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.

The greater physical strength of the male and his higher brain capacity are probably the result of Natural, rather than of Sexual Selection. The former would weed out all the weakly and dull-witted in the ordinary course of the struggle for existence, the latter, during the early days of man’s development, would award the prizes of life to the most amorous and cunning, and to the most ambitious of the competitors.

The secondary sexual characters of the female are chiefly negative characters, the absence of those which are conspicuous in the male. She retains more of the primitive characters of the race. This is the rule in regard to the animal kingdom. Wherever we desire to find the onward tendency of evolution, the latest developments of the race, we turn to the male; when we desire to learn something of the past history of the species we turn to the female and young. This standard, of course, yields by no means uniform results, for we find every gradation of progress on the part of the latter, till male and female and young are externally indistinguishable. But the order is almost invariably the same—first the male, then the female, then the young. Thus progress is more or less automatic or “Orthogenic,” as the scientific text books have it, new characters, as they appear, tending to go on increasing in amplitude till checked by Natural selection. It is to be noted, however, that this transference is limited, for the female never inherits characters which are concerned with aggressiveness to the same degree as in the males, as witness, for example, the brow-ridges and huge canines in the case of the gorilla.

Darwin believed that the beards of men have developed by the selective choice of the women who preferred bearded men, while the secondary sexual characters of the women indicate the lines of male choice. There is, however, no evidence to show that in the past—for these characters are as old as man himself—woman had any choice whatever in the choice of her mate, save under exceptional circumstances. He was led to this conclusion by one or two striking instances apparently demonstrating this choice, and on these he seems to have based his version of the influence of sexual selection in man. The first of them is furnished by the Hottentots wherein, in both sexes, there is a marked “Steatopygy,” or accumulation of fat on the buttocks. In the female this is excessively developed, and it is said that such females are highly prized by the males. Darwin cites an instance of a woman in which this accumulation was so enormous, that she could only rise with the greatest difficulty from a sitting position. But there is no evidence to show that less favoured females remained unmarried.

In other tribes the breasts attain excessive proportions, so much so that they can be slung over the shoulder to feed the infant strapped to her back. These may have been increased by sexual selection, the preference of the males for such mates as possessed this feature in the most marked degree; but there is good reason to believe that such characters, which, it must be remembered, are the outward manifestation of germinal variations, once having appeared, would of themselves, of their own inherent vitality, have gone on developing. They won favour from long familiarity, which has imparted a semblance of increment from choice. These increments of growth in any given generation would be imperceptible, but variations in excess of the average would be conspicuous, and excite admiration from their very strangeness.

The part which sexual selection has played in determining the physical characters of the human race has without doubt been overestimated. Its influence may be said to have ceased with the development of the emotional side of his nature. This momentous process began with the male and had its roots in the ebullitions of his inherently amorous nature which has been the dominating factor in his career, and will be to the end, however much its influence may be disguised by the complex conditions of civilization.

These emotions, varying in kind and intensity, are such as are embraced in the term “Love” in the highest sense. They control the selection of mates, but this selection takes no account, save by accident, of qualities which have any value as factors of race-survival. In the lower animals these are determined by natural selection, and sexual selection adopts as it were the material furnished thereby. It “selects” only in so far as it eliminates the non-sexually inclined, and those which lack the qualities essential to ensure reproduction, such as weapons for example. In human communities natural selection is largely avoided, and “mate-hunger” seems now to be swayed by more than the mere desire for its satisfaction. With the development of human faculty new factors have been introduced, complex emotions have come into being, whose influences are as yet only vaguely understood. Whither are they tending? What will be their effect on race-progress? These are matters of grave importance to us all, and to the student of Eugenics in particular.

Of man’s higher emotions, which, it is contended, now govern his conduct, probably the earliest to assert itself was the æsthetic. His quickening mentality could not fail to be captivated by the bright hues of birds and butterflies, and flowers, the glorious colour-effects of dawn and sunset, the seasons in their changes and so forth. And as this sense of the beautiful slowly gathered force he would seek to decorate his naked body with such of the more brightly-coloured objects around him as were suitable or rather with such as could be affixed thereto.

As a signal mark of his favour and affection, he would occasionally transfer some one, or another, of his most lasting ornaments to his mate, and the additional charm this would give her ensured a continuance of such gifts, and paved the way for tribal fashions. But then, as now among savages, the males take the lead in this matter of ornamentation, but in proportion as affection grows, they are transferred from him to her, so that among civilized races to-day, the custom is entirely reversed, the women, not the men, wearing the finery. So soon as families began to be neighbourly and to combine for the sake of company and mutual help, the spirit of rivalry, so essential to progress everywhere, would tend to increase the number of such gifts, and to set “fashions.” With the foundation of society “selection”—by the elimination of the unsocial, would ensure, not only the survival of such fashions, but their multiplication and diversification, producing results which, to our eyes, have often been hideous. The immediate effect of this form of selection, however, was not a change in physical characteristics, but in the evolution of personal ornaments and development of the æsthetic sense. Progress in this direction must have been infinitely slow, and the lower races of to-day furnish us with instructive object-lessons in its course. In many cases uglification rather than refinement has attended their efforts.

It is indeed more than probable that the various types of ornamentation obtaining among savage races had their origin in outbursts of sexual exaltation. One of the earliest methods of personal decoration was probably to daub the body with paint, as is the custom during the performance of various religious and semi-religious rites among the Australian aborigines. A desire to find a permanent substitute for paint led to the practice of cicatrization, and the later and more refined custom of tattooing. But personal mutilation has taken many and strange forms, such as knocking out the front teeth, filing them to saw-like points, inserting gold or jewels, or staining them. No less extraordinary are the various types of lip and ear ornaments, and the suspension of ornaments from the nose. The various fashions of dressing the hair are also traceable to this origin.

That these modes of personal decoration designed for special occasions should in course of time become permanent, and should, in many cases, have lost their original associations is but natural. To-day among savage and barbaric races many of these modes of transfiguration have become associated with religious and semi-religious ceremonies, but many have been retained solely to enhance the personal appearance, even though in our eyes an exactly opposite effect has been attained. Among the natives of the Congo, for instance, the face is covered with raised patterns formed by cicatrization; that is to say, by cuts made with a knife, which are made to form scars on healing by means of pungent juices or heated iron. Further, the teeth are filed to form saw-like cutting edges, producing a revolting effect according to European ideals, but charming according to the standards of those thus patterns which adorn the tattooed face of the Maori present a result more nearly pleasing. Many of the natives of East Africa pierce the lobes of the ear and hang ornaments therein so heavy, that in due course a hole large enough to run the arm through results. These are mutilations of a purely ornamental character. Curiously enough, precisely similar forms of mutilation occur among people dwelling in different continents, as in the case of the lip and ear ornaments worn by natives of Africa and South America. There can have been no means of communication between these races, and hence we must conclude they were independently derived.

More striking still is the practice of deforming the head which prevailed among the Peruvians, the Caribs of the West Indies, and the natives of Vancouver, and the Chinook Indians, wherein it attained its maximum. Among some tribes, the head was depressed from above downwards, giving the skull a cone-shape, the apex pointing backwards; among others the pressure was applied to the back and front of the head, giving a more or less globular shape, and causing the sides of the head to bulge ominously. Now these distortions are to be attributed solely to the whim of Fashion. But how could this have arisen? No adult could have started it, for the form of the skull cannot be altered once its growth is completed. The conception of this diabolical custom apparently then arose in the brain of some fiendishly ingenious person, who realized that to effect its realization pressure must be applied to the head of the infant at its birth and for some considerable time after, by squeezing the head between boards, or tying it round with thongs of hide. That disastrous results would follow from this tampering with the brain would seem an unavoidable conclusion; yet such was not the case. During the moulding process, travellers who have witnessed it tell us, children display no sign of suffering, even though their eyes seemed to be starting from their sockets from the pressure. But they cried when the thongs were loosened. On attaining to man’s estate, such victims to parental folly seemed to be in every way as intelligent as the men of neighbouring tribes which had no such insane customs.

How deeply rooted was the prejudice in favour of this extraordinary fashion is shown by the fact that when, during infancy, from sickness, or other cause, the bandaging was neglected or omitted, and the child, in consequence, attained to man’s estate with a head of the shape designed by nature, he was seriously hampered in the struggle for existence, for no honours among his tribe were possible. Indeed, as often as not he was sold as a slave. But thus did Public Opinion bring disaster on its advocates, for those misguided people have been swept off the face of the earth by their own folly. Those who survived the ordeal, it is true, seemed in no way mentally deficient, but the infant mortality must have been great, and none of the adults could ever have attained to their full potentiality.

These people were, however, not the only lunatics at large. For this extraordinary practice found its devotees in many other widely sundered parts of the world. Deformed heads of various types have been found in rock-tombs near Tiflis, in the Crimea, Hungary, Silesia, in South Germany, Switzerland, and even in France, Belgium and England! How did it spread from one nation to another? Since means of communication were extremely limited centuries ago, one can only suppose that in most cases it arose independently. It is possible that the idea started with the unintentional deformations of the head which follow the practice of carrying the child during early infancy. It is well known that if a child be constantly carried on one arm, so that one side of the head continuously presses against the shoulder, a more or less marked asymmetry of the skull results. It would be enough for the head of one of the chief’s children to show a rather unusually marked asymmetry of this kind for every mother to endeavour to copy the defect, for imitation ever was the sincerest form of flattery!

To place these superficial, non-transmissible, artificially created features, such as deformed heads, mutilated teeth and ears, and so on, in the same category as the “secondary sexual characters” of the lower animals which are physical, inherent and transmissible features, is to ensure confusion of thought. The one represents a physical, the other an emotional development. The persistence of certain forms of mutilation esteemed beautiful in human society is not to be attributed to Sexual selection, or to “preferential mating,” for these things are not only non-transmissible features, but outside the sway of the amorous instincts, as is shown by the case of those individuals who, living in a community where deformed heads are de rigueur, have heads of normal shape. So soon as such perversions become a part and parcel of everyday life, they become essential to the general well-being and comfort of their possessors, enabling them to follow their normal avocations without exciting the dislike or wounding the prejudices of their neighbours. The absence of the “tribal sign” alienates the esteem and comradeship of his neighbours and brings an unenviable notoriety. In like manner albinos among birds, for example, are hunted down by their fellows and killed, and birds of exotic species conspicuous by reason of their unfamiliar appearance are treated in the same manner. The sexual instincts have no part in this.

It will have become obvious in the course of this chapter that Sexual selection as a factor in shaping the evolution of the human race has not played a very conspicuous part. Nevertheless, the balance of opinion to-day is probably in favour of the view that the physical peculiarities by which we distinguish one race from another are, for the most part, due to the influence of this form of selection. A more careful survey of the facts will show that this view is untenable. And there is no more striking demonstration thereof than that it has been inconsequently applied to account for features in one race, which in another are attributed to environment or to Natural Selection. It may safely be asserted that colour, the shape of the nose, the prominence of the jaws, and the character of the hair, are no more the result of “Sexual Selection” than stature, for example. These are the manifestations of inherent growth forces, or “tendencies,” which owe their survival, and development, to the influence of Natural selection.

Sexual selection has brought about the dominance of the male, by the struggle between males for mastery, originally for females. It “selected” for survival, in primitive races, those males with the thickest skulls and the strongest physique; it determined the survival of the keenest witted and most aggressive and most amorous males, and it eliminated those in which the latter features were too active. It assured victory, in short, to those only who possessed just those qualities on which life or death depend in moments of conflict. In the case of the females, it assured survival only to those who possessed strongly developed maternal instincts and submissiveness.

It is by no means realized that the incidence of moulding forces has changed and is changing with the environment of the race. So long as physical force, as between man and man, determined survival, as among savage races to-day, so long does it ensure to such races strong men and strong children, for in conflict with neighbouring tribes victory rests with the most powerful of physique and endurance and the most prolific. This last is an all-important concomitant if repeated conflicts are to be successfully waged. Among civilized peoples such contests began to lose their value in this regard when, by the introduction of arms, physical personality became a steadily diminishing factor. Victory now rests rather with those peoples who are most skilful in devising engines of destruction. The brain, not brawn, tells. But man cannot live by brains alone. With the inevitable decline in his physical nature man’s hold on existence is seriously imperilled. Civilization is making for extinction as much as over-specialization in the case of the lower animals. Hitherto, save in the case of decaying nations, women have played but a minor part in what we may call the “tribal” affairs of the race. Among the civilized nations of to-day, in proportion as the “maleness” of the community becomes more and more effete, the victims of sophistry, and the slaves of shibboleths, so the influence of the females asserts itself. And recent events among us show plainly enough that that influence is the reverse of good. Having its roots in personal vanity, and the love of notoriety, it is intolerant alike of reason and self-restraint, and that way madness lies.

CHAPTER III

MAN’S COUSINS THE APES

The Man-like Apes and their mode of Life—Their “Courtships”—Musical Chimpanzees—How the Orang-utan improves his voice—His likeness to Caliban—The truculent visage of the Gorilla—“Ornament” in the lower Apes—The Concerts of the Howler Monkeys.

We are none of us given to boasting of our poor relations, and most of us indignantly repudiate our kinship with the Apes. But facts are stubborn things: the relationship is there, whether we admit it or not: and those who love truth for truth’s sake will not shirk the comparison between themselves and their remote cousins. Unhappily, from our present point of view, this cannot be carried very far, for the “Love idylls” of the Apes have yet to be written. Such facts, however, as have been gleaned are interesting. Of the higher, man-like, or “Anthropoid” species only the most meagre information is to be obtained; but this nevertheless is interesting. For the most part we have to be satisfied with inferences drawn from a study of the external differences between the sexes—from the “Secondary Sexual Characters,” in short, and from the records of travellers who have encountered these creatures in their native wilds.

The species which throw most light on this theme are the Gorilla, the Chimpanzee and the Orang-utan. Of these the Chimpanzee has most in common with the human race. But it may satisfy the qualms of many to know that between the Ape and the Man there is a great gulf fixed. The brain of the largest Ape is less than half the size of that even of the lowest of mankind. Man is a reasoning, and for the most part a reasonable, creature; he is a tool-making animal. This is more than can be said of any of the apes, even the most intelligent. Their teeth and immensely powerful arms must serve their every need. No ape ever fashioned for himself either a knife, a vessel to carry water, or any means of transport; and herein we have a measure of his brain capacity. The huge jaws and great canine teeth are no less conspicuous “marks of the beast.”

These, however, man himself has but recently lost, as was proved by the sensational discovery of the skull of an ape-like man at Piltdown, in Sussex, during 1912. Herein the jaw was essentially that of an ape, while the base of the skull was as markedly human. The cheek teeth, or molars, were of the human type; but the canine was ape-like, though much inferior in point of size. That the men of this remote age—which was possibly that of Pliocene times and certainly not later than early Pleistocene—had begun to use rudely-fashioned tools, is proved by the roughly-chipped flints found with the remains. With the invention of tools the decline in the size of his “eye” teeth began.

In all the large apes these “eye” teeth are of great size. Their purpose, it would seem, is primarily to serve as weapons in conflicts between rivals. Such conflicts are apparently unintentionally, and unavoidably, provoked by the loud cries uttered by the males in their endeavours to discover the whereabouts of females desiring mates. Of necessity roaming far in search of food, the unmated have no means of making their whereabouts known, save by thus giving tongue to desire. Evidently the normal methods of voice production do not suffice for their urgent needs, for the carrying power of the voice is immensely fortified by means of great air sacs, or chambers, formed in part by an enlargement of the body of the hyoid, or the bone which supports the tongue, and in part by dilatations of the inner walls of the larynx. The females, it is to be noted, are by no means so well equipped in this matter. It is not necessary that they should be. All that those desiring mates have to do is to follow up the cries of avid males, a by no means difficult task, especially when under the spell of the emotions which possess them. But the mechanism which serves the Chimpanzee and the Gorilla by no means fulfils the needs of the Orang-utan. In this uncouth creature the system of resonating chambers is immensely increased by great, thin-walled, membranous pouches extending round the neck and under the armpits, so that when inflated these areas have a most extraordinarily swollen appearance. When the Orang chooses to lift his voice even the deaf must hear.

Where fighting instead of fondling is the sequel to these impassioned cries the conflict is probably not of long duration, for it is certainly severe. This is attested by the fact that captured specimens, if adult, are commonly found to be minus one or more fingers, which have been bitten or torn off in these love affairs.

An added ferocity of expression is given to the male Gorilla by the development of enormous brow ridges and the huge canines. The former are regarded by some authorities as adaptations to afford increased powers of mastication. But if this were so, then such ridges should be equally developed in both sexes, and this is far from being true. Hideousness, rather than ferocity, has been given to the Orang-utan by the out-growth of enormous ridges on each side of the face, and these, when the great wind-bags encircling the neck are inflated, impart a repulsiveness of expression attained by no other animal living.

Of the normal every-day life of the great Apes but little is known. It would seem, however, that they live in family parties—an adult male accompanied by a female and one or more young of different ages, of which one is commonly an infant in arms. It is difficult to procure positive evidence on the point, but it is commonly believed that the young remain with their parents till they are several years old, when they are gradually driven off to fend for themselves. This is a common procedure with all animals. The dominant impulse in this is something akin to greediness, an indefinable perception that too large a family party will entail too great a strain on the food supply, hence the now no longer helpless young are regarded as a danger to the safety of the family, and are turned adrift. Incidentally this procedure is of immense benefit to the race, for it ensures its distribution, enlarges its chances of survival, and lessens the danger of in-breeding.

Attention must now be turned to the lower Apes. In these it is to be remarked the secondary sexual characters differ conspicuously from those of the man-like species. Manes and beards and brightly-coloured areas of bare skin are now the dominant feature. But canine teeth, in proportion rivalling those of the Gorilla, are found in the Baboons, while in some of the New-world monkeys voice production of quite remarkable power takes the place of ornament.

The precise part played by ornament among these animals can only be inferred from Darwin’s observations on captive animals, and then only in so far as they refer to colour. Manes, beards and moustaches, such as are shown in the adjoining illustrations, are borne only by the males, and sometimes take extravagant forms.

Darwin suggested that the mane of the Baboons, for example, served as a shield when fighting with rivals, protecting the great blood-vessels from injury. Incidentally this end may be attained, but from what we know of similar developments in other animals, this cannot be regarded as the primary function of the mane. One is tempted to look upon it as a protective device because of its position, but it is probably no more so than is the long flowing hair which adorns the flanks of the Guereza. This is of a purely ornamental character, although, according to some, it is to be reckoned as an instance of protective coloration, the long white hair matching the long pendant masses of lichen which hang from the boughs of the trees in the damp forests where these creatures live, and so concealing them from their enemies. Of beards and moustaches many examples might be cited, but the most striking must suffice. These are furnished by the Satan Monkey or Black Saki (Pithecia satanas), and the little Tamarin Monkey (Midas imperator)—one of the Marmosets. In the first-named the beard is thick and full, but in the latter scanty. This, however, is atoned for by the enormous upwardly curled moustache giving the face a most comically human appearance.

In the development of brilliantly-coloured areas of bare skin the monkeys stand alone among the Mammalia. The hues displayed are remarkable for their brilliancy, and this varies in intensity, waxing and waning with the varying moods of their possessors, and attaining their maximum during periods of sexual excitement. Blue, green, red, and violet are the dominant colours, and these are confined to the face, buttocks, and genital organs. The same hues are commonly present in both sexes, though in the female they are less brilliant. Normally the male appears to be unconscious of the conspicuous patches of colour, but when under the irrepressible stimulus of sexual excitement he seems to endeavour to make the utmost possible capital out of such adornments, more especially presenting his buttocks to his mate in an apparent endeavour to stimulate her desire. In some species, as with the Baboons for example, the naked area of this hinder part of the body is a much more conspicuous feature in the female than in the male, becoming enormously swollen and carunculated, and from its vivid red colour presents a positively revolting appearance, according to our standard of what is beautiful. The most vividly coloured species of all is the Mandrill, which, in this matter exceeds all other living Mammals. The face, in the male, is produced forward to give the head a dog-like shape, while the whole of the upper surface of the muzzle has been transformed into a swollen, deeply fluted mass by the excessive inflation of the underlying bone. The bare skin covering this is of a brilliant cobalt blue, with lines of violet in the furrows, while the nose is of a bright scarlet. The naked skin of the buttocks, and the genital organs, are suffused with brilliant tints of scarlet and blue. In spite of the purity and brilliance of the coloration the effect is to make the creature really hideous.

Of the display Cuvier writes: “La partie postérieure du corps n’est ni moins extraordinaire ni moins révoltante. Sous une courte queue sans cesse relevée est un anus entouré d’un gros bourrelet d’écarlate; de larges fesses nues, que l’animal semble montrer sans cesse avec autant de lascivité que d’impudence, sont colorées d’un rose vif nuancé sur les côtés de lilas et de bleu. Les parties genitales enfin sont d’un rouge de feu d’autant plus tranché qu’elles sont absolument nues, et qu’elles viennent a la suite d’un abdomen revêtu de poils blancs.”

While we cannot suppose these animals to possess any standard of beauty or ugliness, it must not be forgotten that they are more or less conscious, not only of the existence of these brightly-coloured areas, but of the effect they produce, as Darwin showed long since in the cases of a captive Mandrill, and some other smaller species of Monkeys, among them a Rhesus Monkey. These, when shown a looking-glass, at once presented their hinder ends to what they supposed to be the new arrival. A similar mark of friendliness was shown towards their keeper, and visitors introduced by him. Periodically, under the sexual stimulus, this desire becomes intensified and becomes an invitation to mating.

In this connection it is interesting to note that in some of the Macaque Monkeys we have signs of a reversal of the usual sequence of coloration. For in the Pigtailed Macaque the young of both sexes are more brilliantly coloured than the adults, in regard to the bare skin areas, while in the Hairy-eared Macaque (M. lasiotis) and the Rhesus Monkey (M. rhesus) the face of the female is brighter than that of the male. This surely means that this coloration is in process of suppression, for according to the rule the male is the first to develop new characters, then the female, and finally they are transmitted to the young. The extra brightness in the young, then, is to be regarded not as an incipient, but as an ancestral character in process of elimination.

As a rule, among the Mammals at any rate, brilliant coloration and weapons of offence are not associated in the same animal. The Baboons, and the Mandrill in particular, are exceptions, for these animals are provided with most formidable “tusks,” the canines of both upper and lower jaws being of great size, and opposed one to another in such a way that they wear away to form sharp, angular cutting-edges, more murderous than the fangs of the Tiger.

Reference has been made already to the existence of large sound resonators for the purpose of increasing the volume of the voice in the Orang, Gorilla and Chimpanzee. Some of the Gibbons are also well provided in this direction. But the most striking instances of the kind are furnished by the Orang, and the monkeys known as Howlers. In these last the base of the hyoid, as the skeleton for the support of the tongue is called, is fashioned into a deep bony cup, which has the effect of intensifying the volume of the voice to a most surprising extent. But more than this, apparently for the protection of this bony voice-bowl the upright branches of the lower jaw have become remarkably deepened, and widened, a correlation of growth between unrelated parts which is fraught with deep significance. “Terrific,” “terrible” and “harrowing” are terms which have been used by travellers like Bates, Belt and Wallace in describing the cavernous roar of these animals, a roar which will easily carry two miles. It would seem that these vocal efforts are not merely confined to what we may call the “Courting” season, as is the roar of the stag, but that they are heard nightly at dusk. They may be resumed again at dawn, and re-awakened when thunder-clouds gather. They have become the normal method of giving vent to excitement, and probably are intensified when isolated males are desirous of discovering the whereabouts of females equally anxious to find a mate.

Among the Apes we meet, as with the human species, with both monogamy and polygamy. But it would be dangerous to assume that the reasons for polygamy are the same in both. Polygamy, indeed, has by no means always the same significance. In the most primitive, half-human races of the past, as with the man-like Apes to-day, polygamy is determined by accident rather than choice. These extinct peoples, like the great anthropoids, were normally monogamous, but on the death of a male in conflict with his neighbour, or from other causes, his mate would probably of her own free will seek out the nearest male and even if he were already mated would be at once adopted into the family circle. This certainly happens in the case of the Gorilla and Chimpanzee to-day. But among living races of mankind, both savage and civilized, multiplicity of wives is a matter of choice on the part of the male, and in many cases to achieve this females from other tribes have to be secured—either by purchase or conquest. With the lower apes, or “monkeys,” polygamy only obtains among gregarious species; and either because the birth-rate of the females exceeds that of the males, or because a considerable number of young males are killed annually by exciting the jealousy of the older males, who are exceedingly pugnacious.

CHAPTER IV

AT DAGGERS DRAWN

The Birth of Weapons—All Flesh is Grass—Utility and Ornament—The Fever of Love—The “Challenge” of the Deer—What it means—More about “Hormones”—“Hummel” Stags—The Age of Deer—The “Courtship” of the Moose—Types of Antlers—Antlered Females—Fighting Topi—The Lance of the Oryx in the Lion’s Flanks—Happiness and Hartebeestes—Odoriferous Suitors—The Bloody Sweat of the Hippopotamus—The Elephant in Love—Concerning Tusks—Polygamy.

From Apes to Antelopes is a far cry, but contrasts are always helpful. Antelopes and Deer, Zebras and Elephants, Rhinoceroses and Swine, are types, taken at random, of that great and important group of animals known as the “Ungulates,” or “Hoofed” animals. These illustrate in a very striking manner what is meant by the term “Secondary Sexual Characters.” They demonstrate no less forcibly what is meant by the term “Sexual Selection.” They are valuable in this connection, because of the often formidable weapons, in the shape of horns and tusks, which so many species have developed during the struggle for mates.

But “Sexual Selection” will not explain their origin, and it is difficult, in the present state of our knowledge, to discover any clues which will reveal this. In seeking these there are certain broad aspects of the problem which are not to be lost sight of. In the first place, horns, at any rate, are confined to the hoofed animals. That the various types of hoofed animals, living and extinct, have had a common ancestry, no one at the present day will probably call in question. The relationship, however, of the various living types, one to another, is by no means always apparent: the missing links are to be sought in the records of the rocks.

When the whole of the evidence comes to be surveyed, and not till then, it becomes apparent that this wonderful diversity is the result of complex factors. That the conditions of existence have controlled the results is beyond question; but it is equally certain that these conditions have been merely controlling and not causative. In other words, we must regard each of these different groups or types—Deer, Antelopes, Horses, Elephants, Swine, and so on—as witnesses of what we call “Heredity.” They are so many “Diathetic types.” That is to say, the forms, or individuals, belonging to each type have inherited certain peculiarities in common; they display a “Diathesis” as the doctors call it: an inherent, inborn tendency, or habit of growth, in a definite direction: a tendency which, ever and anon, develops new qualities, takes new directions. And thus it is that we get Oxen—using this term in its widest sense and not in its special sense—Antelopes, Goats and Sheep, for example. These have, among other things, a “diathesis” in the direction of horn production, and each, too, of a different type. What is meant by this apparently mystifying term “diathesis” will perhaps be made clear by taking the case of the Ox and the Sheep. While very different in appearance, these live on precisely similar food; yet no one has any difficulty in discriminating between the taste of beef and mutton. In the marvellous chemical laboratory of the body the grass gathered in the same field is converted into flesh which even in its uncooked state is easily distinguishable. Though for the purposes of this illustration domesticated animals have been used, the same is true of their wild relations. Sportsmen tell us that the various types of Antelopes and the Zebra, which may be seen feeding together, have yet flesh of very different qualities. These qualities are to be attributed neither to “Natural” nor to “Sexual” selection; they are “accidents.” Similarly, their horns are the witness of a horn-producing “diathesis”: the various divergencies in curvature, and in the form of their spirals, or the number of their encircling rings—as in the horns of Antelopes—are to be interpreted in like fashion. These twists and turns vary in the same way that the taste of the flesh varies, and for the same reason; that is to say, they are not the outcome of “Sexual Selection,” nor have they been brought about by “Natural Selection” to serve the purpose of “Recognition marks,” as Wallace would have us believe.

But horns, as horns, apart from their “accidents” of curvature and ornament, must certainly be regarded as the product of Sexual selection, for having once started into being those individuals had the best chance of leaving descendants which were best armed. The possession of horns was not necessary to the maintenance of the species; but such armature was essential among the males in securing possession of the females. Other things being equal, the male with the biggest horns wins the prize. Since these are also used as weapons of offence, or rather of defence, in warding off the attacks of beasts of prey, it might be contended that they are as much the product of Natural selection as of Sexual selection.

It soon becomes apparent that this interpretation must fail. In the first place, if it were true, the females should be similarly armed. In the second, in the presence of many of their enemies they are useless. The Cape hunting-dog, for example, is more than a match for any antelope. This ferocious animal kills his victim by running it down, persistently tearing at its flanks, until at last the entrails protrude and the horrid chase is ended. Furthermore, the horns are a comparatively late acquirement of the species, as is shown in the case of the Deer; for the earliest known fossil species were hornless. That the females among the Oxen and many of the Antelopes possess horns is an interesting fact, but it can only be regarded as another instance of a character first acquired by the male and later, in successive generations, transferred to the female. And it is to be noticed that this transference is never found save in the cases where the character in question has attained its maximum in the male. The transference of weapons to the female is the more remarkable because there is no evidence that they play any part in the struggle for existence, either in securing mates or in warding off the attacks of enemies. Moreover, these weapons in the female may exceed those of the male, in length, though they are never so massive. They are to be regarded solely in the light of ornaments. There are few more striking instances indeed where the purely ornamental and the strictly utilitarian are so closely associated.

Attention may now profitably be turned to the behaviour of these interesting tribes when under the alluring influences of love.

Tradition and the poets have contrived to persuade us that the fever of Love becomes epidemic in the spring. This, however, is by no means true, at any rate in so far as what we are pleased to call the “lower animals” are concerned. For with many, as for example the Deer and the Bats, this fever is not aroused till the time of autumn plenty. With regard to the deer, we can find a reason for this. It is determined in part by the period of gestation, and in part by the peculiar character of the most conspicuous of the male secondary sexual characters—the antlers. The deer, at any rate of the northern hemisphere, carry their young about eight months. Now it is important that they should make their entry into the world just as the food supply is increasing and the temperature is rising. With the summer before them the young have time to gather strength for the encounter with their first winter. We have a striking witness to the truth of this contention in the fact that when the Indian Spotted Deer, or Chital, was first introduced into Europe, nearly all the fawns perished owing to having been born in winter; later, the females took to calving in spring, and from thence onwards the species has held its own among us.

As touching the stags. The antlers, as everybody knows, are shed annually, and their renewal entails a very considerable strain on the system. As a consequence, it is necessary that this period of stress should fall after the trial of winter is overpast, and with the genial summer before them. From the end of March, when the old weapons are shed, till July, the masterful males of the community wander at large, seeking seclusion and avoiding all occasion of quarrel; for they are not only defenceless, but threatened with disaster should any accident befall the growing horns, which, during their formation, are exceedingly sensitive. Even a slight blow would not only spoil their shapely proportions, but, further, might render them useless in the warfare that is before them.

With some species this desire to go into retreat is more marked than in others. The Red-deer, and the Wapiti, on the one hand, and the Moose on the other, well illustrate this. The two first-named pass the winter in herds, in the case of the Wapiti numbering many thousand individuals; no other species, indeed, is so markedly gregarious. With the advance of the spring, however, all is changed, for the males withdraw from their companions to suffer humiliation in seclusion. As chill October arrives, a striking alteration in their demeanour becomes apparent, at any rate in the case of the older males. The new antlers are now hardened, and the blood supply, which has hitherto been building up the new weapons, is cut off. As a consequence, the “velvet,” which till now has been directly concerned with the growth of the antlers, dies, and peels off the underlying bone. To facilitate this work of cleaning, the animal rubs them, first against the stems of saplings, and, later, against larger trees, and even rocks, till at last they are ready for “battle, murder and sudden death.” The “rutting” season, in short, has commenced. And with the final completion of the antlers other signs of that approaching frenzy, which is soon to establish itself, become apparent. The most striking of these are the swelling of the neck, and a marked increase in the mane thereof; while the voice enlarges its compass enormously, whereby the females, so long neglected, are now feverishly sought for.