Читать книгу The Courtship of Animals - W. P. Pycraft - Страница 5

Table of Contents

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 delicately, 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 begot 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, whatever 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 clear.

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 labour 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 of 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 said 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 cannot 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 æsthetic 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 head of the family, the nuptial ceremonies would be short.