Produced by Bryan Ness, Lisa Reigel, Michael Zeug, and the
Online Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net
(This file was produced from images generously made
available by The Internet Archive/American Libraries.)
Transcriber's Notes: Words in italics in the original are surrounded by
_underscores_. Variations in spelling and hyphenation remain as in the
original. Ellipses match the original. A complete list of typographical
corrections as well as other notes follows the text.
[Illustration: THE THEORETICAL BABY AT 18 MONTHS.]
HOMO-CULTURE;
OR,
THE IMPROVEMENT OF OFFSPRING THROUGH
WISER GENERATION.
BY M. L. HOLBROOK, M. D.,
EDITOR OF "THE JOURNAL OF HYGIENE," AUTHOR OF "HYGIENE
OF THE BRAIN," "HOW TO STRENGTHEN THE MEMORY,"
"ADVANTAGES OF CHASTITY," ETC., ETC.
A New Edition of "Stirpiculture," Enlarged and Revised.
NEW YORK:
M. L. HOLBROOK & CO.
LONDON:
L. N. FOWLER & CO.
1899.
_Copyright by
M. L. Holbrook._
_1897._
_Entered at Stationers' Hall._
PREFACE.
During all ages since man came to himself, there have been enlightened
ones seeking to improve the race. The methods proposed have been
various, and in accordance with the knowledge and development of the
time in which they have appeared. Some have believed that education and
environment were all-sufficient; others that abstinence from
intoxicating drinks would suffice. A very considerable number have held
the idea that by prenatal culture alone the mother can mould her unborn
child into any desired form. The disciples of Darwin, many of them, have
held that natural and sexual selection have been the chief factors
employed by nature to bring about race improvement.
No doubt all these factors have been more or less effectual, but the
time has come for man to take special interest in his own evolution, to
study and apply, so far as possible, all the factors that will in any
way promote race improvement. In the past this has not been done. We are
not yet able to do it perfectly, our knowledge is too deficient, lack of
interest is too universal, but we can make a beginning; greater
thoughtfulness may be given to suitable marriages; improved environment
may be secured; better hygienic conditions taken advantage of; food may
be improved; the knowledge we have gained in improving animals and
plants, so far as applicable, may aid us; air, exercise, water,
employment, social conditions, wealth and poverty, prenatal conditions,
all have an influence on offspring, and man should be able, to some
extent, to make them all tell to the advantage of future generations.
Whatever the conditions of existence, man is able by his intellect to
modify and improve them, and make them favorably serve unborn children.
Herbert Spencer says: "On observing what energies are expended by father
and mother to attain worldly successes and fulfil social ambition, we
are reminded how relatively small is the space occupied by their
ambition to make their descendants physically, morally and
intellectually superior. Yet this is the ambition which will replace
those they now so eagerly pursue, and which, instead of perpetual
disappointments, will bring permanent satisfactions."
If the chapters included in this volume should help to arouse in the
minds of readers, and especially the younger portion of them, some
healthy feelings relating to the improvement of offspring it will have
fulfilled its aim.
Two of them have been given as lectures before societies, the main
object of which was the discussion of subjects bearing on evolution and
human progress, and they are included in this volume because they have a
close relation to the main subject, but the others were written
especially for this work.
While there may appear in a few cases a slight amount of repetition, the
author trusts the reader will not consider it as unpardonable.
With these few words I send the work on its mission hoping it will bear
good fruit.
M. L. H.
CONTENTS.
STIRPICULTURE.
_Page._
Plato's Restrictions on Parentage; Lycurgan Laws; Plutarch
on the Training of Children; Infanticide Among the Greeks;
Group Marriage; Making Children the Property of the State;
Grecian Methods Not Suitable to Our Time; Sexual Selection;
Difficulties in the Way; An Experiment in Stirpiculture;
Intermarriage; Woman's Selective Action; Man's and Woman's
Co-operation; The Individual's Rights; Spiritual Sympathy in
Marriage; 9
PRENATAL CULTURE.
Jacob's Flocks; An Illustrative Case; Beliefs of Primitive
Peoples; Birthmarks Rare; Why Children Resemble Parents;
Life's Experiences Affecting Child; Germ-plasm; Congenital
Deformities; Psychical Diseases; Telegony; Power of Heredity;
Sobriety in the Father; Sacredness of Parentage; Self-control; 55
HEREDITY AND EDUCATION.
Theories; Continuity of the Germ-plasm; A Rational View
of Heredity; Heredity and the Education of Children;
Intellectual Acquirements; Instinct; Knowledge or Heredity;
Individuality; Spectre of Heredity; 100
EVOLUTION'S HOPEFUL PROMISE FOR A HEALTHIER RACE.
Sexual Selection; Human Selection; Natural Selection;
Conflict between Evolutionary Theories and our Humane
Sentiments; Ideal of Health; Adaptation to Environment;
Knowledge; Effects of Living at High Pressure; Girls in
Manufacturing Districts; Co-operation: an Example; Hygiene; 130
THE GERM-PLASM; ITS RELATION TO OFFSPRING.
What is the Germ-plasm? The Primitive Egg; Fertilization of
the Mother-cell Necessary to Produce True Germ-plasm; What
Fertilization Does; Its Process; Helps to Explain Heredity;
Health of the Germ-plasm Necessary in Stirpiculture; Surplus
Vitality Necessary for Producing the Best Children; Duncan's
Statistics as to Ages of Parents of Finest Children; Effects
of Alcohol on Offspring; Food and the Germ-plasm; Effect
of Air and Water on Germ-plasm; Effect of Diseases on
Germ-plasm; Every Child Born an Experiment; 162
FEWER AND BETTER CHILDREN.
Darwin's Opinions; Race Modifications by Natural Selection;
Grant Allen's Views; Spencer's Views on Parental Duties;
Limiting Offspring Among the Natives of Uganda; The Fijians;
Children of Large Families often Superior to those in Small
Families; Some Reasons for this; 179
A THEORETICAL BABY.
Our First Baby; We had Theories; What Some of Them Were; My
Wife's Love for Me; My Sentiments; The Child's Easy Birth;
Mother's Rapid Convalescence; The Child's First Bath;
Forming Good Habits Early; No Crying at Night; Never Rocked
to Sleep; His Bed; Keeping the Stomach and Bowels Right;
Colic, Irritability and the Necessity for Diapers
Eliminated; Number of Meals Daily; The Infant's Clothing; At
One Year Old; Teething Gives Little Trouble; Requires
Considerable Water; Learning to Creep, Stand, Walk and Talk
by His Own Efforts; Invents His Own Amusements;
Companionship With Parents; Mothering; Learning
Self-control; Obedience; Playmates; 184
Notes 199
STIRPICULTURE.
Natural selection, which is the central doctrine of Darwinism, has been
explained as the "survival of the fittest." On this process has depended
the progress observable throughout organic nature to which the term
evolution is applied; for, although there has been from time to time
degradation, that is, a retrogression, this has had relation only to
particular forms, organic life as a whole evidencing progress towards
perfection. When man appeared as the culmination of evolution under
terrestrial conditions, natural selection would seem almost to have
finished its work, which was taken up, however, by man himself, who was
able by "artificial" selection to secure results similar to those which
Nature had attained. This is true especially in relation to animals, the
domestication of which has always been practiced by man, even while in a
state of nature. Domestication is primarily a psychical process, but it
is attended with physical changes consequent on confinement and
variation in food and habits. This alone would hardly account, however,
for the great number of varieties among animals that have been long
domesticated, and it is probable that actual "stirpiculture" has been
practiced from very early times. This term is derived from the Latin
_stirpis_, a stock or race, and _cultus_, culture or cultivation, and it
means, therefore, the cultivation of a stock or race, although it has
come to be used in the sense of the "breeding of offspring," and
particularly of human offspring. It is evident, however, that in
relation to man this is too restricted a sense, and it must be extended
so as to embrace as well the rearing and training as the breeding of
children, in fact, _cultivation_ in its widest sense, in which is always
implied the idea of improvement.
Stirpiculture in this extended sense was not unknown to the ancients,
both in theory and in practice. As to the former, the most noted example
is that of Plato, who, in his "Republic," proposed certain arrangements
as to marriage and the bringing up of children which he thought would
improve the race, and hence be beneficial to the State. The State was to
Plato all in all, and he considered that it should form one great
family. This idea could not be carried into effect, however, so long as
independent families existed, and therefore those arrangements had for
one of their chief aims the abolition of what we regard as family life.
This Plato thought was the best for the State, and the advantage which
was supposed to accrue to it by the absence of separate families is
expressed in a marginal note, which says: "There will be no private
interests among them, and therefore no lawsuits or trials for assault or
violence to elders."
PLATO'S RESTRICTIONS ON PARENTAGE.--The end would hardly seem to justify
the means, in these days, at least, when violence to elders is an
uncommon incident; but how was the community of wives and children by
which it was sought to be attained to be brought about? It is said, "The
best of either sex should be united with the best as often, and the
inferior with the inferior as seldom, as possible." Thus the people were
to be classified into "best" and "inferior," and while the former were
to be brought together as often as possible, the latter were not to be
united at all if it could be avoided. There was no question of marriage
in either case. In the one, the union was for the purpose of obtaining
children, and in the other for the simple gratification of the passions;
for only the offspring of the union between the sexes in the "best"
class were to be reared. The children of the inferior class were not to
be reared, "if the flock is to be maintained in first-class condition."
This infanticide would matter little to the parents, as they had no
control over their coming together, nor concern with the rearing of
their offspring. Lots were to be drawn by the "less worthy" on each
occasion of their being brought together. This was that they might
accuse their ill-luck and not the rulers, in case their partners were
not to their liking. The State was to provide not only what men and
women were to be sexually united, but the ages within which this was to
be permitted for the purpose of obtaining offspring. For a woman, the
beginning of childbearing for the State was fixed at twenty years of
age, and it was to continue until forty. For men, the period of
procreation is said to be between twenty-five and fifty-five years of
age. After the specified ages men and women were to be allowed to "range
at will," except within certain prescribed degrees, but on the
understanding that no children born to such unions were to be reared. It
is evident that under such a system the actual relationship between the
members of the State family could be known only to its rulers; but to
provide against the union of persons too nearly related by blood, all
those who were "begotten at the time their fathers and mothers came
together" were regarded as brothers and sisters. But even brothers and
sisters might be united "if the lot favors them, and they receive the
sanction of the Pythian oracle." Thus far for the breeding of children
laid down in Plato's "Republic." As to the rearing of them, we need only
say that the children allowed to live were to be placed in the custody
of guardians, to be appointed by the State from among the most worthy
of either sex, who were to bring them up in accordance with the
principles of virtue.
The idea which formed the basis of the regulations as to marriage in the
"Republic" was carried into practice by Lycurgus in his government of
Sparta. We are told by Plutarch in his "Lives," that Lycurgus considered
children not so much the property of their parents as of the State, "and
therefore he could not have them begotten by ordinary persons, but by
the best men in it." But he did not attempt to break up the private
family, as was proposed by Plato. He sought rather to enlarge its
boundaries by allowing the introduction of a fresh paternal element when
this could be done with advantage to the State. Thus, he approved of a
man in years introducing to his young wife a "handsome and honest" young
man, that she might bear a child by him. Moreover, if a man of character
became impassioned of a married woman on account of her honesty and
beautiful children, he might treat with her husband for the loan of her,
"that so planting in a beauty-bearing soil, he might produce excellent
children, the congenial offspring of excellent parents." The principles
which influenced Lycurgus were the same as those sought to be applied by
Plato, although in a different way. Plutarch says, "He observed the
vanity and absurdity of other nations, where people study to have their
horses and dogs of the finest breed they can procure, either by
interest or money, and yet keep their wives shut up, that they may have
children by none but themselves, though they may happen to be doting,
decrepid or infirm." Hence Lycurgus sought to drive away the passion of
jealousy "by making it quite as reputable to have children in common
with persons of merit, as to avoid all offensive freedom in their own
behaviour to their wives."
LYCURGAN LAWS.--According to Plutarch, the regulations enforced by
Lycurgus, so far from encouraging licentiousness of the women, such as
afterwards prevailed in Sparta, did just the reverse, as adultery was
not known among them. That the system was beneficial to the State by
tending to secure healthy offspring is probable; but Lycurgus took other
means of bringing about this result. His requiring girls to dance naked
in public was intended to teach them modesty. But we are told further:
"He ordered the virgins to exercise themselves in running, wrestling and
throwing quoits and darts, that their bodies being strong and vigorous,
the children produced by them might be the same; and that, thus
fortified by exercise, they might the better support the pangs of
childbirth, and be delivered with safety." Moreover, he provided against
the propagation of disease and deformation by directing that only such
children should be reared as passed examination by the most ancient men
of the tribe. If a child were strong and well-proportioned, they gave
orders for its education and assigned it one of the nine thousand shares
of land. Thus infanticide was a recognized part of the Spartan system,
as it was in that of Plato. The elders of the tribe were very careful
about the nurses to whom the children were assigned. When seven years
old, the children were enrolled in companies, where they were all kept
under the same order and discipline, and had their exercises and
recreations in common. The boy of best conduct and courage was made
captain, and their whole education was one of obedience. As for
learning, Plutarch says they had just what was absolutely necessary; and
certainly it was not such as could be recommended for imitation in these
days.
Xenophon, in his essay on "The Lacedemonian Republic," adds little to
what Plutarch tells us with reference to the marriage regulations of
Lycurgus. He remarks, however, that marriage was not allowed until the
body was in full strength, as this was conducive "to the procreation of
a robust and manly offspring." He affirms, also, that those who were
allowed by arrangement to associate with other men's wives were men who
had an aversion to living with a wife of their own!
PLUTARCH ON THE TRAINING OF CHILDREN.--In his "Morals," Plutarch gives
a dissertation on the training of children, the first portion of which
deals with stirpiculture in the limited sense of the term, but is very
inadequate. Indeed, the only advice he gives is that a man should not
keep company with harlots or concubines, because children by them are
"blemished in their birth" by their base extraction; and that no man
should "keep company with his wife for issue's sake but when he is
sober," lest he beget a drunkard. The main portion of Plutarch's
treatise is concerned with the education of children, which is the
second part of stirpiculture as a system of complete cultivation.
Introductory to the subject of education he speaks of nursing, to which
he attaches much importance. Plutarch insists on the necessity of
mothers nursing their own children; nature, by providing them with two
breasts, showing them that they can nurse even twins. But if they
cannot, they are to choose the best nurses they can get, and such as are
bred after the Greek fashion. For, "as it is needful that the members of
children should be shaped aright as soon as they are born, that they may
not afterwards prove crooked and distorted, so it is no less expedient
that their manners be well fashioned from the very beginning; for
childhood is a tender thing, and easily wrought into any shape."
After referring to the importance of the choice of good companions for
a child, Plutarch proceeds to consider the question of education, which
he speaks of as the matter of most concern. As to education in general,
he points out that a concurrence of three things is necessary to the
"completing of virtue in practice," which is the aim of that process,
that is: Nature, reason or learning, and use or exercise; For, "if
nature be not improved by instruction, it is blind; if instruction be
not assisted by nature, it is maimed; and if exercise fail of the
assistance of both, it is imperfect as to the attainment of its end."
There cannot be "instruction"--a term which is here used as equivalent
to "education," although the latter has a wider signification than the
former, and being equivalent to mental cultivation,--without a teacher,
and Plutarch says well, "we are to look after such masters for our
children as are blameless in their lives, not justly reprovable for
their manners, and of the best experience in teaching. For the very
spring and root of honesty and virtue lies in the felicity of lighting
on good education." He is, indeed, so much impressed with its value that
he affirms: "The one chief thing in this matter--which compriseth the
beginning, middle and end of all--is good education and regular
instruction." These two "afford great help and assistance towards the
attainment of virtue and felicity." He adds: "Learning alone, of all
things in our possession, is immortal and divine."
Plutarch dwells on various other matters connected with education
better fitted for his times than ours, but he refers to the importance
of example in words that are deserving of careful consideration. He
says: "The chiefest thing that fathers are to look to is, that they
themselves become effectual examples to their children, by doing all
those things which belong to them, and avoiding all vicious practices,
that in their lives, as in a glass, their children may see enough to
give them an aversion to all ill words and actions. For those that chide
children for such faults as they themselves fall into unconsciously
accuse themselves, under their children's names. And if they are
altogether vicious in their own lives, they lose the right of
reprehending their very servants, and much more do they forfeit it to
their sons. . . . . Wherefore we are to apply our minds to all such
practices as may conduce to the good breeding of our children."
It is not improbable that the marriage regulations ascribed to Lycurgus
were based on institutions already in existence among the Spartans. From
the statement of Polybius, that the brothers of a house often had one
wife between them, it has been inferred that in Sparta the Tibetan form
of polyandry was practiced. According to Plutarch, another curious
marriage custom prevailed, showing that the Spartans, who differed in
various respects from other Greeks, had retained primitive habits.
Thus, the bridegroom carried off the bride by violence, and for some
time after this "marriage by capture" he visited her "with great caution
and apprehension" of being discovered by the rest of the family; the
bride at the same time exerted all her art to contrive convenient
opportunities for their private meetings. And this they did, not for a
short time only, but some of them even had children before they had an
interview with their wives in the daytime! This custom had much in
common with the _sadica_ marriages of the early Arabs, who, as we are
told by Professor Robertson Smith, allowed a woman, while she remained
with her own tribe, to receive the clandestine visits of a lover. Her
offspring were recognized as legitimate and became members of the tribe.
The incident of "capture" could not occur, as it was a general custom in
ancient Arabia for a husband to live among his wife's kinsfolk.
INFANTICIDE AMONG THE GREEKS.--The practice of infanticide, which was
the only mode by which Lycurgus, or even Plato in his imaginary
republic, could really insure the existence of a healthy and vigorous
population, was undoubtedly a survival from primitive times. The
sacredness of infant life is the result of the high moral tone which has
accompanied the spread of Christianity; and it may be said to be almost
unknown outside of the Christian era. Various reasons are assigned by
different peoples for the practice of infanticide; but one cause
universally operative is the objection to rearing malformed or unhealthy
offspring. Savages adopt various modes of improving, according to their
ideas, the physical appearance of their children. Giving the proper form
to the nose is considered a very important matter by the native
Australian mother and by the Polynesian Islanders; as, indeed, it was by
the ancient Persians, among whom the molding of the nose to the proper
curve was essential, especially in the royal family. The flat head of
the American Indian of the northwest coast was at one time considered a
beauty, and was restricted to the members of the tribe, slaves not being
allowed to undergo the necessary head compression. The small artificial
foot of the Chinese lady is another case in point. But however much the
physical appearance might be altered, no effect could thus be made in
the general physique of the race. The most easy way of keeping this up
to a proper standard is to destroy all the infants that possess physical
defects; and such a course is adopted by many savages, although it is by
no means the most influential cause of infanticide.
GROUP MARRIAGE.--A remarkable system of relationships, with which is
combined a series of regulations framed with the object of pointing out
what persons are entitled to enter into the marital relation, is found
to be prevalent in nearly all uncivilized peoples. The members of a
tribe are divided into two or more groups, each of which consists of
persons who are nearly related by blood, and who are forbidden,
therefore, to intermarry. One of the tribes of Central Australia, the
Dieyerie, has a legend which explains the marriage system common to them
and to all the other tribes, as being intended to prevent the evil
effects of intermarriage between persons very near of kin. The story is
valuable as showing the opinion entertained by savages as to the effect
on the race of breeding in and in--a subject to which we may have
occasion to make further reference. Dr. J. F. McLennan and other writers
on primitive marriage refer to the practice among certain _civilized_
peoples of antiquity of what we regard as incestuous marriage, in
support of the view that in the early history of mankind intercourse
between the sexes was promiscuous.[21:A] Such an explanation is entirely
uncalled for, however, as the custom was intended to secure purity of
blood, that is, blood of a particular line of ancestors. Such marriages
were known only to a few peoples, and they were evidently of
comparatively late origin. Whether the purity of blood was attended with
improvement of the stock may be doubted; as, whatever may have been the
actual origin of the marriage regulations of the numerous peoples among
whom the classificatory system of relationship is established, they are
intended, without question, to prevent the intermarriage of persons who
are regarded as near blood relations, the general disapproval of which
must have had some sufficient reason, or, at all events, must have
originated in ideas supposed to furnish good grounds for it.
MAKING CHILDREN THE PROPERTY OF THE STATE.--The principles which were
embodied in the scheme proposed by Plato, in his "Republic," to bring
about an improvement in the race are mainly two: First, restriction on
the formation of procreative unions; second, infanticide. The breaking
up of private or separate families necessarily resulted from the
operation of his "marriage" regulations, and was intended to emphasize
the idea which Plato, like Lycurgus, insisted on, that the children
belonged to the State. Lycurgus sought to enforce the same idea by
allowing wives to have intercourse with other men than their husbands,
thus making children "common" in some sense, while retaining the
separate family intact. Thus he introduced, or rather it should be said,
established a modified form of polyandrous marriage; Plato's system, on
the other hand, being one of mere pairing, as in the breeding of
animals. In either case the union of very near relations was not
permitted, that is, between brother and sister, or parent and child. Yet
Lycurgus allowed marriage between a half-brother and sister by the same
mother. Curiously enough, this was forbidden by the Athenian law, which
permitted a brother and sister by the same father only to intermarry.
The Greek rule, as laid down in Smith's "Dictionary of Greek and Roman
Antiquities," was that "proximity of blood or consanguinity was not,
with some few exceptions, a bar to marriage," although direct lineal
descent was so. Moreover, there was no attempt to enforce consanguineous
marriages, so as to ensure purity of blood, such as was customary among
the Incas of Peru, the laws of which required that the oldest son and
daughter of the sovereign should intermarry because the Incas were
descended from the Sun, and the Sun had married his sister the Moon, and
had united in marriage his two first children! A more practical reason
was found in the rule that the kingdom should be inherited through both
parents. Hence it was not permitted to mix the blood of the Sun, or
rather of those who claimed solar descent, with that of men.
GRECIAN METHODS NOT SUITABLE TO OUR TIME.--It is evident that the
principles which governed the ancients in their endeavors to improve the
race are not capable of application at the present day, under the
conditions of modern civilization. Instead of placing further
restrictions on marriage, the tendency now is to loosen those which have
hitherto existed, although certain regulations, such as relate to age,
consent, etc., are recognized as necessary for the interests of the
State. Moreover, greater facilities are given than were formerly allowed
for dissolving ill-assorted unions, thus getting rid of the excuse for
the formation of irregular connections. Nevertheless, the interests of
neither society at large nor of individuals will permit of the
introduction of the temporary or occasional pairing system, which is a
return to an animal state, and, therefore, not worthy of the dignity
implied in the term, marriage, and which is inconsistent with true
family life. It would be liable to all kinds of abuse, and would become,
in most cases, a legalized system of prostitution, thus dragging society
down to a lower level instead of raising it, and tending to the
deterioration, instead of the improvement, of the race, if not to its
extinction. As to infanticide, this certainly would not be tolerated by
public opinion, although it is now largely resorted to under the guise
of abortion. To legalize child-killing under any circumstances would be
to offer a premium for murder, even if it were permitted only with the
express sanction in every case of the officials of the State. There is
now no justification for such a course, as the education of those who
appear to be on a mental level with the animals has been carried so far
that the term "idiot" may soon have to be dropped from our vocabulary.
It must be affirmed, however, that the whole subject of the improvement
of the race was dealt with by Plato, and, indeed, by the ancients
generally, in a very crude and superficial manner. This has been well
pointed out by Professor B. Jowett in the Introduction to his
translation of Plato's "Republic." Professor Jowett objects generally
that the great error in the speculations of Plato and others on the
improvement of the race is, "that the difference between men and the
animals is forgotten in them." The human being is regarded with the eye
of a dog or bird fancier, or at best of a slave owner; the higher or
human qualities are left out. The breeder of animals aims chiefly at
size or speed or strength; in a few cases, at courage and temper; most
often the fitness of the animal for food is the greatest desideratum.
But mankind are not bred to be eaten, nor yet for their superiority in
fighting or in running or in drawing carts. Nor does the improvement of
the human race consist merely in the increase of the bones and flesh,
but in the growth and enlightenment of the mind. Hence there must be a
marriage of true minds as well as of bodies; of imagination and reason
as well as of lusts and instincts. Men and women without feeling or
imagination are justly called brutes; yet Plato takes away these
qualities and puts nothing in their place, not even the desire of a
noble offspring, since parents are not to know their own children. The
most important transaction of social life he who is the idealist
philosopher converts into the most brutal. For the pair are to have no
relation to each other but at the hymeneal festival; their children are
not theirs, but the State's; nor is any tie of affection to unite them.
Yet the analogy of the animals might have saved Plato from a gigantic
error if he had not lost sight of his own illustration! For the "nobler
sort of birds and beasts" nourish and protect their offspring and are
faithful to one another! It is certainly surprising, as Jowett says,
that the greatest of ancient philosophers should, in his marriage
regulations, have fallen into the error of separating body and mind. He
did so probably through a false notion of the antagonism between the
family and the State, and hence, as Lycurgus did not aim at destroying
family life he escaped that error.
And yet there is nothing to show that the marriage regulations of
Lycurgus had any real effect on the children of the State. That the
early Spartans were a hardy and courageous people is undoubtedly true;
but apart from the practice of infanticide, which would necessarily get
rid of the weak, their character and conduct can be explained by
reference merely to the system of training, both of youth and maidens,
which Lycurgus rigidly enforced. Lacedemon was essentially a military
republic, and its rulers aimed to breed soldiers, rather than men in the
noble sense in which the term "man" is now used. Indeed, there is
nothing to show that any compulsory attempt to improve the race has ever
been successful, apart from the effect which the destruction of feeble
and deformed offspring may have, and the influence of the severe
training of those who are allowed to survive.
Nevertheless, the human race has vastly improved since its first
appearance on the earth, if the teachings of the doctrine of evolution
are true and applicable to man as well as to the inferior animals. The
passage from the native Australian to the European is a long one, and
yet they are supposed to represent a common primitive stock. The steps
by which the European has been gradually developed, with his special
characteristics, cannot now be traced; but one of the chief agencies to
which the result is due is that to which Darwin applied the term,
"sexual selection." As natural selection has relation to _adaptation_,
and its aim is "the survival of the fittest," so sexual selection has
reference to _beauty_, and its object is the perpetuation of the most
beautiful, according to the taste of the peoples practicing it. Darwin
was the first to point out the importance of sexual selection for
certain purposes which, as stated by Professor G. J. Romanes, in his
"Darwin and after Darwin,"[28:A] "have no reference to utility or the
preservation of life." The latter writer in treating of the subject
affirms it is universally admitted that the higher animals do not pair
indiscriminately, the members of either sex preferring "those
individuals of the opposite sex which are to them most attractive." Many
birds and certain mammals clearly display the esthetic sense, which is
shown by the former particularly in the adorning of their nests with
colored objects; and it is reflected in the personal appearance of the
animals themselves. During the pairing season, birds take on their most
brilliant plumage, and the males take great pains to exhibit their
charms before the females, actively competing with one another in so
doing. There is similar rivalry among song birds, who strive to see
which can best please the females by their singing.
SEXUAL SELECTION.--Professor Romanes, after referring to those facts,
which are considered in detail by his great predecessor, states the
theory of sexual selection as follows: "There can be no question that
the courtship of birds is a highly elaborate business, in which the
males do their best to surpass one another in charming the females.
Obviously the inference is that the males do not take all this trouble
for nothing; but that the females give their consent to pair with the
males whose personal appearance, or whose voice, proves to be the most
attractive. But, if so, the young of the male bird who is thus
_selected_ will inherit his superior beauty; and thus, in successive
generations, a continuous advance will be made in the beauty of plumage
or of song, as the case may be,--both the origin and development of
beauty in the animal world being thus supposed due to the esthetic taste
of the animals themselves."
It is not necessary to refer particularly to the evidence in support of
the theory of sexual selection. There can be no doubt that it is a most
important factor in the perpetuation and increase of certain characters,
those which come within the category of "beautiful," the very existence
of which proves them to be beneficial to the stock to which the animals
exhibiting them belong. The fundamental fact is that they have "the
effect of charming the females into a performance of the sexual act;" an
opinion which is supported by the more general fact that "both among
quadrupeds and birds, individuals of the one sex are capable of feeling
a strong antipathy against, or a strong preference for, certain
individuals of the opposite sex."
These statements are applicable also to man, with whom the principle of
sexual selection must have been influential to at least the same degree
as among the lower animals. It may be expected, indeed, to be more
influential, as the esthetic taste with which it is associated becomes
more highly developed with man than with any member of the animal
kingdom. Even here it is not a question of mere coloration. The theory
of sexual selection as framed by Darwin is concerned, as Romanes points
out, not so much with color itself as with the particular disposition of
color in the form of ornamental patterns. These have a kind of
_structural_ value, and certain birds, moreover, possess actual
structural peculiarities, such as ornamental appendages to the beak, the
only use of which would appear to be to charm the female during
courtship. We may suppose, therefore, that sexual selection has affected
not merely what may be termed the superficial characters of man, but to
some extent, at least, those which have a structural value.
The principle of sexual selection is applicable primarily to the
characteristics of the male; but Darwin supposes them to have been
transferred to the other sex, and through them transmitted to the race
generally. In his "Descent of Man," he remarks of the actual influence
over the race of that principle: "The nervous system not only regulates
most of the existing functions of the body, but has indirectly
influenced the progressive development of various bodily structures and
of certain mental qualities. Courage, pugnacity, perseverance, size and
strength of body, weapons of all kinds, musical organs, both vocal and
instrumental, bright colours and ornamental appendages have all been
indirectly gained by the one sex or the other, through the exertion of
choice, the influence of love and jealousy, and the appropriation of the
beautiful in sound, colour or form; and these powers of the mind
manifestly depend on the development of the brain."
That sexual selection has actually resulted in modification of human
physical structure, Darwin thinks can be shown by reference to the
ancient Persians, whose type was greatly improved by intermarriage with
the beautiful Georgian and Circassian women. He refers to several
similar cases, and particularly to the Jollofs of West Africa, whose
handsome appearance is said to be due to their retaining for wives only
their most beautiful slaves, the others being sold.
Sexual selection may be operative for the improvement of the race
through the action of either man or woman, and the conditions of its
activity are different in either case. As to the action of man, Darwin
says in relation to primitive peoples: "The strongest and most vigorous
men--those who could best defend and hunt for their families, who were
provided with the best weapons and possessed the most property, such as
a large number of dogs or other animals--would succeed in rearing a
greater average number of offspring than the weaker and poorer members
of the same tribe. There can, also, be no doubt that such men would
generally be able to select the more attractive women. At present, the
chiefs of nearly every tribe throughout the world succeed in obtaining
more than one wife."
With reference to selection by the women, Darwin shows that among
savages they have much more to say in their marriages than is usually
supposed. He remarks: "They can tempt the men they prefer, and can
sometimes reject those whom they dislike, either before or after their
marriage. Preference on the part of the women, steadily acting in any
one direction, would ultimately affect the character of the tribe, for
the women would generally choose, not merely the handsomest men,
according to their standard of taste, but those who were at the same
time best able to defend and support them. Such well-endowed pairs would
commonly rear a larger number of offspring than the less favored."
Darwin adds: "The same result would obviously follow in a still more
marked manner if there were selection on both sides, that is, if the
more attractive, and at the same time more powerful men were to prefer,
and were preferred by, the more attractive women. And this double form
of selection seems actually to have occurred, especially during the
earlier periods of our long history."
The investigations of Darwin as to the operation of sexual selection had
reference chiefly to the modification of physical characters. He did not
altogether lose sight, however, of its possible influence in affecting
for the better the mental characteristics of the race. He concludes his
enquiry by the remark that "Man might by selection do something, not
only for the bodily constitution and frame of his offspring, but for
their intellectual and moral qualities. Both sexes ought to refrain from
marriage if they are in any marked degree inferior in body or mind; but
such hopes are Utopian, and will never be even partially realized until
the laws of inheritance are thoroughly known. Every one does good
service who aids towards this end."
It is in the application of the principle of sexual selection to the
mental characteristics of man, that any real improvement of the race,
viewed as consisting of human beings and not of mere animals, must be
brought about. Beauty of physical form and feature is of importance in
human relations only so far as it is associated with beauty of mind and
character, that is, with high intellectual and moral attainments. That
these often go together is true, but it is not always the case. Grant
Allen says: "To be sound in wind and limb; to be healthy of body and
mind; to be educated; to be emancipated; to be free, to be
beautiful--these things are ends towards which all should strive, and by
attaining which all are happier in themselves, and more useful to
others." But physical and intellectual perfection are not always found
together, as was observed by Darwin, when he mentioned among the causes
which interfere with the physical action of sexual selection the fact
that men are largely attracted by the mental charms of women. Professor
Jowett affirms truly that "Many of the noblest specimens of the human
race have been among the weakest physically. Tyrtaens or AEsop, or our own
Newton, would have been destroyed at Sparta, and some of the fairest and
strongest men and women have been among the wickedest and worst." Hence,
he properly infers that "Not by the Platonic device of uniting the
strong and the fair with the strong and the fair, regardless of
sentiment and morality, nor yet by his other device of combining
dissimilar natures, have mankind gradually passed from the brutality and
licentiousness of primitive marriage to marriage Christian and
civilized."
The truth of this inference cannot be denied, because to leave out of
view considerations of sentiment and morality would fatally vitiate any
scheme for the improvement of the human race. But Professor Jowett
affirms that, "We do not know how by artificial means any improvement in
the breed can be effected." The problem is no doubt a complex one. As he
points out, a child has usually thirty progenitors only four steps back,
and whatever truth there may be in the inheritance of special physical
characters, "We have a difficulty in distinguishing what is a true
inheritance of genius or other qualities, and what is mere imitation or
the result of similar circumstances. _Great men and great women have
rarely had great fathers and mothers._" Professor Jowett thinks, indeed,
that too much importance may be ascribed to heredity. He says: "The
doctrine of heredity may seem to take out of our hands the conduct of
our lives, but it is the idea, not the fact, which is really terrible to
us. For what we have received from our ancestors is only a fraction of
what we are or may become. The knowledge that drunkenness or insanity
has been prevalent in a family may be the best safeguard against their
recurrence in a future generation. The parent will be most awake to the
vices or diseases in his child of which he is most sensible within
himself. The whole of life may be directed to their prevention or cure.
The traces of corruption may become fainter, or be wholly effaced; the
inherited tendency to vice and crime may be eradicated. And so heredity,
from being a curse, may become a blessing. We acknowledge that in the
matter of our birth, as in our nature generally, there are previous
circumstances which affect us. But on this platform of circumstances, or
within this wall of necessity, we have still the power of creating a
life for availment by the reforming energy of the human will."
There is much truth in these remarks of Professor Jowett, but they do
not affect the argument in favor of the possibility of bringing about an
improvement in the race if the proper means are adopted. It would not be
any wiser for the strong and healthy to marry with the sick and weak,
because the latter happen to be highly intellectual or moral, than to
marry with the strong and healthy if these physical characters are
united with mental weakness or immorality. There is a consensus of
opinion at the present day, that what should be aimed at is the union of
physical perfection with that of intellect and character, in the
persuasion that steps towards this end will ultimately lead to the
general improvement of the human race.
DIFFICULTIES IN THE WAY.--The difficulty is to devise and carry out some
scheme for the purpose which shall be both feasible and agreeable to
public sentiment. The latter consideration would prevent any attempt at
active stirpiculture under State direction, although the State might
indirectly affect the result by subsidiary regulations as to marriage
and training of children. There is nothing, however, to prevent the
systematic efforts of private individuals, and in such cases the causes
which Darwin cites as interfering with the physical action of sexual
selection would not operate. The most systematic experiment in
stirpiculture of modern times was that originated by John Humphrey Noyes
at the Oneida Community, in central New York, from 1868 to 1879. A paper
on this experiment was read by Anita Newcomb McGee before the American
Science Association in August, 1891, which was published in "The
American Anthropologist," 1891, and the following facts are taken from
that paper.