Chapter II: , it follows that it is the female rather than the male that (6)

There is another class of factors the primary and not the incidental function of which it is either to reduce fertility or to cause elimination. These factors are prolonged abstention from intercourse, abortion, and infanticide. The view put forward here is that normally in every primitive race one or more of these customs are in use, and that the degree to which they are practised is such that there is an approach to the optimum number. With regard to this view we may first deal with the question as to the prevalence of these customs. We may then refer to the evidence as to the nature and origin of these practices. We shall then be in a position to ask how it may be supposed that they are so practised as to bring about that amount of restriction of increase which will result in an approach to the optimum number being made.

7. The evidence regarding the practice of these customs—prolonged abstention from intercourse, abortion, and infanticide—has already been given in the last two chapters. This evidence is also summed up in the Appendix to which the reader is invited to turn. No attempt has been made to conduct an exhaustive inquiry; but it is claimed that there is ample evidence of the widespread prevalence of one or more of these practices. There is no indication of the correlation of any one practice with any one economic stage. As far as the evidence goes, any practice may be in use in any economic stage. To the meaning of this we shall refer later. It is further claimed that, when the influence of contact with Europeans is taken into account, the evidence of the existence of these customs is still more impressive; for the observations upon which we have to rely have for the greater part been made after these races had been in contact with Europeans, and such contact is followed by a diminution of these practices.

One of the first changes brought about by this contact is connected with the introduction of diseases previously unknown. These diseases are often peculiarly fatal, causing a very high death-rate, and it is clear that, unless the practices of abstention from intercourse, abortion, and infanticide were largely abandoned, the race would perish. There is no difficulty in understanding how these practices would actually be abandoned soon after the introduction of disease. The proximate causes of these practices are largely, as we shall see, the difficulty of transporting many young children and the undesirability of having more than one child during the period of lactation. If disease began to carry off many children, the immediate causes for these practices would largely or entirely disappear and so would the customs themselves.[1116]

Apart from the introduction of disease, the effect of contact is in other ways to reduce the extent of these practices. Contact has often resulted in warfare between aboriginal races and European settlers—as in Tasmania, Australia, and America, or as between the Bushmen and the Boers. The largely increased death-rate would, as in the case of disease, be followed by a diminution of the extent of these practices. Further, under other conditions, as for instance in Polynesia, the efforts of missionaries have long been directed to putting a stop to these customs.[1117] We may also note that there is often a bias on the part of observers to under-estimate the extent of the employment of infanticide and abortion. Many observers are attracted by the races who come under their notice and seem to think that these practices are incompatible with the kindly nature or pleasant disposition of the people they describe—that in fact the attribution to them of such customs as a normal feature of existence is a kind of libel—and if they report them at all, they persuade themselves into thinking that they are infrequent and abnormal. We have only to remember the objection taken to the interpretation of the finds in neolithic graves in England as evidences of infanticide—an objection based on the dislike of believing that our ancestors could have been guilty of such a habit. Or, again, we may remember that Tacitus, when desirous of holding up the Germanic tribes as an example to the Romans of his day, declared that they never committed infanticide—the implication being again that infanticide is to be regarded as a degenerate and unworthy custom.[1118]

Nevertheless, in spite of all such tendencies working for the rapid disappearance of these customs, and in spite of the bias against believing in their existence, there is, as the Appendix shows, ample evidence that one or more of these practices are recorded for almost every people.

8. We may now consider the evidence regarding the origin and nature of these practices. We shall find that abortion and infanticide arise owing to the difficulty of providing for more than one child at a time. We shall also find that these customs are practised as normal features of social life and in such a manner as to keep the number of children at a fairly constant average figure. There is frequently a belief that a particular number of children is the right number of children. Further, it will be seen that the number of children to be preserved is a matter for consideration in which the wishes of not only the parents but also of the relations and of the community in general have to be taken into account, and that the practices are enforced by social pressure.

A large amount of evidence has been given to the effect that the number of children is always small—the number, that is to say, after these practices have taken effect. This is in itself evidence, it may be noticed, that these practices do result in reducing the number of children to a small constant average. Some additional evidence may now be noted.

According to Curr infanticide in Australia ‘resulted principally from the difficulty, if not the impossibility, of transporting several children of tender age from place to place on their frequent marches’,[1119] and later he observes that ‘infanticide was common among the Bangerang.... They themselves gave as their reason for it the impossibility of the woman carrying more than one infant in their constant wanderings.’[1120] ‘Every child which was born before the one which preceded it could walk was destroyed, because the mother was regarded as incapable of carrying two,’[1121] says another observer of the Narrinyeri tribe. Considerable information is given by Howitt for various Australian tribes. ‘Infanticide is practised by the Mining to some extent, the mode of killing being by starvation. After a few days of short commons the child becomes peevish and troublesome, and in consequence more neglected, being placed by itself away from the camp and fires, and it is said to be afflicted with Mupurn (magic). When death ends its sufferings Mupurn is the cause. The reason they give for this practice is that if their numbers increase too rapidly there would not be enough food for everybody. Yet they are very fond of their offspring, and very indulgent to those they keep, rarely striking them, and a mother would give all the food she had to her children, going hungry herself.’[1122] ‘In the Tongaranka tribe the practice of infanticide was common, because a baby was frequently too much trouble to look after, and it was often the mother who killed it. But it was not done until the family consisted of three or four; but after that too much work in hunting had to be done to keep the family in food.... In the Mukjarawaint tribe the children belonged to the grandparents, though the parents had care of them. If, for instance, a boy was born and then a girl, the father’s parents might take them, or the mother’s parents, and so also with another couple of children. If, then, another child was born and one of the grandparents took it, it would be kept. If not, it was killed, there being too many children. The grandparents had to decide whether a child was to be kept alive or not. If not, then either the grandfather or father killed it, by striking it against the mother’s knee, and then knocking it on the head.... According to Buckley, if a family increased too rapidly in the Wadthawing tribe, as, for instance, when a woman had a child within twelve months of the previous one, there was a consultation in the tribe as to whether it should live or not.... Infanticide in the Kurnai tribe arose through the difficulty of carrying a baby when there were other children, especially when the next youngest was not able to walk.’[1123] Of the aborigines of the River Darling we are told that ‘it seems to have been the custom to kill many of the children directly after birth, to save trouble and privation in time of drought, when long distances must be travelled in the search for food and water’,[1124] and the same proximate cause of infanticide is mentioned by Beveridge.[1125] Of the women in the Port Lincoln district it is said that they put forward as the cause of infanticide the fact that they ‘cannot suckle and carry two children together’;[1126] similar reasons are said to be given by the women of Central Australia.[1127] Speaking of the natives of Port Darwin Foelsche says that the reason for infanticide is that ‘too many children encumber the parents in travelling about for food’.[1128] It is also worthy of note in connexion with Howitt’s statement about there being at times a dread of over-population that, according to Spencer and Gillen, this is not the case at any rate in Central Australia;[1129] according to Curr, however, ‘in many tribes there is a great fear of a want of food arising from over-population’.[1130] Among the tribes of Port Lincoln ‘the number of children reared by each family is ... very limited, rarely exceeding four’, and ‘if a mother has children in rapid succession ... the young infant is killed’.[1131] In the Dieyerie tribe about 30 per cent. of the children are destroyed at birth.[1132] In the neighbourhood of Port Darwin children are killed ‘where a woman has more than three or four’.[1133] In Central Australia ‘each mother only rears, upon an average, two children’.[1134] Among the Northern tribes of Central Australia the number of children is kept down by infanticide to two or three.[1135]

Similar evidence is forthcoming for other races of this group. Thus of the Puelches Guinnard says that ‘among these almost primitive creatures, children are not nearly so numerous as might be imagined, for the existence of the new born infant is submitted to the judgment of the father and mother, who decide on its life or death’.[1136] Charlevoix says of the Abipones that ‘they seldom rear but one of each sex, murdering the rest as fast as they come into the world, till the eldest are strong enough to walk alone. They think to justify this cruelty by saying that, as they are almost constantly travelling from one place to another, it is impossible for them to take care of more infants than two at a time; one to be carried by the father, the other by the mother.’[1137]

Turning to races of the second group in Funafuti every mother was allowed to keep alternate children, but the second, fourth, and so on had to be destroyed.[1138] ‘A Tikopian family is usually limited to four children, any excess of this number being killed by burying them alive in the house or just outside it; occasionally five or six may be kept alive but never more. If the first four children are girls one or more of these may be killed in the hope that the succeeding children may be boys, in which case the lives of the boys would be spared.’[1139] In New Guinea, in the later years of marriage, abortion is used in order to lessen the number of children, since a large family would mean too much work for the parents.[1140] In the Kingsmill Islands ‘a woman seldom has more than two children, and never more than three; when she discovers herself to be enceinte for the third or fourth time, the foetus is discharged by a midwife’.[1141] In the Sandwich Islands, ‘however numerous the children among the lower orders, parents seldom rear more than two or three, and many spare only one; all the others are destroyed, sometimes shortly after birth, generally during the first year of their age’.[1142] ‘They consider three children a burden,’ says the same author in another passage, ‘and are unwilling to cultivate a little more ground, or undertake the small additional labour necessary to the support of their offspring during the helpless period of infancy and childhood.’[1143] ‘No married pair (among the Gilbert Islanders) are allowed by their law to have nor bear more than four children, that is only four children get the chance of life. The woman has the right to rear or to endeavour to rear one child. It rests with the husband to decide how many children shall live, and this depends on how much land there is to divide.’[1144] In Fiji ‘infanticide is more prevalent among the poor classes than the rich’.[1145] Speaking of the Murray Islands Hunt says that ‘after a certain number had been born, all succeeding children were destroyed, lest the food-supply should become deficient’.[1146] Codrington says of the Melanesians that ‘abortion and infanticide were very common. If a woman did not want the trouble of bringing up a child, desired to appear young, was afraid the husband might think the birth before its time, or wished to spite her husband, she would find some one to procure abortion.... Infanticide was more prevalent in some islands than others.... The old women of the village generally determined whether a new-born child should live; if not promising in appearance or likely to be troublesome, it was made away with.’[1147] Among the Mafulu of British New Guinea a woman must not give birth to a child unless she can give a pig to a village feast, and consequently children are often destroyed either by abortion or infanticide, both of which are common.[1148] Of the Western Islands in the Torres Straits we hear that ‘few women rear more than three children, and besides most of those born before marriage are doomed to be killed immediately after birth, unless the father—which is seldom the case—is desirous of saving the child.... Even of other infants some, especially females, are made away with in a similar manner when the mother is disinclined to support it.’[1149] Of the Eastern Islands it is said that ‘after a certain number had been born, all succeeding children were destroyed, lest the food-supply should become insufficient’.[1150]

Rengger, who remarks upon the small number of children among the Guaranis, traces it to the regular practice of abortion after a certain number had been born.[1151] ‘Infanticide is quite common among the Lenguas, an interval of seven or eight years being always observable between children of the same family. Not only are babies, which are born in the interval, immediately killed, but abortion is also practised.’[1152] Among the Creek Indians ‘to destroy a new-born infant is not uncommon in families that are grown so numerous as to be supported with difficulty’.[1153] Of the Cheyennes it is said that ‘it has been the custom that a woman should not have a second child until her first is ten years old. When that age is reached, the man is likely to go with his wife and child to some large dance or public gathering, and there ... to announce publicly that now this child is going to have a little brother or sister.’[1154] There is sometimes evidence, for instance among the Sioux[1155] and the Brazilian tribes,[1156] that abortion is committed after consultation with the husband. Among the Pima Indians ‘sometimes a mother nursed a child until it was six or seven years old, and if she became pregnant in the meantime she induced abortion’.[1157] In Fiji there was no cohabitation until the child was two years old. ‘This separation ... was in bygone times invariably enforced’ and abortion was practised when there had been enough children.[1158] Speaking also of Fiji Seeman says that ‘relatives of a woman take it as a public insult if a child should be born before the customary three or four years have elapsed, and they consider themselves in duty bound to avenge it in an equally public manner’.[1159] Similarly Gutmann says of the Wadschagga that it is considered most disgraceful if a woman, who is still suckling a two years child, again becomes a mother, and that in consequence abortion is frequent.[1160] In German New Guinea, according to Krieger, only three children are as a rule brought up owing to a fear of scarcity of food.[1161] In Radeck ‘every mother is allowed to bring up only three children; every fourth and succeeding one she is obliged to bury alive herself’.[1162] Infanticide was ordered by law in Vaitapu and not more than two children were allowed in a family.[1163] Of the Roro-speaking tribes of New Guinea we are told that ‘formerly it was not customary for a woman to have children until her garden was bearing well’.[1164] In the New Hebrides ‘infanticide was sadly prevalent. As the burden of plantation and other work devolved on the woman, she thought she could not attend to more than two or three children, and that the rest must be buried as soon as born.’[1165] In the New Britain group ‘after marriage children are not borne by the woman for a period of from two to four years. I am informed that this is the result of a popular dislike to speedily becoming a mother on the part of the women, who use various means to procure abortion and use them successfully.... A considerable period elapses between the birth of one child and the birth of another. The general term is about three years. One child is always well out of hand before another appears.’[1166] We may also note that, according to Rivers, infanticide is frequent among the Todas and is practised not when food runs short but as a regular custom.[1167]

It will be remembered that, when setting out in the last two chapters the evidence for the extent of abortion and of infanticide, these practices were in many cases stated to be committed when there was a certain number of children thus corroborating the evidence given to this effect above.

9. We are now in a position to discuss the manner in which numbers are regulated among these races, leaving until later the discussion as to how the position among these races was derived from that among species in a state of nature. Everywhere groups of men are, as we have seen, confined to definite areas. Among the few things which the men composing these groups do know with accuracy are the limits within which their food must be obtained. Further they co-operate in the search for food. It follows, therefore, that within any such area there is—taking all the relevant facts into account—an optimum number. The advantages to any group of approaching this number are immense; a wide departure from this number can only be socially disastrous. We found that within any group there is a number of factors—some of which reduce fertility and others of which increase elimination—and that the average amount of restriction of increase resulting from the action of these factors was fairly constant. We also found that there were certain other factors—prolonged abstention from intercourse, abortion, and infanticide—which are everywhere present and considerably restrict increase. If, as we shall see later, there is reason to think that some approach to the optimum is everywhere attained, it is clear that the former factors cannot of themselves alone sufficiently restrict increase. It is therefore to the latter factors, the primary function of which it is to restrict increase, that we must look when we seek for the mechanism by which numbers are brought near the desirable level.

It is clear how these factors originate. Among more or less nomadic peoples abortion and infanticide are practised because of the difficulty of transporting and of suckling more than one child at a time. Abstention from intercourse arises as a taboo. The problem we have to face is how these practices could come to be of the necessary intensity. Now men and groups of men are naturally selected on account of the customs they practise just as they are selected on account of their mental and physical characters. Those groups practising the most advantageous customs will have an advantage in the constant struggle between adjacent groups over those that practise less advantageous customs. Few customs can be more advantageous than those which limit the number of a group to the desirable number, and there is no difficulty in understanding how—once any of these three customs had originated—it would by a process of natural selection come to be so practised that it would produce an approximation to the desirable number. There would grow up an idea that it was the right thing to bring up a certain limited number of children, and the limitation of the family would be enforced by convention.

Though, however, adjustment is understandable as the result of a natural selection of customs, the evidence shows that there is even among the most primitive races at times at least some deliberation as to whether a child shall be allowed to live. In the more advanced races there is increasing evidence of deliberation. It cannot be supposed that in deliberation of this kind there is any grasp of the true position regarding the importance of the optimum number, but it may be supposed that under these circumstances the actual position at the moment as to whether there are too many or too few in the group does weigh when taking the decision. To all members of such a group, confined as they are within the knowledge of them all to a limited area, the disadvantages of too many mouths must be obvious. Therefore even among the more primitive races there may be some semi-conscious adjustment of numbers by means of one of these methods. However this may be, it is clear that, even if there is no semi-conscious deliberation among the lower groups, there is to some extent an automatic adjustment to the needs of the moment. Suppose disease or severe weather, for instance, to produce a higher rate of infant mortality, then abortion and infanticide, inasmuch as they are practised because of the difficulty of transporting more than one child, will be less practised.

10. Leaving aside for the moment the evidence that an approximation to the desirable number is in this manner attained, we may note that in order that the system should be effective, something more is necessary. The conception of an optimum number involves the idea of a standard of living. The attainment of the optimum number indicates that the highest standard, which is possible taking all the circumstances into account, has been reached. In order that the standard of living may be maintained, it is not merely enough that numbers should be restricted; the younger generation must become proficient in the skilled methods which make this standard possible of attainment, and in particular it is important that the young men should not marry unless they are both energetic and skilful—unless, that is to say, they are both willing to keep up and are capable of keeping up the standard of living previously attained. There is abundant evidence to the effect that pressure is exerted upon the younger generation. It is commonly recognized that among primitive races the girls marry at or soon after puberty. It is not so often recognized that the young men not infrequently do not marry until some years later. The inefficient and the physically incapable sometimes do not marry at all. In such facts we may see evidence of the pressure exerted by social conditions and conventions. We find also that not only are young men carefully instructed in the skilled methods, but that the parents of the bride anxiously inquire as to the bridegroom’s energy and capability of supporting a family. The conditions regarding marriage have been much studied, and in marriage by service and marriage by purchase we can observe the pressure which forces a young man to show himself proficient in the skilled methods which are in use among his people. Obligations on the would-be bridegroom to work and save up the purchase money or to serve his future parents-in-law make it necessary for the young man to learn skilled methods and to exhibit energy and competence before marriage, whereby it is in any case rendered unlikely that new families will be set up which will adopt a lower standard of living than that of the previous generation. At the evidence for these facts we may now glance.

In Australia betrothals generally take place in infancy and marriage follows later; these betrothals are usually arranged as exchanges, but the system shows some features of marriage by purchase.[1168] Considerable postponement of marriage is often observed, especially among the less skilled members of the community; thirty is mentioned as a not uncommon age for marriage.[1169] Among the Eskimos there is a very strong feeling that a boy must show himself proficient in the difficult arts of hunting and fishing as practised by them. A young man seldom marries until he is over twenty, though often betrothed when an infant.[1170] Before that age he cannot learn all the methods of hunting game, managing a kayak, and so on. Marriage is considered impossible because he would not be in a position to maintain his family, and it is the necessity of showing that he is in this position before marriage is allowed which is remarked upon by all observers of Eskimo life.[1171] The usual form of marriage in America is by purchase.[1172] As a rule, the amount to be paid is relatively large, and the boy must either spend some time in getting it together or else obtain it from his father. At other times marriage is by service. Thus among the Kenai the bridegroom performs a year’s service,[1173] and among the Haidahs boys were often betrothed at an early age and went to live with the girl’s family and worked for them until marriage.[1174] A Seri bridegroom leaves his own family and enters that of the bride for a year; ‘he must display and exercise skill in turtle fishing, strength in the chase, subtlety in warfare and all other physical qualities of competent manhood’.[1175] Among the Jakun a husband ‘is expected to provide a hut, cooking pots and other necessary articles such as will suffice to enable house-keeping to be started with reasonable comfort’.[1176] Among the Fuegians ‘as soon as a youth is able to maintain a wife by his exertions in fishing and bird catching, he obtains the consent of her relations, and does some piece of work, such as helping to make a canoe, or preparing sealskins’.[1177]

In this connexion it may be noticed that we often hear of the scorn poured upon the weak and unsuccessful; it appears to be the case that such men sometimes never marry.[1178] Among the Kutchins ‘poor men, whose abilities as hunters are small, and who have been unable to accumulate herds, remain bachelors’.[1179] One of the most difficult things an Eskimo has to learn is how to catch seals. ‘The poor wretch’ that cannot do so ‘is despised to the last degree, and is obliged to subsist on women’s diet, such as scolpings, which he can fish for on the ice, mussels, periwinkles, dried herrings, &c.’[1180] With regard to postponement of marriage, from twenty-three to twenty-five is the usual age of marriage for men among the Thompson Indians,[1181] from twenty-one to twenty-five for men among the Lillooets,[1182] and twenty-five among the Abipones.[1183]

With regard to the races of the second group, among the Topebatos men marry when about eighteen. They have both to present gifts to, and to do work for, their future parents-in-law.[1184] The bridegroom also works for his future parents-in-law among the Bontoc Igorot.[1185] In Fiji ‘young men of the lower orders married rather late in life for a primitive people, rarely, it appears, before the age of twenty-five’.[1186] Later the same author says that ‘marriages were often delayed for years when the bridegroom’s family were too poor to acquire property commensurate with their pride’.[1187] In the Maldive Islands ‘although a man is allowed four wives at a time, it is only on condition of his being able to support them’.[1188] In the Caroline Islands ‘a suitor serves for his wife in the house of his father-in-law elect as Jacob did with Laban and frequently has his pains for nothing’.[1189] Marriage by purchase is common in New Guinea and often results in a postponement of marriage while the purchase money is being collected.[1190] Speaking of the New Britain Group, Danks says ‘some I have met who have never married, but the cause lay in their inability to raise the shell money with which to purchase a wife’.[1191] In Sumatra marriage by purchase is said to constitute a certain hindrance to marriage, in spite of which, however, there are few celibates.[1192] Among the Negritos of Zambala the amount of the purchase money is large and ‘there is no doubt that the gifts made represent almost all the wealth of which a young man and family can boast’.[1193] In the Western Islands of the Torres Straits men marry when between twenty and twenty-five years old,[1194] marriage being by purchase.[1195] In certain cases where head hunting is practised prowess in this art must be shown before marriage.[1196] In certain parts of Borneo ‘it is a rule among all the tribes that no youth can regularly wear a mandan, or be married or associate with the opposite sex, till he has been on one or more head hunting expeditions’.[1197]

Marriage by purchase is often found in Africa. The necessity of collecting the purchase money frequently involves some postponement of marriage. Formerly among the Thonga a man generally married when about twenty-five years old,[1198] but there was some variation in the age owing to the varying difficulty experienced in getting together the necessary cattle.[1199] Sooner or later nearly all the men among this tribe get married;[1200] and this is true of all Bantu peoples. ‘The kind of individual called a bachelor does not abound among the Bantu. The wretched, the invalids, the weak-minded only, are deprived of the legal marriage which for the black man is and remains the one object in life.’[1201] Sometimes in South Africa ‘a young man too poor to acquire a wife by the transfer of cattle would make an arrangement with the father of the girl to live with her and serve him’.[1202] Among the Baronga young men do not marry for several years after puberty.[1203] Werner’s description of marriage among the Zulus is of particular interest. ‘The price paid by the Zulus (under the name of Lobola) and others cannot properly be called purchase, being rather in the nature of a settlement or guarantee that the suitor is able to support a wife; it is held by her family in trust for her and her children.’[1204] The same author, speaking generally of British Central Africa, says that ‘young men may have to wait for some years, owing to lack of means or other reasons. In the country under the Angoni chiefs they are called on ... to “serve their time”, herding the chief’s cattle, and later, perhaps, going to war.’[1205] The men of the Akikuyu are described as ‘not marrying very young’.[1206] Roscoe enumerates the various articles required to make up a bride’s price among the Baganda, and adds that ‘they were difficult to obtain and represented a large sum to a poor person, so that it took him a long time to collect them; a man frequently spent twelve months begging among his relatives and friends the amount asked; for though as a rule he had secured some of the things before he went to ask for the lady, there would still be a balance to find’.[1207] Among the Wapagoro regular sexual intercourse is practised by children. At puberty they are separated and the boy must then begin to collect the purchase money, and not until he has finished may intercourse be resumed.[1208] Plas notes postponement of marriage among the Kuku owing to the amount of the purchase money.[1209] An interesting account of the Akamba is given by Dundas. ‘During his lifetime a man so divides his stock that he allots a portion to each of his wives. On his death the portion of each wife goes to her son or sons.... If the cattle left are not numerous enough to buy a wife for each son they are left with the eldest son until the increase suffices for the purchase of a wife for him. When the increase is again large enough it is given to the second son to buy a wife, and so on until each has a wife.’[1210] According to Johnston, ‘the Masai warrior is not allowed by the elders of his tribe to marry until he has reached about thirty years of age and has accumulated a fair amount of property or else so distinguished himself by his bravery as to merit an early retirement’.[1211] Among the Bangala, if a man is accepted by a girl he has to pay the ‘bespoke’ money, after which ‘the girl is reserved for him until such time as he can pay the whole or larger part of the marriage money’, and, while he is collecting this money, he will build a house if he does not already own one.[1212] Further, ‘a man can marry as many women as he can afford to pay marriage money for, but to each he must give a house’,[1213] and as a result of the high marriage price, if his family cannot help him, a man ‘cannot save enough to procure a wife until he is thirty or even older’.[1214] Cureau states that in the Congo basin a bride’s relatives are much interested in estimating a suitor’s capabilities of supporting a family and of, in general, doing well.[1215] Among the Ekoi people, ‘by a native custom if a man wishes to marry an Ekoi maiden he must serve her people for some considerable time, usually from two to three years. His work mostly consists in helping to clear bush for next season’s farms, but other services may be required of him. During this time he is expected to make presents to the relations of his future wife.’[1216]

Very similar institutions are found in America. Among the Nandowensis, ‘when one of their young men has fixed upon a young woman he approves of, he discovers his passion to her parents, who give him an invitation to come and live with them in their tent. He assiduously accepts the offer, and by so doing engages to reside in it for a whole year, in the character of a married servant. During this time he hunts, and brings all the game he kills to the family, by which means the father has an opportunity of seeing whether he is able to provide for the support of his daughter and the children that might be the consequence of their union.’[1217] Among the Ojebway Indians marriage is also by service and the future father-in-law is described as being anxious that the suitor should be a good hunter.[1218] Of the Natchez it is said to be ‘rare for young men to marry before they be five-and-twenty. Till they arrive at that age they are looked upon as too weak, without understanding and experience.’[1219] According to Dorsey, men of the Omaha tribe did not marry formerly until between twenty-five and thirty.[1220] Among the Attakapas, ‘if a savage desires to marry a girl whose father is still living, he approaches the latter; the latter then inquires if he is a brave warrior, a good hunter’, if he can make weapons, and so on.[1221] In Mexico men married about twenty.[1222] In British Guiana marriage is by service, and the bridegroom must show that he is capable of taking a man’s part; within a certain time he must clear a piece of land of a given area.[1223] Another author gives further details: ‘Before he is allowed to choose at all he must prove that he is a man and can do a man’s work.’ There are various tests. Among others ‘he clears a space in the forest to be planted with cassaba, and brings in as much game and fish as possible, to show that he is able to support himself and others’.[1224] In Peru a man had to be twenty-four years old before he could marry.[1225] Von Martius states that the system of marriage by purchase in Brazil is to be regarded as a symbol that the bridegroom can support a family.[1226] Men among the Guanas marry when over twenty.[1227]

11. The evidence so far adduced shows that the mechanism whereby numbers may be kept near to the desirable level is everywhere present. When inquiring into the nature of the mechanism, we found certain indications that it was effective. The regularity with which certain customs are practised, the small average number of children, and other facts afford strong but not conclusive evidence that an approach is normally made to the optimum number. We may now ask what further evidence there is as to the position in this respect.

Conclusive evidence is not available. It is only when we are able, as among some of the races in the third group, accurately to measure the average income over a period of years during which numbers are changing that we can arrive at a definite result. With regard to other races we have to adopt methods which, though less precise, nevertheless afford important evidence. We may inquire into the general conditions of life and ask whether there are indications of the approach to the highest standard of living within reach, or whether living is more usually reduced to the bare level of subsistence. We may ask whether famine and starvation frequently occur, what the average physical condition of the people is, whether old age is often reached, whether, in short, the conditions are such as we should expect to find them when the optimum number was approached, or as we should expect to find them when the numbers reached the maximum which could just be kept alive.

The conception of savage life which formerly prevailed was that primitive races were always in a condition of semi-starvation.[1228] In this connexion it has to be remembered that the conception of the optimum number has regard to all the conditions, and that among these races, taking the degree of skill, social customs, and so on into account, there would be, even if the optimum number was attained, times of scarcity, if not of famine. The existence of times of scarcity, therefore, is no evidence that, so far as numbers are concerned, these races have not attained the best conditions possible for them. It is undoubtedly the fact that they are physiologically adapted to withstand periods of scarcity in a manner that civilized men are not adapted, and it is interesting to observe that, according to the results of certain experiments, occasional periods of semi-starvation are far less harmful than is continual under-feeding.[1229]

Descriptions of the Australians suggest the picture of anything but an emaciated people in a condition of semi-starvation. In one place Spencer and Gillen speak of them as well nourished;[1230] in another place they describe a typical Arunta as ‘by no means poor in physique; in fact he might often serve a sculptor for a model, and, when walking behind a native, you are continually struck with his proportions and beautiful carriage’.[1231] These authors go on to say, however, that ‘there are times when he is hard pressed and during a long continuance of drought his life is not a happy one’.[1232] So, too, Schürmann says of the tribes of Port Lincoln: ‘the male sex exhibits a great deal of unstudied natural grace in their deportment, their walk is perfectly erect and free, motions of the body easy and gestures natural under all circumstances.’[1233] Further, we are told that ‘their food, if of indifferent quality, was at least wholesome and readily procurable, six hours a day abundantly sufficing for that purpose, so that hunger was little known’,[1234] and that ‘in most of the districts with an indigenous population game is so abundant compared to the number of inhabitants, as to enable every one to procure for himself and his family as many pounds of meat a day as his heart desired’.[1235] Perhaps this is too optimistic a view; there are certainly many references to lean times when food is difficult to procure. ‘In few parts of Australia’, says Thomas, ‘can the native count on anything like regular supplies of food’,[1236] and we hear of those powers of enduring hunger and thirst so common among these races and so incomprehensible to Europeans.[1237]

Burchell is enthusiastic about the Bushmen; ‘as we rode onwards, I could not cease admiring the beautiful symmetrical form of our Bushman guide, who walked and sometimes ran before us, with a gait the most easy and free that I ever beheld. All the limbs, unshackled by clothing, moved with a grace never perhaps seen in Europe. The contemplation of his well-proportioned, although small and delicate figure, his upright manly port, his firm and bold step, and the consciousness of liberty which beamed in his countenance afforded us indescribable pleasure.’[1238] Nevertheless the Bushmen had ‘periods of fasting’[1239] and were ‘often destitute of food for several successive days during seasons when both roots and game were scarce’.[1240] They were also ‘capable of remaining a long time without food, and could then devour immense quantities of meat without any ill effect’.[1241]

In most countries a lean season occurs periodically once or more every year. Such lean seasons are more exacting in some regions than others. The Australians manage to subsist for the most part without storing up food;[1242] in other countries the storing of food becomes a necessity.[1243] We often find that where food has to be stored up the stock runs low towards the end of the lean season. The Eskimos have to depend for many months upon the food they have preserved, and if for any reason, as for instance the late formation of the floe, their calculations are upset, they may be placed in a very trying situation.[1244] Of them we hear stories, as of other races, regarding their powers of withstanding hunger; ‘a man who has eaten nothing for three days, at least nothing but sea grass, can manage his little kayak or canoe in the most furious waves’.[1245]

Of the Kutchins of the Peel River we are told that they are ‘an athletic and fine-looking race, considerably above the average stature, most of them being upwards of six feet in height and remarkably well proportioned’.[1246] ‘The Indians north of the Columbia are, for the most part, good-looking, robust men, some of them having fine, symmetrical forms. They have been represented as diminutive; with crooked legs and uncouth features. This is not correct; but, as a general rule, the direct reverse is the truth.’[1247] The Montagnais are described as ‘tall, strong, erect, well-proportioned and agile’;[1248] on the other hand, we hear that they are liable to shortages of food, are able to go without food for three days together at a time, and are guilty of great excesses of eating and drinking when food is plentiful.[1249] Hardisty says that the Loucheux can always obtain food except under very unfavourable circumstances.[1250] ‘It sometimes happens that the Ahts are in straits for want of food, when the fish do not appear until late in the spring,’[1251] but ‘they can bear the want of food a long time without becoming exhausted’.[1252] The account of the Californians given by the acute Jesuit missionary Baegert is of particular interest. ‘Notwithstanding the barrenness of the country, a Californian hardly ever dies of hunger, except perhaps now and then an individual that falls sick in the wilderness and a great distance from the mission, for those who are in good health trouble themselves very little about such patients, even if these should happen to be their husbands, wives or other relations, and a little child that has lost its mother or both parents is also occasionally in danger of starving to death.... The food of the Californians is certainly of a mean quality, yet it keeps them in a healthy condition, and they become strong and grow old in spite of their poor diet.’[1253] ‘Californians can endure hunger easier and much longer than other people; whereas they will eat enormously if a chance is given.’[1254] Three days without food appeals differently to an observer in a mission station on the one hand and to a prisoner among the Indians on the other. ‘So protracted was the hunger we experienced,’ says Cabeça de Vaca, ‘that many times I was three days without eating anything. The natives also endured as much, and it appeared to me a thing impossible that life could be so prolonged.’ The same author goes on to say, however, that ‘they are a merry people considering the hunger that they suffer; notwithstanding they never cease to dance nor to observe their festivities and ceremonies. To them the happiest part of the year is the season of eating prickly pears; for then they have hunger no longer, and pass all the time in dancing and they eat day and night.... It occurred to us many times while we were among this people, and there was no food, to be three or four days without eating, when they, to revive our spirits, would say to us not to be sad, that soon there would be pears and we should enjoy plenty, and drink of the juice, and that our bellies would be very big, and we should be content and joyful, having no hunger.’[1255]

It is submitted that the conditions indicated by the type of evidence of which examples have been given above are not compatible with the state of existence on the bare means of subsistence.[1256] With this evidence there should be considered the facts given in the sixth chapter regarding the good health and advanced age to which these races generally attain.

Turning to races of the second group, in the Eastern Islands of the Torres Straits ‘nutritious food is generally very scarce at the end of the dry season’.[1257] The Dyaks usually experience a season when it is difficult to procure food.[1258] We are told that famine was unknown in Fiji,[1259] but that from November to February there was sometimes a scarcity when the last yam crop had been consumed and the next crop had not ripened.[1260] So too among the Baganda ‘no one ever went hungry while the old customs were observed’,[1261] but there are at times lean seasons. ‘When food is abundant they have their three meals daily; when it is scarce they content themselves with two, and hope for the rain and a plentiful supply of fruit.’[1262] Cureau, describing the races of the Congo Basin, gives a general description of the conditions which corresponds very closely with that just quoted for the Baganda.[1263] In British Central Africa “the time of hunger” comes after the rains, when the last year’s corn is eaten, and the new is not yet ripe—about March’.[1264] Of the Kagero of Northern Nigeria we are told that the ‘people are naturally more healthy and better conditioned in December, say, than in August’, because towards the end of the year there is plenty of food from the harvest whereas later in the wet season there is usually a scarcity.[1265] So of the Mandja of the Northern Congo we are told that ‘generally by the month of October, the Mandja family has consumed its reserves of food; thereupon follows want for two months’.[1266] In North America Catlin describes times of scarcity among the Mandans[1267] and im Thurm describes similar conditions in Guiana.[1268]

Of the fine development of physical form there is abundant evidence. The inhabitants of Timor Laut are ‘handsome-featured fellows, tall, erect, and with splendidly formed bodies’.[1269] One of the earlier travellers, Kotzebue, was very much struck with the physical features of the inhabitants of the Sandwich Islands[1270] and of Radeck.[1271] So, too, in Africa the Akikuyu are ‘exceedingly strong, muscular, healthy and well set up’.[1272] ‘The Damaras, generally speaking, are an exceedingly fine race of men. Indeed it is by no means unusual to meet with individuals six feet and some inches in height, and symmetrically well proportioned withal. Their features are, besides, good and regular; and many might serve as perfect models of the human figure.’[1273] As in the case of the races of the first group, we are told that formerly these people lived to a great age. ‘Under natural conditions the Bantu were a longer lived people than the Europeans.’[1274] Catlin was greatly impressed with the physical fitness of the North American Indians. He never saw ‘a more hardy and healthy race of men’, while the women were ‘exceedingly healthy and robust’.[1275] According to Heriot, ‘the North Americans are in general robust, and of a healthful temperament, calculated to live to an advanced age’.[1276] Du Pratz speaks highly of the physical characteristics of the Natchez and much similar evidence could be quoted.[1277] Azara, for instance, says that the Payaguas lived to an advanced age[1278] and also mentions especially the fine physical features of the Mbayas[1279] and of the Charruas.[1280] Of the Mandrucos Wallace says that ‘their figures are generally superb; and I have never felt so much pleasure in gazing at the finest statue, as at the living illustrations of the beauty of the human form. The development of the chest is such as I believe never exists in the best formed Europeans, exhibiting a splendid series of convex undulations, without a hollow in any part of it.’[1281] Humboldt remarks of the Chaymas that both men and women ‘are very muscular, but fleshy and plump’.[1282] So, too, Spix and Martius, speaking of Brazilian tribes, say that ‘the Indians are seldom sick and generally live to an advanced age’.[1283]

Lastly it may be observed as evidence of some weight that, as between different races, the higher the skill and the greater the natural richness of the surroundings, the higher, so far as we can judge, is the return per head. Though the return cannot be measured, all that we know of the conditions of life point to this conclusion, whether we contrast the agricultural races in general with the hunting and fishing races, or whether we contrast such hunting and fishing races as those of the north-west coast of America with the Fuegians.

12. The conclusions derived from a study of the first two groups are therefore to the effect that an approximation to the desirable number is normally attained by the practice of one or more of the three customs mentioned. As a result, the small average size of the family is arrived at—the size being just about that which allows for the average mortality from various causes later in life, so that in the next generation there will be as nearly as possible the same number of adults as in the former generation. It may be that, as an occasional coincidence, just that amount of reduction of fertility and just that amount of elimination necessary to bring about approximation are effected by means of those factors which were described as having incidentally these results. But such a coincidence must be very rare and the evidence shows that the practice of one or more of the other class of factors is widespread, if not universal. Further, it has been shown that a more or less automatic adjustment is attained by means of variations in the intensity of the operation of these latter factors, whereas it is difficult to see how it could come about by variations in the former factors only, and, however unprogressive social organization and general conditions may be, some adjustment must be necessary from time to time.

It has been observed that there is no apparent connexion between the practice of any of these customs and the different economic stages, and it may be stated that an investigation undertaken to see if any connexion could be detected was without result. This conclusion is not surprising. The problem of how to control numbers is one which is presented to all races at all times. We have grouped races according to their economic status; but there is no reason to expect that under any one economic system a particular method of controlling population would be adopted more than any other method—no reason, for instance, why infanticide rather than abortion should be practised under one system rather than under another. As has been said, the problem is always present, and the method adopted must originally have depended upon some factor quite independent of the economic stage; abortion, for instance, might have been practised in one country because of the presence of some herb which experience showed to be effective, while in another country a taboo upon sexual intercourse for magical reasons might have been developed into a taboo during lactation.