I. In spite of all that is exceptional and elevated in the intellectual phenomena displayed by man, they do not, when considered as characters, isolate us from animals. It is different with moral and religious phenomena. The latter, as we have seen, belong essentially to the human kingdom; they are the attributes of our species. Let us examine them rapidly, and, at the same time, invariably from this point of view.
Confining ourselves rigorously to the region of facts, and carefully avoiding the territory of philosophy and theology, we may state, without hesitation, that there is no human society or even association in which the idea ofgoodandevilis not represented by certain acts regarded by the members of that society or association as morallygoodor morallybad. Even among robbers and pirates theft is regarded as a misdeed, sometimes as a crime, and severely punished, while treachery is branded with infamy; the facts noticed by Wallace among the Kurubars and Santals shew how the consciousness of moral good and truth is anterior toexperience, and independent of questions ofutility.
Nevertheless, Sir John Lubbock, in a work with which all my readers are doubtless acquainted, states that the moralsenseis wanting in the savage. In support of this opinion he quotes some vague and general assertions, bearing more particularly upon the Australians, Tahitians, Red-Skins, etc. The assertions of the eminent naturalist have been so oftenrepeated that it will only be necessary for me to examine them in a few words.
In the first place, I might produce numerous quotations of the same nature in opposition to these assertions. I shall only recall the words of Wallace, speaking of the tribes in the midst of which he had lived. “Every individual,” he says, “scrupulously respects the rights of his neighbour, and these rights are but rarely infringed.” Is it possible to admit that thisrespectdoes not rest upon something analogous to that which we call morality. I shall, moreover, presently shew that this is really the case.
Again, Lubbock seems to have contradicted himself when pointing out in his book the small amount of real liberty enjoyed by savages. He represents them, correctly, as being the slaves of a multitude of customs, having the importance of laws, which rule all their actions. Now, amongst these customs, there are a great number which are at variance with the most natural passions, such as the instinct of reproduction, the choice of nourishment, etc. An infringement of these laws is followed by a punishment often terrible. Is it not evident that the greater number of them can only be based upon the more or less distinct idea of good and evil?
But the idea in question resembles mathematical formula. The result of the solution of a general equation varies with the data: and according to the latter may sometimes be represented by the signplus, sometimes by the signminus. So morality varies in its manifestations by virtue of innumerable circumstances which, again, originate in numerous causes. The same acts are often regarded as good, bad, or indifferent, according to the special organisation, the religion, or the traditions of the society in which they have occurred.
These acts do not, on this account, cease to belong to a faculty essentially human; and, whether of themselves, or from the idea with which they are connected in the different human groups, they furnish thenaturalistwithcharactersas true as those belonging to the intelligence.
This is still more certainly the case wheninstitutionsareproduced by this order of facts and ideas. These sometimes present such a characteristic appearance, that at the first glance they seem to isolate a people or a race, and reflection is necessary to discover the true relations which unite the group by which this peculiarity is presented to other populations and races. Thetabouof the Polynesians was long considered by many writers as something absolutely special, whilst in reality we meet with thecivil tabouin every European nation, and the Mosaic law throughout is atabou codebased upon religion.
To arrive at the truth in this study we must approach it with perfect impartiality, with all the mental freedom which a zoologist brings to the examination of the physical characters of a mammal or bird. We must avoid judging foreign peoples whether civilized, barbarous, or savage, by our own fixed ideas. If we act differently, we only render ourselves liable to error and injustice. A momentary return to our own case, to the history of our race and our most advanced populations, is often useful in making us appreciate justly the moral characters of tribes and peoples which we are far too fond of representing to ourselves as occupying a position far below our own.
II. By using this precaution, and adhering to general facts, we can scarcely help being struck by the intimate resemblance which moral manifestations establish between all men, both in good and in evil; and, melancholy though the conclusion is, especially perhaps in the latter respect. For example, the infamous debauches of the Polynesian areoïs, the hideous vices of some American populations, have often been insisted upon. But let us not forget the orgies of Greece and Rome, certain haunts in our own great cities, and the terrible revelations which from time to time are made in the police courts of our proudest capitals.
Fundamentally, the White, even when civilized, from the moral point of view is scarcely better than the Negro, and too often, by his conduct in the midst of inferior races, has justified the argument opposed by a Malgache to a missionary,“Your soldiers seduce all our women you come to rob us of our land, pillage the country, and make war against us, and you wish to force your God upon us, saying that He forbids robbery, pillage, and war! Go, you are white upon one side and black upon the other; and if we were to cross the river, it would not be us that the caimans would take.”
Such is the criticism of asavage; the following is that of an European, of M. Rose, giving his opinion of his own countrymen: “The people are simple and confiding when we arrive, perfidious when we leave them. Once sober, brave and honest, we make them drunken, lazy, and finally thieves. After having innoculated them with our vices, we employ these very vices as an argument for their destruction.”
However severe these conclusions may appear, they are unfortunately true, and the history of the relations of Europeans with the populations which they have encountered in America, at the Cape, and in Oceania, justify them only too fully. As for Africa, it seems to me that the two words,tradeandslavery, are quite sufficient to prevent a European from boasting too loudly of the morality of his race.
It may, however, be objected that these crimes were perpetrated long ago, and will never be repeated, that slavery has been abolished in our colonies never to reappear. The answer is but too simple, and will, I am sure, be confirmed by the reminiscences of more than one of my readers. In every case this allegation only applies to theAryanWhite. TheSemiticWhites have preserved slavery, and the accounts of all travellers, especially those of Barth, Livingstone, Nachtigall, and Schweinfurth, show us but too clearly that it is still the trade of Central Africa. But is theAryan Whitehimself free from all blame upon this point? As an answer to this question, I shall confine myself to mentioning some facts, which happened, so to speak, only the other day. However melancholy the narration may be, it will at least serve the purpose of proving that thesavage elementstill exists in the mostcivilized nations. I have borrowed themfrom A. H. Markham, commander of theRosario, which was sent out by the English government to cruise among the archipelagoes of Santa Cruz and the New Hebrides, for the purpose of putting a stop to the practices in question. The truth and accuracy of this testimony, which was given in 1873, are therefore unfortunately indisputable.
Forty years ago the sandal-wood trade reached a development which is accounted for by the high value attached to this wood by the Chinese. Speculators fitted out ships, and cut down the forests of the Melanesian Islands. The natives naturally resisted this devastation: they were answered by the rifle. In 1842 the crews of two English vessels landed at Sandwich Island, one of the most luxuriant in the archipelago of the New Hebrides. The islanders, when resisting the destruction of their woods, were set upon by the Whites, who killed twenty-six, and, driving a great number into a cave, suffocated them with smoke till not one remained.
The atrocities committed by the sandal-wood robbers have been surpassed by those of the pirates, who devoted themselves to thelabour traffic, orlabour trade, which arose and increased with the cotton plantations which the Civil War in the United States multiplied in the English colonies, not only in Australia, but even in the Fiji Islands, and as far as some of the New Hebrides.
The want of hands being felt, the idea struck Captain Towns of having recourse to the indigenous Blacks of the South Sea, offering them the inducement of wages. Success crowned the enterprise, and the Captain soon had imitators. The original plan was to engage the islanders for a fixed time, with the understanding that they should then be sent home. But the considerable gains thus obtained excited cupidity, andslave-dealersbegan to carry off Papuans in order to transport them to plantations where veritable slavery awaited them. Thistradebecame so extensive that it acquired a name which was also bestowed uponchild-stealing. It is calledkidnapping, an expression which been authorised by official documents.
All means were legitimate to thekidnappersin order to procure their human cargo without cost. I might here borrow many horrible details from Markham, but I will only quote one. A brig had just anchored at some little distance from the coast of Florida, one ofthe Solomon Islands. A canoe filled with natives coming close alongside was upset by a manœuvre, apparently accidental. The boats were immediately lowered as if to render assistance to the shipwrecked natives. But the spectators on the rocks, or in other canoes saw European sailors seize the wretched men, and with a long knife cut off their heads on the gunwale of the boat. This done, the sailors returned to the brig which immediately set sail. The heads thus obtained were destined to pay for the engagement of a certain number of labourers. In many of those Melanesian Islands the victorious warrior decapitates and carries off the head of his vanquished enemy, and the respect which he gains increases with the number of these trophies in his possession. Now it had been agreed between certain chiefs and captains of vessels, that the latter should procure heads, and, in exchange, receive a certain number of living individuals, engaged for one or two years.
It need hardly be said that at the expiration of their engagement the unfortunate Papuans did not regain their liberty. In 1867, for example, there is proof that, of 382 islanders who ought to have been sent home, only 78 had been allowed to go.
It will easily be understood that these ships, laden with unfortunate creatures, carried off by force or by stratagem, were necessarily the theatre of terrible scenes. Here again the commander of theRosarioquotes many facts. I shall only borrow the account of what happened on board theCarl, for the history of this slave-ship seems to me to present a summary of all the atrocities ofkidnapping.
TheCarlquitted Melbourne in 1871, with the avowed intention of engaging black labourers. With her, under the title of passenger, went a certain Dr. James Patrick Murray, who was interested in the enterprise, and who seems to haveplayed the part of leader. When they arrived at the New Hebrides, the kidnappers seem to have made ineffectual efforts to obtain labourers by legitimate means. They soon had recourse to others. At Palmer Island one of them dressed himself as a missionary, hoping thus to attract the islanders on board, who fortunately discovered the trap. From this moment the slave-dealers had recourse to violence alone. Their method was to approach the canoes manned by Papuans, and to destroy or capsize them by throwing into them some of those large bars of iron which are used as ballast. The crews were then easily captured.
Eighty blacks had been collected in this manner. During the day they were allowed to come on deck, but in the evening they were thrust into the hold. During the night of the 12th of September, the prisoners made some noise. They were silenced by firing a pistol over their heads. During the following night the noise began again, and the same means were employed to stop it. But the blacks had set to work to break up the camp-beds, and thus armed they attacked the hatchway. The whole crew, sailors and passengers, then began to fire into the crowd. The firing lasted eight hours. It stopped perhaps for a few moments, but began again at the least noise.
Day broke, and all seemed quiet; the hatchways were opened wide, and those who could were invited to come up There werefive; all the rest were either dead or wounded. The corpses were hastily thrown into the sea, and at the same timesix living individualswho were badly wounded.
Could we find among savages manyindustriesmore infamous than kidnapping, many deeds more atrocious than those of which Dr. Murray and his accomplices were guilty?
Let us hasten to do justice to the local legislature and the English Parliament, which promulgated severe laws and rules for the prevention and punishment of the crimes of kidnapping. Unfortunately, the colonists, more or less interested in procuring labourers at a cheap rate, show themselvesremarkably indulgent towards those whose business it is to provide them withcoolies. Some officers of the English navy have learnt this to their cost. Captain Montgomery, commander of theBlanche, had seized, and sent to Sydney, the schoonerChallengeas a slave-ship. It was proved that on two occasions theChallengehad imprisoned blacks in her hold, who had been fraudulently enticed on to the ship; that two of them had been taken, under circumstances of violence, to the Fijis; that the others had only been released, because in their despair they had set to work to make a leak in the side of the vessel with a hatchet; and, finally, that these wretched creatures were obliged to swim back to their island, from which theChallengealready lay at a distance of about 6¾ miles. In spite of these grave facts, theChallengewas acquitted. On the other hand, Captain Montgomery was condemned to pay £900 sterling damages, and interest to the owners of the ship.
III. If it is only too easy to detect amongst ourselves the evil deeds of savages, it is, happily, easy to point out among these people, whom we are so ready to accuse and despise, the feelings upon which our own societies are founded, the good which, as a whole, predominates in them, and the virtues which we most honour. My readers will, however, understand that I cannot here enter into details incompatible with the nature of this work. We must confine ourselves to a rapid glance at the opinions held by men in general uponproperty,respect of human life, andself-respect, and compare what travellers have told us of some of the most inferior races with what we know of our own and of ourselves.
It has often been said, in speaking of certain races and peoples, that they have no idea of property. Those who look a little closer into the matter will see that this is an error. Among tribes of warriors, hunters, or fishers, however low a position they may hold in the scale of humanity, arms and tools are looked upon as personal property, and the testimony of travellers, who have taken but little interest in the question, is very explicit upon this point. In the ParisMuseum there is a boomerang upon which some signs are roughly carved. M. Thozet, the donor, was showing it on some occasion to an Australian from the neighbourhood, when the latter at once discovered from the signs to whom it had belonged. But there is another form which property assumes among savage or barbarous populations. If it is a question of land, it will often be found to be under the jurisdiction of the clan, tribe, or nation. Thehunting-groundsof the Red-Skins are met with in every place where civilization has stopped at the level which they represented at the epoch of their discovery. This species of property exists in New Holland among peoples, supposed by some to bedegenerate monkeys, and the right which rules it is so rigorous that the Australian never enters the property of a neighbouring tribe without express permission. To act otherwise is equivalent to a declaration of war. Our common lands, and the annual conflicts which took place formerly, and which, perhaps, still take place, in spite of official settlements, between French and Spanish shepherds, will give some idea of such a state of things. Among certain Australian tribes, territorial property is still more divided and definite; every family has its hunting-grounds, which are inherited by the sons to the exclusion of the daughters.
Among the most savage peoples, when we have been able to gain definite information as to their manners, we find that theft is regarded as something wrong, and punished. Among the Australians, poaching is punished with death.
But theft is only a crime when it is committed under certain circumstances. When under others it is, on the contrary, regarded as meritorious. To rob an enemy of his horses or cattle is a praiseworthy act of cunning. It is no longer theft, but an act of hostility. Now, to the savage the stranger is almost always an enemy. The case is the same with a great many Aryan and Semitic peoples. Was it not so among the classic nations from which we derive our civilization?
Nothing is more common than to hear travellers accuse entire races of an incorrigible propensity for theft. The insular populations of the South Sea have, amongst others, been reproached with it. These people, it is indignantly affirmed, stole even the nails of the ships! But these nails wereiron, and in these islands, which are devoid of metal, a little iron was, with good cause, regarded as a treasure. Now, I ask any of my readers, supposing a ship withsheathingandboltsof gold, and nails of diamonds and rubies, were to sail into any European port, would its sheathing or its nails be safe? And would not numbers of people be found ready to reason like the Negroes, who make no scruple of robbing a White? “You are so rich,” they say, when reproached with any misdeed of this kind.
These same Negroes, however, have a great respect for property among themselves. Theft does not appear to be more frequent with them than it is with us between Europeans, and the thief is punished upon the coast of Guinea precisely in the same manner as in Europe.
We ought, perhaps, to refer to the idea of property the manner in which adultery is regarded by some peoples. In countries where the woman may be bought, it is evidently a violation of the rights of the proprietor. Nevertheless, even amongst the most savage tribes, a more elevated feeling, and one which is connected with moral or social ideas, as we ourselves understand them, may be proved, often in the clearest manner. The gravity of the punishment incurred by the culprit scarcely permits of a doubt that it is so. The Australian, uncorrupted by the vicinity of the White and brandy, never forgives one who has destroyed the purity of his wife, and kills him on the first occasion. With the Hottentots, death again is the punishment for adultery. It is the custom among the Negroes of the Gold Coast for the culprit, as a general rule, to make an arrangement with the injured party, if it is a question of one of the women of the third order, who are merely concubines. But if it is a question of thegreat wifeor theFetish wife, then death, or atleast the ruin of the culprit, will alone suffice to avenge the injury.
Yet Negresses are not Penelopes. I do not for a moment think of challenging the unanimous evidence of travellers on this point, and the husbands, as we have just remarked, do not always invoke the rigour of the local code. What may we legitimately infer from this fact? Merely that the customs and the law of these races are at variance. But is it not often so amongst ourselves. Is adultery practised with impunity only among Negroes? Do complaisant husbands exist only among Australians?
IV. Respect for human life is universal. The murderer is everywhere punished. But, amongst ourselves, murder supposes certain conditions. In spite of the law, he who kills his adversary in a fair duel is regarded by no one as a murderer; he who kills or causes the death of a great number of enemies in pitched battle is a hero.
With the savage the formula is still more elastic. As I have just remarked, he regards a stranger in almost every case as an enemy, and to kill him is no crime; it is often a title of honour. Moreover, among the greater number of savage or barbarous peoples, blood demands blood, and for vengeance to be complete, it is not necessary that the true culprit should be overtaken. Every individual of the same family, tribe, or nation,can, andmustpay for his crime if occasion offers. When Takouritreacherouslymassacred Captain Marion du Fresne and his sixteen sailors, he only obeyed the laws of his country. He had avenged his relative Nagui Noui,treacherouslycarried off three years previously by Surville, who wished to punish the theft of a canoe. In this manner many Europeans have fallen victims to the misdeeds of their countrymen, and certain peoples have acquired an unmerited reputation for ferocity.
But let us remember that the Scotch and the Corsicans scarcely acted differently in their vendetta. With them, as with the Red-Skin, the Maori, and the Fijian, the blood of every member of the family or clan might atone for theblood spilt by another. Again, that which we now callwilful murder, was no more considered by the European as an act of cowardice or treason than it is by the savage. Let us remember, moreover, that in the Middle Ages, chiefs occupying the highest positions in European society, did not hesitate to act in this manner; let us remember that the commanders of our ships, when punishing savages for some attack, bombard and burn the first villages that they meet without any scruple, although they may be almost sure that many innocent will pay for the guilty; and perhaps we shall be less severe.
As to a want of respect for human life, the white European race cannot reproach the most barbarous. Let us look back upon our own history, and recall some of those wars, those pages written in letters of blood in our own annals. Let us not, above all, forget our conduct towards our inferior brethren; the depopulation which marks every step through the world; the massacres committed in cold blood, and often for amusement; the man-hunts organized after the manner of stag-hunts; the extermination of entire populations to make room for European colonies, and we shall be forced to acknowledge that if respect for human life is a moral and universal law, no race has violated it oftener, or in a more terrible manner than our own.
V. Modesty and sense of honour are undoubtedly two of the principal manifestations of self-respect. Neither the one nor the other are wanting among savage peoples. But the former, especially, often shows itself in customs and practices widely opposed to our own, or bearing no resemblance whatever to them. This has given rise to many misconceptions, such as that which, among certain Polynesians, has been considered as a refinement of immodest sensuality, what in their opinion is only an act of elementary modesty.
I might multiply examples of this nature, but for what purpose? Is it not the same in matters of politeness? We rise and uncover the head before a stranger or a superior; in a similar case the Turk remains covered, and the Polynesiansits down. Though differing so entirely in form, are they not inspired by the same sentiments? Is not the faculty by which they are called into play everywhere the same?
It is the same also with the sense of honour. Here, however, more than in any other case, we meet with conceptions remarkably in accordance with our own. The history of savage nations abounds with traits of warlike heroism, and nothing is more common than to see savages prefer torture and death to shame. The Algonquin and the Iroquois challenge their executioners to invent fresh tortures. The Kaffir chief asks as a favour to be thrown to the crocodiles rather than lose the feather, which to him represents the epaulette, and serve as a common soldier after having been an officer. The duel of the Australian is more logical than ours, and always in earnest.
That which we call chivalrous generosity in speaking of Europeans, is by no means wanting in savages. In the struggles at Tahiti several officers owed their lives to this feeling. After peace had been concluded, Admiral Bruat asked a Tahitian chief, to whose fire he had been exposed for an hour while he bathed, why he had not fired: “I should have been dishonoured in the eyes of my people if I had killed such a chief as you, naked, and by surprise,” replied the savage. Could the most civilized man have acted or spoken better?
We might quote various actions of Red-Skins and Australians, arising from sentiments of the same nature.
VI. In conclusion, if it is sad to be forced to recognisemoral evilin races and in nations which have carried social civilization to the highest degree of perfection, it is consoling to acknowledge thegoodin the most backward tribes, and to find it there in its most elevated and refined form. The fundamental identity of human nature is nowhere displayed in a more striking manner.
Does this assertion lead to the inference that all human groups are upon the same moral level? By no means. From this, as from the intellectual point of view, they may hold ahigher or lower position of the scale, without any of them falling to zero. It is precisely this moral inequality which has for the anthropologist an interest at once scientific and practical. The very development of the faculty, the acts which it inspires, the institutions of which it is the foundation, present differences sufficiently great to make it possible to discover characters in this order of facts.