Chapter XXIV: Appendix: II 488 (4)

The information, however, which we thus gain is very meagre. A study of fossil remains can only provide us with an outline of the facts connected with the evolution of the skeleton. More can be gathered from a study of the cultural remains, and certain deductions of considerable interest can be made especially in connexion with our present purpose so far as the evolution of skill is concerned. But, of course, we can in this manner gather nothing as to the nature of the social customs and institutions belonging to the races which practised these skilled methods. The question we have to face is whether this very bare outline of the facts of history can in any manner be filled in.

3. There is a further source of evidence which we have to consider. There has come under the observation of civilized man a large number of races in a low stage of culture. The evolution of culture or of control over the surroundings took place more quickly among certain races than among others. Some races got left out of the main stream of evolution, and finally in relatively recent years the more advanced races arrived at a stage where they were in a position completely to dominate the latter. The more primitive races were unable to offer any serious resistance to the civilized races. It was, therefore, possible to regard these primitive races dispassionately and scientifically; this study has led to the collection of a vast amount of information regarding these primitive races. These data are for many reasons often of a very unsatisfactory nature; of this the chief cause is that, before an accurate study was begun, contact with civilized races had often had a considerable influence upon the former mode of life of the primitive races. What we require and what is difficult to obtain is information as to the conditions under which these races lived before they came into contact with Europeans. With regard to the unsatisfactory nature of the evidence there will be more to say later.

It is of primary importance to observe that these races are not to be regarded as actual representatives of certain stages through which civilized races have passed. We know that in the evolution of control over nature civilized races have passed through certain stages of culture; the first stage was marked by the use of unpolished stone implements and the obtaining of food by hunting and fishing only; the second stage was marked by the use of polished stone implements and the obtaining of food by agriculture and the domestication of animals.[103] These two broad divisions—the Palaeolithic and the Neolithic—may be subdivided. But no primitive race can be regarded as representing any definite stage in exact detail, whether in the first or in the second of the two broad divisions through which civilized races have passed. While the culture of the ancestors of civilized man was evolving from that of the Palaeolithic stage to that of the present day, the culture of certain other races did not progress as far even as the Neolithic stage. But the culture of these races did not remain unmodified; it followed in each case a line of evolution of its own. These races are therefore to be regarded as specialized representatives of the earlier stages of culture through which the civilized races passed. Nevertheless, specialized though their culture may be, the general conditions of their existence are certainly similar to the general conditions which must have characterized the corresponding stage in the evolution of the culture of civilized races. That is to say, the broad features which characterize the conditions found among hunting and fishing races must also have characterized the conditions under which our Palaeolithic ancestors lived.

There is here obviously suggested a method whereby the framework of history arrived at by the evidence of fossil and cultural remains may be filled in. The broad conclusions drawn from a study of hunting and fishing races may be applied to Palaeolithic races. But this method must be used with great caution; it has undoubtedly been pressed too far. It is possible to divide hunting and fishing races into groups and to compare these groups with stages in the evolution of Palaeolithic culture. How far it is in any way valid to attribute in this fashion particular social institutions which characterize lower, middle, and upper hunting races to lower, middle, and upper Palaeolithic races respectively is very doubtful. It is not proposed here to attempt to carry the method as far as this. For one thing, so far as the subject has been worked out, there is no clear correlation between different factors affecting fertility and elimination on the one hand and stages in culture among hunting races on the other hand. Thus, as it happens, any attempt to carry this method into more detail is not productive of results, and therefore it is not worth while to inquire whether results would be valid or not. All that it is proposed to do here is to examine the evidence regarding the prevalence of certain customs, habits, and so on, among hunting races, and to apply the broad conclusions founded on this evidence to the ancestors of civilized races who supported themselves by hunting. In this manner only is it at all possible to fill in the framework of history provided by the remains of culture and by fossils, and thus to arrive at any conclusions regarding the course of the movement away from the conditions found in the pre-human ancestor to those found among civilized races.

4. With regard to the question as to the way in which this evidence may be most conveniently set out, it is proposed to proceed in the following manner. Before we come to the evidence regarding fertility and elimination, something has to be said regarding fecundity in man, and that will be the subject of the fifth chapter. In the following chapter the evidence regarding fossil and cultural remains will be very briefly discussed, just so far as, in the first place, provides the necessary historical facts to form a basis for the discussion of the qualitative problem and as, in the second place, provides the framework into which we can fit the conclusions which we shall draw from a study of primitive races. In the seventh chapter the evidence drawn from a study of hunting races will be reviewed in so far as it throws light upon fertility and elimination. In the eighth chapter the evidence bearing upon these problems, so far as the agricultural races are concerned, will be similarly set out. In the ninth chapter the evidence will be discussed in its bearing upon the quantitative problem among these races—all reference to the qualitative problem being left for later chapters. In the tenth chapter the evidence for the historical races will be similarly reviewed, and in the eleventh chapter similarly discussed. The twelfth chapter will be devoted to a discussion of certain problems connected with the quantitative problem at the present day. The twelfth chapter therefore will complete the treatment of the first or quantitative aspect of the problem, and in the remaining chapters will be discussed the second or qualitative problem. Already there will have been presented a large part of the evidence necessary for the discussion of the second problem—namely, the evidence connected with the outline of the facts of history and that connected with fertility and elimination. What other evidence is necessary can be given as and when required.

V
HUMAN FECUNDITY

1. As a preliminary to the separate inquiries into the two aspects of the problem, it is necessary briefly to consider the question of human fecundity.

We may ask, in the first place, whether, taking a broad view of human history, there is any reason to believe that human fecundity has changed since the epoch of the pre-human ancestor, and, if so, whether it has increased or diminished. Secondly, there are a number of habits and customs which have been practised in different degrees at different times, such as prolonged lactation, polygamy, and so on, and we may also ask what bearing, if any, such habits and customs have upon fecundity.

There is much connected with the subject which is difficult and obscure. It is, in particular, often difficult to ascertain whether any differences in fecundity, as may be found to exist, are of the nature of racial or of environmental differences. Into such points, however, we need not go. We are concerned only with the question as to whether there are differences in fecundity, and we may confine our attention to a notice of any broad differences which do exist and to the question whether certain habits and customs widely practised at one time or another and supposed to bear upon fecundity do or do not have the influence attributed to them. We may begin with the first question set out above. In order to obtain an answer to this question we have to rely upon evidence derived from various sources, partly from primitive races, which we assume in general to exhibit conditions prevalent among prehistoric races, and partly from evidence derived from a study of the mammalian species which have been subject to changes comparable with those to which man has in the course of his history been subject.

2. From what has been said regarding the nature of reproduction in