The use of the term “Courtship”—Primitive Man and the Foundations of Society—“Amorousness” as a motive force—Polygamy—Our half human ancestors—Standards of Beauty—Disquieting signs. Our ideas on the subject of the “Courtship” of animals are of necessity largely framed on what has been observed by each of us in regard to our own race; and without any very careful analysis of motives, or thought of what lies behind. But no real insight into this most tremendous subject can be gained which does not strive to penetrate beyond what is actually seen; which does not endeavour to get at the source of conduct in this regard.
“Courtship” is the word we commonly employ to describe the act of wooing; and in civilized human society at any rate, the intensity of the emotions which inspire the desire to woo are held in restraint by a variety of causes—and hence the “Courtship.” In the lower animals it is a moot point whether the term “Courtship” can be accurately applied. They are governed by no conventions, for them there is neither modesty nor immodesty. Desire with them is not made to walk 22delicately, veiled according to custom; nor is it artificially fostered as among civilized communities by stimulating food and the crowding together of large numbers of both sexes in artificial surroundings. Rather it is a natural, rhythmical, highly emotional state, which gathering force inhibits the ordinary emotions, or, rather, overrides them, begetting an intensity of passion which brooks no control. It demands, without parleying, or mincing matters, what is really the object of courtship among the civilized human communities—the consummation of the nuptial ceremony. The term “Courtship” is a Euphemism. Nevertheless, bearing this in mind, it may conveniently be used in these pages.
We cannot hope to understand the springs of courtship in the human race from what we observe in present-day society, or even from what we have gleaned thereon from the records of remote ages. We must get back, so far as is possible, to the very dawn of the human race: to that period of man’s evolution when his conduct was controlled by purely savage instincts. But even then the mark of the beast must have been fading out. His most valuable asset, his larger brain, even then gave him an advantage over the Apes, his near relations, and over the beasts of the field which he had begun to bring into subjection. We may assume that like his anthropoid relations, he was of a solitary, nomadic disposition, wandering in small parties from place to place as fancy or food determined. His advance to this stage started when, by the activity of his enlarging brain, he began to be oppressed by the gloom of the forest, and drawn by the fascination of more open country, and the ever-varying scenes which exploration brought him. But this life 23begot new needs and new desires. Hitherto, hunger, self-preservation and self-perpetuation were the only stimulants which roused his activities; and they were also the three forces, and powerful forces, which shaped his love of solitude. The proximity of his fellows threatened his three most vulnerable points—they competed for his food, they endangered his life, and threatened the possession of his family.
This more varied and adventurous existence roused new centres of activity in his brain; he began to perceive, though dimly, the possibilities of a larger life, though doubtless one which would minister to his own comfort rather than to that of his family—the natural and only road to better things. He began to devise more expeditious means of securing food, and circumventing his enemies, among whom the most formidable was his fellow-man, because in him he met his match. In the course of his wanderings he had learned the use of stones as weapons—which he could never have done in the forests—and he had also discovered the value of his family as ministers to his comfort, if only by setting them to collect such food as did not require strength and cunning in its capture. An inherent love of the chase for the sake of the excitement which this afforded probably made him nothing loth to regard hunting as his own peculiar duty. A little later the advantages of neighbourliness were borne in on him, largely for the sake of the greater ease wherewith the animals of the chase could be captured by their combined efforts; but this begat comradeship and some of the graces which follow therefrom.
Thus was laid the foundation of Society and “civilization” with all its attendant barbarities. Then, as now, 24whatever discordant notes were heard, were those struck by the twin Demons Envy and Jealousy. These disturbers of the peace are parasites on Society, their very existence depends on it. They have played a larger part in fashioning its rules and regulations than is generally realized. Their influence is as powerful to-day as ever in the past. It expresses itself in varying degrees in different individuals, and is roused by varying causes. But the most potent of all is jealousy in regard to sexual matters.
Amorousness, a word with a deep meaning, was, and is, the underlying factor which shaped, and is sustaining, human society; and is no less powerful among the beasts that perish. The motive force in this has not been the desire for offspring, but for the satisfaction of the elemental animal passion, the gratification of the purely sexual emotions which at their height are irresistible. There may be some who will see in this contention a degrading aspect of life. But this view will obtain only among those who prefer the man-made sophistries of life to its Divine mysteries. This dominance of what are popularly called the animal passions is the outcome of a perfectly natural process, whereby those in which these passions were defective died without offspring, while those who tended to excess were similarly eliminated. The desire for offspring for its own sake may exist among our own species to-day but, normally, offspring follows as an effect not as a cause. Many of our social problems would straighten themselves out if these facts were once faced and acknowledged; we are apt to concern ourselves with what should be—according to our ideals—rather than what is. Let it be granted that this rendering is true, and much else that mystifies becomes 25clear.
Whether primitive man was monogamous or polygamous, or whether he practised promiscuity, are themes which have exercised the minds of the most ingenious since the custom of making books began, and the most diverse conclusions have been arrived at. In coming to any conclusion on this subject probability based on what we know of the higher apes can be the only standard of argument. In these animals monogamy is the rule, the male and female with their young roaming at large in a family party. Occasionally, however, a male is seen accompanied by two females, and this is only what we should expect. The Apes are not very prolific animals nor are they numerous in individuals, hence, should any male be killed either in combat with a rival or by any other means, his mate probably wanders in search of another male, by whom, when found, she is probably readily adopted even if he should be already mated.
In like manner lived our half-human progenitors. But with them family parties no longer wandered aimlessly searching for food, but with a purpose. No longer forest dwellers, or vegetarians, food would require more zeal and discrimination in collecting, and shelter of some kind had probably to be devised, partly as a protection against predatory animals, and partly for personal comfort, since it would now have become apparent that this could be appreciably increased by the exercise of a little effort and ingenuity. This appreciation of creature comforts formed a cement holding the family together; a sense of safety in Society helped still further. Rude tools chipped from flints were among their earliest and most cherished possessions for the sake of the advantages they secured. Here was the earliest form of wealth and the birth of 26labour and a further step on the road to progress. Little would now occur to derange the harmonious routine of the daily life, save only the ever-present jealousy of the head of the family which was assailable both from within and without. His sons and daughters were probably now regarded as a portion of his wealth, for they ministered to his comfort, and aided in the daily work which had now become a necessity. As his sons attained to maturity, so they became rivals to be watched with a jealous eye, and finally driven off, while his daughters at the same time became potential mates. This danger of close inter-marriage was a real one, though it cannot be supposed that it was in any way realized. The risk was evaded by perfectly natural means. The jealousy of the head of the family which drove him to expel his sons as they attained maturity provided the means. These young bachelors sought their mates from neighbouring families, and it is probable that they would not be hard to lure from their parental control, but in such matters force was able to effect where persuasion failed.
These mate hunting excursions are to be regarded as extremely powerful factors in securing the betterment of the race. They were adventures in which all must fail who did not possess courage, cunning, and brawn, for, paradoxical as it may seem, evolution depends, not so much on the qualities of the individual as on the elimination of the unfit. As yet might was right. But the strife of combat, fierce and merciless, had its beneficial results not only in weeding out the physically and mentally deficient, but in stimulating affection between the victor and his prize.
As the advantages of neighbourliness dawned upon these children of nature, rules and regulations, for the control 27of the individual on behalf of the good order of the community, came into being; and among the earliest laws to be framed, we may be certain, were those for the regulation of marriage. These, as we may gather from the history of savage races to-day, did not concern themselves with chastity, at any rate before marriage, it was enough if they secured the right of possession, and excluded the dangers of close intermarriage. Promiscuity in the past was never the practice of any race, its existence to-day, among both savage and civilized people, is due in part to imperfections in the social scheme, and in part to the vagaries of individuals.
That the sexual instincts form the bed-rock on which depends the survival of all races of animals, which, for their propagation, require the co-operation of separate sexes, is beyond dispute. And it is no less certain that in so far as the evolution of man is concerned, jealousy has been a powerful integrating factor.
Among the higher animals apart from Man, both polygamy and polyandry are met with, and this with no apparent detriment to the race. It is significant, however, that polyandry is never met with among the mammals, and but rarely among the birds, when, as will be shown, this form of sexual relationship has been accompanied by a profound modification of the behaviour of the sexes in regard, not only to courtship, but to the offspring. The male has lost his masculinity, and the female her femininity. In human society both forms of marriage prevail, and there can be no doubt, from the history of such customs, that of the two types, polygamy is much to be preferred. It is certain that no race which practices polyandry can do more than hold its own, and that in a low grade of development. This cannot be 28said of polygamy, which might indeed be commended as a solution of some of our own social problems, were it not almost certain that the remedy would prove as bad as the disease.
The subject of “Courtship” in so far as it applies to the human race is one concerning which little can be said. Westermark, Letourneau, Sutherland, and last but by no means least, Darwin, have brought together a mass of facts bearing on the status of women among communities, savage and civilized, ancient and modern, and from these much may be inferred. To this harvest, however, Darwin himself still remains the most important contributor on all that directly concerns the “Sexual Selection” theory. Other writers seem to have paid more attention to the laws governing the possession of women than to the discussion of the motives which may have controlled the choice of mates. Instances of amatory dalliance, such as are met with among the inferior apes, and the birds, seem to be wanting. This negative evidence seems to show that, even among the most ancient, the most Ape-like, half-human races of man such dalliance was unknown. And this because primitive man, in his love-making as in everything else, was accustomed to take what he wanted, or die in the attempt. It is to this forcefulness of character that the human race owes its progress throughout the ages. But did he, when desire possessed him, exercise any sort of choice, when this was possible? What were his standards? These are unanswerable questions; at most we can but infer what his behaviour may have been from observations on existing races of mankind. These seem to demonstrate that while some races profess admiration for certain of their physical peculiarities, these 29cannot be attributed to the action of sexual selection.
It has been suggested that the low, beetling brows, protruding mouth, and flat, broad nose which characterized the earliest human peoples, were slowly eliminated by the ?sthetic taste displayed by the females in their choice of mates. Now in the first place, it is highly improbable that they had any choice allowed them, and if they had, these are just the characters which were most marked in the males and might, or probably would, in consequence, have been deemed “manly” and desirable, for it is hardly to be supposed that such people would be capable of conceiving ideas of a possible refinement of their personal appearance if they could but add to the height of their foreheads and reduce the size of their faces. These graces settled down on them as the brain enlarged and habits changed. But the process of transformation must have been infinitely slow, and quite imperceptible from one generation to another.
The absence of secondary sexual characters in man, such as the brightly coloured areas which are so conspicuous a feature of many of the lower apes, is to be explained by his fundamentally different mode of life. Such vivid hues obtain only in species which live in troops, and they serve as aphrodisiacs, ensuring mating to every female forming a part thereof, which would be by no means certain were there no external signs of her condition. Primitive man, like the higher apes, was instinctively monogamous, and of necessity solitary, till he had acquired a tolerable measure of self-control and neighbourliness. When lust possessed him, he was obliged, in making his maiden venture to scour the country in the search for the object of his desire. This found, and won, probably only after desperate conflict with the 30head of the family, the nuptial ceremonies would be short.
The greater physical strength of the male and his higher brain capacity are probably the result of Natural, rather than of Sexual Selection. The former would weed out all the weakly and dull-witted in the ordinary course of the struggle for existence, the latter, during the early days of man’s development, would award the prizes of life to the most amorous and cunning, and to the most ambitious of the competitors.
The secondary sexual characters of the female are chiefly negative characters, the absence of those which are conspicuous in the male. She retains more of the primitive characters of the race. This is the rule in regard to the animal kingdom. Wherever we desire to find the onward tendency of evolution, the latest developments of the race, we turn to the male; when we desire to learn something of the past history of the species we turn to the female and young. This standard, of course, yields by no means uniform results, for we find every gradation of progress on the part of the latter, till male and female and young are externally indistinguishable. But the order is almost invariably the same—first the male, then the female, then the young. Thus progress is more or less automatic or “Orthogenic,” as the scientific text books have it, new characters, as they appear, tending to go on increasing in amplitude till checked by Natural selection. It is to be noted, however, that this transference is limited, for the female never inherits characters which are concerned with aggressiveness to the same degree as in the males, as witness, for example, the brow-ridges and huge canines in the case of the gorilla.
Darwin believed that the beards of men have developed by the selective choice of the women who preferred 31bearded men, while the secondary sexual characters of the women indicate the lines of male choice. There is, however, no evidence to show that in the past—for these characters are as old as man himself—woman had any choice whatever in the choice of her mate, save under exceptional circumstances. He was led to this conclusion by one or two striking instances apparently demonstrating this choice, and on these he seems to have based his version of the influence of sexual selection in man. The first of them is furnished by the Hottentots wherein, in both sexes, there is a marked “Steatopygy,” or accumulation of fat on the buttocks. In the female this is excessively developed, and it is said that such females are highly prized by the males. Darwin cites an instance of a woman in which this accumulation was so enormous, that she could only rise with the greatest difficulty from a sitting position. But there is no evidence to show that less favoured females remained unmarried.
In other tribes the breasts attain excessive proportions, so much so that they can be slung over the shoulder to feed the infant strapped to her back. These may have been increased by sexual selection, the preference of the males for such mates as possessed this feature in the most marked degree; but there is good reason to believe that such characters, which, it must be remembered, are the outward manifestation of germinal variations, once having appeared, would of themselves, of their own inherent vitality, have gone on developing. They won favour from long familiarity, which has imparted a semblance of increment from choice. These increments of growth in any given generation would be imperceptible, but variations in excess of the average would be conspicuous, 32and excite admiration from their very strangeness.
The part which sexual selection has played in determining the physical characters of the human race has without doubt been overestimated. Its influence may be said to have ceased with the development of the emotional side of his nature. This momentous process began with the male and had its roots in the ebullitions of his inherently amorous nature which has been the dominating factor in his career, and will be to the end, however much its influence may be disguised by the complex conditions of civilization.
These emotions, varying in kind and intensity, are such as are embraced in the term “Love” in the highest sense. They control the selection of mates, but this selection takes no account, save by accident, of qualities which have any value as factors of race-survival. In the lower animals these are determined by natural selection, and sexual selection adopts as it were the material furnished thereby. It “selects” only in so far as it eliminates the non-sexually inclined, and those which lack the qualities essential to ensure reproduction, such as weapons for example. In human communities natural selection is largely avoided, and “mate-hunger” seems now to be swayed by more than the mere desire for its satisfaction. With the development of human faculty new factors have been introduced, complex emotions have come into being, whose influences are as yet only vaguely understood. Whither are they tending? What will be their effect on race-progress? These are matters of grave importance to us all, and to the student of Eugenics in particular.
Of man’s higher emotions, which, it is contended, now govern his conduct, probably the earliest to assert itself 33was the ?sthetic. His quickening mentality could not fail to be captivated by the bright hues of birds and butterflies, and flowers, the glorious colour-effects of dawn and sunset, the seasons in their changes and so forth. And as this sense of the beautiful slowly gathered force he would seek to decorate his naked body with such of the more brightly-coloured objects around him as were suitable or rather with such as could be affixed thereto.
As a signal mark of his favour and affection, he would occasionally transfer some one, or another, of his most lasting ornaments to his mate, and the additional charm this would give her ensured a continuance of such gifts, and paved the way for tribal fashions. But then, as now among savages, the males take the lead in this matter of ornamentation, but in proportion as affection grows, they are transferred from him to her, so that among civilized races to-day, the custom is entirely reversed, the women, not the men, wearing the finery. So soon as families began to be neighbourly and to combine for the sake of company and mutual help, the spirit of rivalry, so essential to progress everywhere, would tend to increase the number of such gifts, and to set “fashions.” With the foundation of society “selection”—by the elimination of the unsocial, would ensure, not only the survival of such fashions, but their multiplication and diversification, producing results which, to our eyes, have often been hideous. The immediate effect of this form of selection, however, was not a change in physical characteristics, but in the evolution of personal ornaments and development of the ?sthetic sense. Progress in this direction must have been infinitely slow, and the lower races of to-day furnish us with instructive object-lessons in its course. In many cases uglification 34rather than refinement has attended their efforts.
It is indeed more than probable that the various types of ornamentation obtaining among savage races had their origin in outbursts of sexual exaltation. One of the earliest methods of personal decoration was probably to daub the body with paint, as is the custom during the performance of various religious and semi-religious rites among the Australian aborigines. A desire to find a permanent substitute for paint led to the practice of cicatrization, and the later and more refined custom of tattooing. But personal mutilation has taken many and strange forms, such as knocking out the front teeth, filing them to saw-like points, inserting gold or jewels, or staining them. No less extraordinary are the various types of lip and ear ornaments, and the suspension of ornaments from the nose. The various fashions of dressing the hair are also traceable to this origin.
That these modes of personal decoration designed for special occasions should in course of time become permanent, and should, in many cases, have lost their original associations is but natural. To-day among savage and barbaric races many of these modes of transfiguration have become associated with religious and semi-religious ceremonies, but many have been retained solely to enhance the personal appearance, even though in our eyes an exactly opposite effect has been attained. Among the natives of the Congo, for instance, the face is covered with raised patterns formed by cicatrization; that is to say, by cuts made with a knife, which are made to form scars on healing by means of pungent juices or heated iron. Further, the teeth are filed to form saw-like cutting edges, producing a revolting effect according to European ideals, but charming according to the standards of those thus 35patterns which adorn the tattooed face of the Maori present a result more nearly pleasing. Many of the natives of East Africa pierce the lobes of the ear and hang ornaments therein so heavy, that in due course a hole large enough to run the arm through results. These are mutilations of a purely ornamental character. Curiously enough, precisely similar forms of mutilation occur among people dwelling in different continents, as in the case of the lip and ear ornaments worn by natives of Africa and South America. There can have been no means of communication between these races, and hence we must conclude they were independently derived.
More striking still is the practice of deforming the head which prevailed among the Peruvians, the Caribs of the West Indies, and the natives of Vancouver, and the Chinook Indians, wherein it attained its maximum. Among some tribes, the head was depressed from above downwards, giving the skull a cone-shape, the apex pointing backwards; among others the pressure was applied to the back and front of the head, giving a more or less globular shape, and causing the sides of the head to bulge ominously. Now these distortions are to be attributed solely to the whim of Fashion. But how could this have arisen? No adult could have started it, for the form of the skull cannot be altered once its growth is completed. The conception of this diabolical custom apparently then arose in the brain of some fiendishly ingenious person, who realized that to effect its realization pressure must be applied to the head of the infant at its birth and for some considerable time after, by squeezing the head between boards, or tying it round with thongs of hide. That disastrous results would follow from this tampering with the brain would seem an 36unavoidable conclusion; yet such was not the case. During the moulding process, travellers who have witnessed it tell us, children display no sign of suffering, even though their eyes seemed to be starting from their sockets from the pressure. But they cried when the thongs were loosened. On attaining to man’s estate, such victims to parental folly seemed to be in every way as intelligent as the men of neighbouring tribes which had no such insane customs.
How deeply rooted was the prejudice in favour of this extraordinary fashion is shown by the fact that when, during infancy, from sickness, or other cause, the bandaging was neglected or omitted, and the child, in consequence, attained to man’s estate with a head of the shape designed by nature, he was seriously hampered in the struggle for existence, for no honours among his tribe were possible. Indeed, as often as not he was sold as a slave. But thus did Public Opinion bring disaster on its advocates, for those misguided people have been swept off the face of the earth by their own folly. Those who survived the ordeal, it is true, seemed in no way mentally deficient, but the infant mortality must have been great, and none of the adults could ever have attained to their full potentiality.
These people were, however, not the only lunatics at large. For this extraordinary practice found its devotees in many other widely sundered parts of the world. Deformed heads of various types have been found in rock-tombs near Tiflis, in the Crimea, Hungary, Silesia, in South Germany, Switzerland, and even in France, Belgium and England! How did it spread from one nation to another? Since means of communication were extremely limited 37centuries ago, one can only suppose that in most cases it arose independently. It is possible that the idea started with the unintentional deformations of the head which follow the practice of carrying the child during early infancy. It is well known that if a child be constantly carried on one arm, so that one side of the head continuously presses against the shoulder, a more or less marked asymmetry of the skull results. It would be enough for the head of one of the chief’s children to show a rather unusually marked asymmetry of this kind for every mother to endeavour to copy the defect, for imitation ever was the sincerest form of flattery!
To place these superficial, non-transmissible, artificially created features, such as deformed heads, mutilated teeth and ears, and so on, in the same category as the “secondary sexual characters” of the lower animals which are physical, inherent and transmissible features, is to ensure confusion of thought. The one represents a physical, the other an emotional development. The persistence of certain forms of mutilation esteemed beautiful in human society is not to be attributed to Sexual selection, or to “preferential mating,” for these things are not only non-transmissible features, but outside the sway of the amorous instincts, as is shown by the case of those individuals who, living in a community where deformed heads are de rigueur, have heads of normal shape. So soon as such perversions become a part and parcel of everyday life, they become essential to the general well-being and comfort of their possessors, enabling them to follow their normal avocations without exciting the dislike or wounding the prejudices of their neighbours. The absence of the “tribal sign” alienates the esteem and comradeship of his neighbours and brings an unenviable 38notoriety. In like manner albinos among birds, for example, are hunted down by their fellows and killed, and birds of exotic species conspicuous by reason of their unfamiliar appearance are treated in the same manner. The sexual instincts have no part in this.
It will have become obvious in the course of this chapter that Sexual selection as a factor in shaping the evolution of the human race has not played a very conspicuous part. Nevertheless, the balance of opinion to-day is probably in favour of the view that the physical peculiarities by which we distinguish one race from another are, for the most part, due to the influence of this form of selection. A more careful survey of the facts will show that this view is untenable. And there is no more striking demonstration thereof than that it has been inconsequently applied to account for features in one race, which in another are attributed to environment or to Natural Selection. It may safely be asserted that colour, the shape of the nose, the prominence of the jaws, and the character of the hair, are no more the result of “Sexual Selection” than stature, for example. These are the manifestations of inherent growth forces, or “tendencies,” which owe their survival, and development, to the influence of Natural selection.
Sexual selection has brought about the dominance of the male, by the struggle between males for mastery, originally for females. It “selected” for survival, in primitive races, those males with the thickest skulls and the strongest physique; it determined the survival of the keenest witted and most aggressive and most amorous males, and it eliminated those in which the latter features were too active. It assured victory, in short, to those only who possessed just those qualities on 39which life or death depend in moments of conflict. In the case of the females, it assured survival only to those who possessed strongly developed maternal instincts and submissiveness.
It is by no means realized that the incidence of moulding forces has changed and is changing with the environment of the race. So long as physical force, as between man and man, determined survival, as among savage races to-day, so long does it ensure to such races strong men and strong children, for in conflict with neighbouring tribes victory rests with the most powerful of physique and endurance and the most prolific. This last is an all-important concomitant if repeated conflicts are to be successfully waged. Among civilized peoples such contests began to lose their value in this regard when, by the introduction of arms, physical personality became a steadily diminishing factor. Victory now rests rather with those peoples who are most skilful in devising engines of destruction. The brain, not brawn, tells. But man cannot live by brains alone. With the inevitable decline in his physical nature man’s hold on existence is seriously imperilled. Civilization is making for extinction as much as over-specialization in the case of the lower animals. Hitherto, save in the case of decaying nations, women have played but a minor part in what we may call the “tribal” affairs of the race. Among the civilized nations of to-day, in proportion as the “maleness” of the community becomes more and more effete, the victims of sophistry, and the slaves of shibboleths, so the influence of the females asserts itself. And recent events among us show plainly enough that that influence is the reverse of good. Having its roots in personal vanity, and the love of notoriety, it is intolerant alike of reason and self-restraint, and that way madness lies.