washington by the Biological Survey.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_15" href="#FNanchor_15" class="label">[15]</a> J. Stokley Ligon, American student of wild life, says: “I am inclined +to agree with Dr. Nelson regarding young of a previous year not banding +with parent animals and their young of a current year.” (Letter March 17, +1928.) He writes in the same letter: “I have never observed the big packs of +wolves one hears and reads about.”</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_16" href="#FNanchor_16" class="label">[16]</a> Since this was written it has been ascertained that Oimekon, about 300 +miles southeast and 200 miles south of the Arctic Circle, is colder than Verkhoyansk, +and is therefore now the coldest known spot on earth. Like +Verkhoyansk, the Oimekon vicinity is forested.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_17" href="#FNanchor_17" class="label">[17]</a> Most things in this chapter are documented, but this letter is paraphrased +from a vivid memory. Some details may be wrong, but the general trend is +right.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_18" href="#FNanchor_18" class="label">[18]</a> In 1904-06 I was fellow and assistant instructor in anthropology at +Harvard. I had to read the examination papers but my seniors made up the +questions. It was a standard joke with them to slip in somewhere: “In what +country do the Eskimos live?” A good percentage of Harvard men, ranging +from sophomore to senior, could be depended upon to answer: “The Eskimos +live in Iceland.” That, my colleagues thought, was a pretty good joke on me.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_19" href="#FNanchor_19" class="label">[19]</a> We have prints of the photographs described above and two additional +ones—another of the apartment house and one that may be of Olof by +herself, though it is most too good looking and may be of Miss Finch +at the age of about 10.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_20" href="#FNanchor_20" class="label">[20]</a> We note here some of the ways in which this ties in with, and fails to +tie in with, what Schoolcraft learned. Olof told him that it was a Mr. +Slayton who managed her lecture career, that after his death she lived with +Mrs. Slayton for a number of years. See his account for why she left them. +Then Olof met some people named Stone (I. K. Stone, Maple Street, Battle +Creek, Michigan) who took her to Battle Creek where she had then (1922) +been living for two or three years.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_21" href="#FNanchor_21" class="label">[21]</a> Youthfulness at the time Olof left Greenland, as hereinafter stated, is +said to have been useful in circus sideshow and on the lyceum platform—if +challenged Miss Krarer used to say, modestly, that since she had for +sources only vague childhood memories she might very well go wrong on +particulars. But in general, she maintained, she was conveying an undeceptive +first-hand impression of Eskimos and of Eskimoland.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_22" href="#FNanchor_22" class="label">[22]</a> The article was printed with an editorial note: “Here’s a series of +inspiring bath hour thoughts suggested by H. L. Mencken’s discovery, +through official channels, that America’s first bathtub was built in Cincinnati +and put in operation on December 20, 1842. Adam Thompson, its founder, +got the idea on his visit to England, where Lord John Russell had started +the custom of bathing fourteen years before. So, if any of the next best +authors spring a freshly tubbed Englishman on you in a story of the revolution, +you’ll know he’s phony.”</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_23" href="#FNanchor_23" class="label">[23]</a> Mencken’s own summary of the first decade of struggle over the bathtub +hoax is given in his <i>Prejudices, Sixth Series</i>, New York, 1927, pp. +194-201.</p> + +</div> + +<div class="footnote"> + +<p><a id="Footnote_24" href="#FNanchor_24" class="label">[24]</a> The discrepancy between this 1854 and Mencken’s 1845 may well be due +to a mere transposition of figures.</p> + +</div> +</div> + +<div class="transnote"> + +<p class="c">Transcriber’s Notes:</p> + +<p>Variations in spelling and hyphenation are retained.</p> + +<p>Perceived typographical errors have been changed.</p> + +</div> + +<div style='text-align:center'>*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 78443 ***</div> +</body> +</html> |