the Mind of Primitive Man Classic Reprint

8/21/2019 the Mind of Primitive Man Classic Reprint

1/306


2/306

TEXT FLY WITHINTHE BOOK ONLY


3/306

> CO ^< OU_1 64065 >mCD ^ COZi >


4/306


5/306


6/306


7/306

THE MIND OF PRIMITIVE MAN


8/306

THE MACMILLAN COMPANYNEW YORK - BOSTON CHICAGO DALLASATLANTA - SAN FRANCISCOMACMILLAN AND CO., LIMITED

LONDON BOMBAY CALCUTTA MADRASMELBOURNETHE MACMILLAN COMPANYOF CANADA, LIMITEDTORONTO


9/306

THE MINDof

PRIMITIVE MAN

FRANZ BOAS

REVISED EDITION

THE MACMILLAN COMPANY


10/306

REVISED EDITION COPYRIGHTED, 1938,BY THE MACMILLAN COMPANY.

All rights reserved no part of this book may be re-produced in any form without permission in writingfrom the publisher, except by a reviewer who wishesto quote brief passages in connection with a review

written for inclusion in magazine or newspaper.

Printed in the United States of America.Set up and electrotyped. Published March, 1938.

Fourth Printing October, 1944.

First edition copyrighted and published, 1911,by The Macmillan Company.

Copyright renewed 1930 by Franz Boas.


11/306

PREFACESince 1911, when the first edition of The Mind of Primi-

tive Man was published much work has been done in allthe branches of science that have to be considered in theproblem with which the book deals. The study of heredityhas made important strides and has helped to clear upthe concept of race. The influence of environment uponbodily form and behavior has been the subject of manyinvestigations and the mental attitudes of primitiveman have been studied from new points of view. For thisreason a large part of the book had to be rewritten andrearranged.The first statement of some of the conclusions reachedin the book were made in an address delivered by theauthor as vice-president of the Section of Anthropologyof the American Association for the Advancement ofScience, in 1895. Ever since that time the subject has re-mained one of his chief interests. The result of his studieshas been an ever-increasing certainty of his conclusions.There is no fundamental difference in the ways of think-ing of primitive and civilized man. A close connectionbetween race and personality has never been established.The concept of* racial type as commonly used even inscientific literature is misleading and requires a logical aswell as a biological redefinition. While it would seem thata great number of American students of biology, psychol-ogy and anthropology concur with these views, popularprejudice, based on earlier scientific and popular tradition,has certainly not diminished, for race prejudice is still an


12/306

vi PREFACEimportant factor in our life. Still worse is the subjectionof science to ignorant prejudice in countries controlled bydictators. Such control has extended particularly to booksdealing with the subject matter of race and culture. Sincenothing is permitted to be printed that runs counter to theignorant whims and prejudices of the governing clique,there can be no trustworthy science. When a publisherwhose pride used to be the number and value of his scien-tific books announces in his calendar a book trying toshow that race mixture is not harmful, withdraws thesame book after a dictator comes into power, when greatcyclopedias are rewritten according to prescribed tenets,when scientists either do not dare or are not allowed topublish results contradicting the prescribed doctrines,when others, in order to advance their own material in-terests or blinded by uncontrolled emotion follow blindlythe prescribed road no confidence can be placed in theirstatements. The suppression of intellectual freedom ringsthe death knell of science. FRANZ BOASNEW YORKCOLUMBIA UNIVERSITYJanuary, 1938


13/306

CONTENTS1. INTRODUCTION 3

Double meaning of primitiveness, 3. The Whiterace having achieved the highest civilization saidto represent the highest physical type, 4. Doescultural achievement depend upon hereditary apti-tude alone? 6. Many races contributed to the or-igin of civilization, 7. Early civilization in Amer-ica, 8. Interpretation of rapidity of development,8. Decline of primitive cultures, 11. Spread ofcivilization, 13. Summary, 15. The problem, 17.

2. HISTORICAL REVIEW 19Boulainvilliers and Gobineau, 19. Klemm, 20.Carus, 21. Morton, 22. Nott and Gliddon, 23.Houston Stewart Chamberlain, 24. MadisonGrant, 25. Palaeontologist, 26. Stoddard, 26.von Eickstedt, 27. Influence of contact of racesand of modern biology, 29. Ethnologists, 32.

3. THE COMPOSITION OF HUMAN RACES . 35The meaning of types, 35. The meaning of vari-ability, 37. The analysis of populations as com-posed of different elements, 41. Determination ofdifferences between traits, 42.-^-Regular distribu-tion of many variable phenomena, 42. Measure-ments of degree of variability, 44. ^Descriptionof differences between types, 47.

4. THE HEREDITARY CHARACTERISTICS OFHUMAN RACES ^ 52Racial heredity, 52. Forms common to several

racial types, 53. Genetic differences of forms ap-parently identical, 53,-^aws of heredity, 54.-^In-breeding, 55. Variability of family lines and of


14/306

viii CONTENTSfraternities, 60. Race a complex of distinct geneticlines, 63. Relations between family line and fra-ternal variabilities, 64. Differences between humanraces and races of domesticated animals, 68.-^lm-possibility of constructing original pure types, 70.Rate at which individual and social characters de-velop, 71.

5. THE INSTABILITY OF HUMAN TYPES ^ . 74Morphological development of man, 74. Domes-tication, 76. Influence of environment upon or-ganisms, 85. Human races living under differentconditions, 86.A^Modification of form due to en-vironment, 88. Growth, 91. Identical twins, 95.

Influence of selection, 97.5. THE MORPHOLOGICAL POSITION OF RACES 99

Parallel development, 99. Distribution of higher and lower traits among races, 101. Significanceof such traits, 102. Size and structure of brain invarious races, 103. The principal races of man,106. Europeans, Australians, Pygmy types, 109.Relations between Mongolid and European, 110.Areas of specialization of races, 112.

7. PHYSIOLOGICAL AND PSYCHOLOGICALFUNCTIONS OF RACES 116Variability of functions, 116. Variability of tempoof development, 117. Tempo of development ofdifferent races in the same environment and of thesame race in different types of environment, 120.Mental tests, 121. Motor habits, 123. Frequencyof crime, 126. Mental diseases, 126. Pronuncia-tion, 127. Studies of personality, 127. Behaviorof identical twins, 128. Ethnological observationsregarding personality, 129. Inhibition, 131. Im-providence, 133. Lack of concentration, 134.Prelogical thought, 135. Lack of originality, 135.Relation of genetic and cultural conditioning of be-havior, 137. Effect of continued civilization, 139.Lack of proof of change in faculties, 140. Relapse


15/306

CONTENTS ixof individuals into primitive life, 142. Influence ofearly life, 143. Distribution of mental traits indifferent races, 143.

8. RACE, LANGUAGE AND CULTURE ... 145Relations between type, language and culture, 145.-^Classification from the three points of view ir-reconcilable, 146. Permanence of type and changeof language, 147. Permanence of language andchange of type, 148.-Js4)ermanence of type and lan-guage and change of culture, 150.~^Hypothesis oforiginal correlation between type, language and cul-ture, 152. Lack of time relation between the threefeatures, 154.-^The evaluation of languages and cul-tures, 157.

9. EARLY CULTURAL TRAITS 159Definition of culture, 159. Animal habits comparedwith human culture, 160. Culture in palaeolithictimes, 164. Traits common to all cultures, 165.Isolated parallelisms, 166. Similarities due to his-torical causes, 168. Old World and New World,169. Simple and complex cultures, 172. Advanceof rational explanations, 173.

10. THE INTERPRETATIONS OF CULTURE . . 175^Explanations by analogy, 175. Evolutionary the-ory, 177. Examples, 177.-s=4)evelopment of agri-culture and of domestication of animals, 179.-^De-velopment of the family, 182. Customs do notalways develop in the same way, 183. Differentcustoms developing from a single source, 184.Convergent evolution, 185. Lack of comparabil-ity of data, 186,-^nfluence of geographical en-vironment, 189.-^Economic determinism, 193.Rastian's elementary ideas, 193. Culture as deter-mined by race, 195.

11. THE MIND OF PRIMITIVE MAN AND THEPROGRESS OF CULTURE 197Definition of primitiveness, 197. Progress of tech-nique, 199. Progress in intellectual work, 202.


16/306

CONTENTSParticipation in cultural achievements, 203. Socialorganization, 206. Characteristics of languages ofprimitive tribes, 207. Fundamental characteristicsof primitive thought and language, 208. The cate-gories of language, 209. Attributes, 212. Gram-matical forms, 213. Abstract terms, 216. Nu-merals, 218. The influence of language uponthought, 219.-:4mportance of tradition, 220.Gradual enlargement of the social unit, 223.

12. THE EMOTIONAL ASSOCIATIONS OF PRIM-ITIVES 226Interrelations between various aspects of primitive

life, 226. Subconscious character of automatic ac-tions and their emotional tone, 227. Taboo, 230.The incest group, 231. The effect of propaganda,233. Examples of automatic reactions, 234. Ef-fects of education, 237. Customs based on irra-tional processes, 237. Secondary explanations, 238.

Association of ideas through similar emotionalvalues, 240. Ritual, 240. Nature myths, 241.Art, 242. Varying associations of widely distrib-uted traits, 244. Substitution of causal explana-tions for emotional associations, 248.

13- THE RACE PROBLEM IN MODERN SOCIETY 253Modern race theories, 253. Critique of the conceptof race, 254. Intermingling of European types, 255.Attempts to describe culture as determined by

race, 259. Population of the United States, 266.Eugenics, 267. The Negro problem in the UnitedStates, 268.

BIBLIOGRAPHY 273


17/306

THE MIND OF PRIMITIVE MAN


18/306


19/306

1. INTRODUCTIONA survey of our globe shows the continents inhabited

by a great diversity of peoples different in appearance,different in language and in cultural life. The Europeansand their descendants on other continents are united bysimilarity of bodily build, and their civilization sets themoff sharply against all the people of different appearance.The Chinese, the native New Zealander, the African Negro,the American Indian present not only distinctive bodilyfeatures, but each possesses also his own peculiar mode oflife. Each human type seems to have its own inventions,its own customs and beliefs, and it is very generally as-sumed that race and culture must be intimately associated,that racial descent determines cultural life.Owing to this impression the term primitive has adouble meaning. It applies to both bodily form and cul-

ture. We are accustomed to speak both of primitive racesand primitive cultures as though the two were necessarilyrelated. We believe not only in a close association be-tween race and culture; we are also ready to claim superi-ority of our own race over all others. The sources of thisattitude spring from our every-day experiences. Bodilyform has an aesthetic value. The dark color, the flat andwide nose, the thick lips and prominent mouth of theNegro; the slanting eye and prominent cheekbones of theEast Asiatic do not conform to those ideals of humanbeauty to which we of West European traditions are ac-customed. The racial isolation of Europe and the socialsegregation of races in America have favored the rise of

3


20/306

4 THE MIND OF PRIMITIVE MANthe so-called instinctive aversion to foreign types,founded to a great extent on the feeling of a fundamentaldistinctiveness of form of our own race. It is the samefeeling that creates an instinctive aversion to abnormalor ugly types in our own midst, or to habits that do notconform to our sense of propriety. Furthermore suchstrange types as are members of our society occupy, verygenerally, inferior positions and do not mingle to any greatextent with members of our own race. In their nativeland their cultural life is not as rich in intellectual achieve-ment as our own. Hence the inference that strangeness oftype and low intelligence go hand in hand. In this wayour attitude becomes intelligible, but we also recognizethat it is not based on scientific insight but on simpleemotional reactions and social conditions. Our aversionsand judgments are not, by any means, primarily rationalin character.

Nevertheless, we like to support our emotional attitudetoward the so-called inferior races by reasoning. The su-periority of our inventions, the extent of our scientificknowledge, the complexity of our social institutions, ourattempts to promote the welfare of all members of thesocial body, create the impression that we, the civilizedpeople, have advanced far beyond the stages on whichother groups linger, and the assumption has arisen of aninnate superiority of the European nations and of theirdescendants. The basis of our reasoning is obvious: thehigher a civilization, the higher must be the aptitude forcivilization; and as aptitude presumably depends upon theperfection of the mechanism of body and mind, we inferthat the White race represents the highest type. The tacitassumption is made that achievement depends solely, orat least primarily, upon innate racial ability. Since the in-tellectual development of the White race is the highest, it


21/306

INTRODUCTIONis assumed that its intellectuality is supreme and that itsmind has the most subtle organization.The conviction that European nations possess the high-est aptitude supports our impressions regarding the signif-

icance of differences in type between the European raceand those of other continents, or even of differences be-tween various European types. Unwittingly we pursuea line of thought like this: since the aptitude of the Eu-ropean is the highest, his physical and mental type is alsohighest, and every deviation from the White type neces-sarily represents a lower feature.

This unproved assumption underlies our judgments ofraces, for other conditions being equal, a race is commonlydescribed as the lower, the more fundamentally it differsfrom our own. We interpret as proof of a lower mentalityanatomical peculiarities found in primitive man which re-semble traits occurring in lower forms of the zoologicalseries; and we are troubled by the observation that someof the lower traits do not occur in primitive man, butare rather found in the European race.The subject and form of all such discussions show thatthe idea is rooted in the minds of investigators that weshould expect to find in the White race the highest typeof man.

Social conditions are often treated from the same pointof view. We value our individual freedom, our code ofethics, our free art so highly that they seem to mark anadvancement to which no other race can lay claim.The judgment of the mental status of a people is gener-ally guided by the difference between its social status andour own, and the greater the difference between their in-tellectual, emotional and moral processes and those whichare found in our civilization, the harsher our judgment. Itis only when a Tacitus deploring the degeneration of his


22/306

THE MIND OF PRIMITIVE MANtime finds the virtues of his ancestors among foreign tribesthat their example is held up to the gaze of his fellow-citizens; but the people of imperial Rome probably hadonly a pitying smile for the dreamer who clung to the an-tiquated ideals of the past.

In order to understand clearly the relations betweenrace and civilization, the two unproved assumptions towhich I have referred must be subjected to a searchinganalysis. We must investigate how far we are justified inassuming achievement to be primarily due to exceptionalaptitude, and how far we are justified in assuming theEuropean type or, taking the notion in its extreme form,the Northwest European type to represent the highestdevelopment of mankind. It will be advantageous to con-sider these popular beliefs before making the attempt toclear up the relations between culture and race and todescribe the form and growth of culture.

It might be said, that, although achievement is notnecessarily a measure of aptitude, it seems admissible tojudge the one by the other. Have not most races had thesame chances for development? Why, then, did the Whiterace alone develop a civilization which is sweeping thewhole world, and compared with which all other civiliza-tions appear as feeble beginnings cut short in early child-hood, or arrested and petrified at an early stage of develop-ment? Is it not, to say the least, probable that the racewhich attained the highest stage of civilization was themost gifted one, and that those races which have remainedat the bottom of the scale were not capable of rising tohigher levels?A brief consideration of the general outlines of the his-tory of civilization will give us an answer to these ques-tions. Let our minds go back a few thousand years, untilwe reach the time when the civilizations of eastern and


23/306

INTRODUCTIONwestern Asia were in their infancy. The first great advancesappear. The art of writing is invented. As time passes,the bloom of civilization bursts forth now here, now there.A people that at one time represented the highest type ofculture sinks back into obscurity, while others take itsplace. At the dawn of history we see civilization cling tocertain districts, taken up now by one people, now byanother. Often, in the numerous conflicts of these timesthe more civilized people are vanquished. The conquerorlearns the arts of life from the conquered and carries ontheir work. Thus the centers of civilization are shifting toand fro over a limited area, and progress is slow and halt-ing. At this period the ancestors of the races that aretoday among the most highly civilized were in no waysuperior to primitive man as we find him now in regionsthat have not come into contact with modern civilization.Was the civilization attained by these ancient people

of such a character as to allow us to claim for them a geniussuperior to that of any other race?

First of all, we must bear in mind that none of thesecivilizations was the product of the genius of a singlepeople. Ideas and inventions were carried from one to theother; and, although intercommunication was slow, eachpeople which participated in the ancient development con-tributed its share to the general progress. Proofs withoutnumber have been forthcoming which show that ideashave been disseminated as long as people have come intocontact with one another. Neither race nor language limittheir diffusion. Hostility and timid exclusiveness againstneighbors are unable to hinder their flow from tribe to tribeand they filter through distances that are measured bythousands of miles. Since many races have worked to-gether in the development of the ancient civilizations, wemust bow to the genius of all, whatever group of mankind


24/306

8 THE MIND OF PRIMITIVE MANthey may represent, North African, West Asiatic, Euro-pean, East Indian or East Asiatic.We may now ask, did no other races develop a cultureof equal value? It would seem that the civilizations of an-

cient Peru and of Central America may well be comparedwith the ancient civilizations of the Old World. In bothwe find a high stage of political organization, division oflabor and an elaborate ecclesiastical hierarchy. Greatarchitectural works were undertaken, requiring the co-operation of many individuals. Plants were cultivatedand animals domesticated; the art of writing had been in-vented. The inventions and knowledge of the peoples ofthe Old World seem to have been somewhat more numer-ous and extended than those of the races of the New World,but there can be no doubt that the general status of theircivilization measured by their inventions and knowledgewas nearly equally high. 1 This will suffice for our consid-eration.What, then, is the difference between the civilization of

the Old World and that of the New World? It is essentiallya difference in time. The one reached a certain stage threethousand or four thousand years sooner than the other.Although much stress has been laid upon the greaterrapidity of development of the races of the Old World, it

is not by any means conclusive proof of exceptional ability.It may be adequately conceived as due to the laws ofchance. When two bodies run through the same coursewith variable rapidity, sometimes quickly, sometimesslowly, their relative positionwill be the more likely to showaccidental differences, the longer the course they run. Iftheir speed is constantly accelerating, as has been the casein the rapidity of cultural development, the distance be-

1 A general presentation of these data will be found in Buschan andMacCurdy.


25/306

INTRODUCTIONtween these bodies, due to chance only, will be still widerthan it would be if the rate were uniform. Thus two groupsof infants a few months old will be much alike in theirphysiological and psychical development; youths of equalage will differ much more; and among old men of equalage, one group will be in full possession of their powers,the other on the decline; due mainly to the accelerationor retardation of their development, which is, to a greatextent determined by causes that are not inherent in theirbodily structure, but largely due to their modes of life.The difference in period of development does not alwayssignify that the hereditary structure of the retarded in-dividuals is inferior to that of the others.Applying the same reasoning to the history of mankindwe may say that the difference of a few thousand years is

insignificant as compared to the age of the human race.The time required to develop the existing races is a matterof conjecture, but we may be sure that it is long. We alsoknow that man existed in the Eastern Hemisphere at atime that can be measured by geological standards only,and that he reached America not later than the beginningof the present geological period, perhaps a little earlier.The age of the human race must be measured by a spanof time exceeding considerably one hundred thousandyears (Penck). As the initial point of cultural developmentwe must assume the remotest times in which we find tracesof man. What does it mean, then, if one group of mankindreached a certain stage of cultural development at the ageof one hundred thousand years and another at the age ofone hundred and four thousand years? Would not the lifehistory of the people, and the vicissitudes of their history,be fully sufficient to explain a delay of this character, with-out necessitating the assumption of a difference in theiraptitude to social development? Such retardation would


26/306

10 THE MIND OF PRIMITIVE MANbe significant only if it could be shown that it occurs regu-larly and at all times in one race, while in other racesgreater rapidity of development is the rule.If the achievements of a people were a measure of theiraptitude, this method of estimating innate ability wouldhold good not only for our time but would be applicableunder all conditions. The Egyptians of 2000 or 3000 B.C.might have applied the argument in their judgment of thepeople of northwestern Europe who lived in the Stone Age,had no architecture and a very primitive agriculture. Theywere backward people like many so-called primitivepeople of our time. These were our ancestors, and thejudgment of the ancient Egyptians would now have to bereversed. Precisely in the same way must the customaryestimate of the Japanese of one hundred years ago bereversed on account of their adoption of the economic,industrial and scientific methods of the western world.The claim that achievement and aptitude go hand in handis not convincing. It must be subjected to an exhaustiveanalysis.At present practically all the members of the Whiterace participate to a greater or lesser degree in their ad-vancement, while in none of the other races has such civi-lization as has been attained at one time or another beenable to reach all the constituent tribes or peoples. Thisdoes not necessarily mean that all the members of theWhite race had the power of developing with equal rapiditythe germs of civilization. Civilization, originated by afew members of the race, gave a stimulus to the neighbor-ing tribes who, without this help, would have required amuch longer time to reach the high level which they nowoccupy. We do observe a remarkable power of assimila-tion, which has not manifested itself to an equal degree inany other race.


27/306

INTRODUCTION 11Thus the problem presents itself of discovering the

reason why the tribes of ancient Europe readily assimilatedthe civilization thatwas offered tothem, while at presentwesee primitive people- dwindle and become degraded beforeits onslaught instead of being elevated by it. Is not this aproof of a higher organization of the inhabitants of Europe?

I believe the reasons for the present rapid decline ofprimitive culture are not far to seek, and do not neces-sarily lie in a greater ability of the races of Europe andAsia. First of all, in appearance, these people were morealike to civilized man of their times than the races ofAfrica, Australia and America to the European invadersof later periods. When an individual had been assimilatedin culture, he merged readily in the mass of the populationand his descendants soon forgot their foreign ancestry.Not so in our times. A member of a foreign race alwaysremains an outsider on account of his personal appearance.The Negro, no matter how completely he may haveadopted what is best in our civilization is too often lookeddown upon as a member of an inferior race. The physicalcontrast in bodily appearance is a fundamental difficultyfor the rise of primitive people. In early times in Europe,it was possible for colonial society to grow by accretionfrom among the more primitive natives. Similar conditionsare still prevalent in many parts of Latin America.

Furthermore, the diseases which nowadays ravage theinhabitants of territories newly opened to the Whites werenot so devastating. On account of the permanent con-tiguity of the people of the Old World who were always incontact with one another, they were subject to the samekinds of contagion. The invasion of America and Poly-nesia, on the other hand, was accompanied by the intro-duction of new diseases among the natives of these coun-tries. The suffering and devastation wrought by epidemics


28/306

12 THE MIND OF PRIMITIVE MANwhich followed the discovery are too well known to bedescribed in full. In all cases in which a material reductionin numbers occurs in a thinly settled area, the economiclife as well as the social structure is almost completelydestroyed, and with these the menial vigor and power ofresistance decays.At the time when Mediterranean civilization had madeimportant strides forward, the tribes of northern Europehad profited to a considerable extent by their achieve-ments. Although still sparsely settled, the tribal units werelarge as compared to the small bands encountered in manyparts of America, in Australia or on the small islands ofPolynesia. We may observe that populous communitiesof extensive areas have withstood the inroads of Europeancolonization. The outstanding examples are Mexico andthe Andean highlands where the Indian population hasrecovered from the impact of European immigration. Thesmall North American tribes and those of eastern SouthAmerica have succumbed. The Negro race also seemscapable of surviving the shock.

Furthermore, the economic stresses brought about bythe conflict between modern inventions and native in-dustries are far more fundamental than those producedby contact between the industries of the ancients andthose of less advanced people. Our methods of manufac-ture have reached such perfection that the industries ofthe primitive people of our times are being exterminatedby the cheapness and plentiful supply of the products im-ported by the White trader; for the primitive tradesmanis entirely unable to compete with the power of productionof our machines, while in olden times there was onlyrivalry between the hand-products of the native and of theforeigner. When a day's work suffices for obtaining effi-cient tools or fabrics from the trader, while the manufac-


29/306

INTRODUCTION 13ture of the corresponding implements or materials by thenative himself would have required weeks, it is but naturalthat the slower and more laborious process should begiven up speedily. In some regions, and particularly inAmerica and in parts of Siberia, the primitive tribes areswamped by the numbers of the immigrating race, whichis crowding them so rapidly out of their own haunts thatno time for gradual assimilation is given. In olden timesthere was certainly no such vast inequality in numbers aswe observe in many areas at the present time.We conclude from these considerations that in ancientEurope the assimilation of the more primitive tribes tothose of advanced economic, industrial and intellectualachievement was comparatively easy; while primitivetribes of our times have to contend against almost insur-mountable difficulties inherent in the vast contrast be-tween their own condition of life and our civilization. Itdoes not necessarily follow from these observations thatthe ancient Europeans were more gifted than other raceswhich have not been exposed to the influences of civiliza-tions until more recent times (Gerland; Ratzel).

This conclusion may be corroborated by other facts. Inthe Middle Ages the civilization of the Arabs and ArabizedBerbers had reached a stage which was undoubtedly su-perior to that of many European nations of that period.Both civilizations had sprung largely from the samesources, and must be considered branches of one tree.The people who were the carriers of Arab civilization inthe Sudan were by no means of the same descent as theEuropeans, but nobody will dispute the high merits oftheir culture. It is of interest to see in what manner theyinfluenced the Negro races of Africa. At an early time,principally between the second half of the eighth and theeleventh centuries of our ra, northwestern Africa was in-


30/306

14 THE MIND OF PRIMITIVE MANvaded by Hamitic tribes, and Mohammedanism spreadrapidly through the Sahara and the western Sudan. Wesee that since that time large empires were formed, anddisappeared again in struggles with neighboring States,and that a relatively high degree of culture was attained.The invaders intermarried with the natives; and the mixedraces, some of which are almost purely Negro, have risenhigh above the level of other African Negroes. The historyof Bornu is perhaps one of the best examples of this kind.Barth and Nachtigal (1) have made us acquainted withthe past of this State, which has played a most importantpart in the eventful history of North Africa.Why, then, have the Mohammedans been able to exert

a deep influence upon these tribes, and to raise them tonearly the same standard which they had attained, whilein most parts of Africa the Whites have not been capableof assimilating Negro culture to an equal degree? Evi-dently on account of the different method of introductionof culture. While the relations between the Mohammedansand the natives were similar to those of the ancients andthe tribes of Europe, the Whites send only the products oftheir manufactures and a few of their representatives intothe Negro country. A real amalgamation between themore highly educated Whites and the Negroes has nevertaken place. The amalgamation of the Negroes by theMohammedans is facilitated particularly by the institu-tion of polygamy, the conquerors taking native wives, andraising their children as members of their own family.The spread of Chinese civilization in eastern Asia maybe likened to that of the ancient civilization in Europe.Colonization and amalgamation of kindred tribes and insome cases extermination of rebellious subjects, with sub-sequent colonization have led to a remarkable uniformityof culture over a large area.


31/306

INTRODUCTION 15When, finally, we consider the inferior position held by

the Negro race of the United States, where the Negro livesin the closest contact with modern civilization, we must notforget that the antagonism between the races is as strongas ever and that the inferiority of the Negro race is dog-matically assumed (Ovington). This is a formidable ob-stacle to the Negro's advance and progress, even thoughschools and universities are open to him. We might ratherwonder how much, against heavy odds, has been accom-plished in a short period. It is hardly possible to predictwhat would be the achievements of the Negro if he wereable to live with the Whites on absolutely equal terms.Our conclusion drawn from the foregoing considerationsis the following: Several races have developed a civiliza-tion of a type similar to the one from which our own hassprung, and a number of favorable conditions have facili-tated its rapid spread in Europe. Among these, similarphysical appearance, contiguity of habitat and moderatedifference in modes of manufacture were the most potent.When, later on, Europeans bgan to spread over othercontinents, the races with which they came into contactwere not equally favorably situated. Striking differencesof racial types, the preceding isolation which caused devas-tating epidemics in the newly discovered countries, andthe greater advance in technical processes made assimi-lation much more difficult. The rapid dissemination ofEuropeans over the whole world destroyed all promisingbeginnings which had arisen in various regions. Thus norace except that of eastern Asia was given a chance todevelop independently. The spread of the European racecut short the growth of the existing germs without regardto the mental aptitude of the people among whom it wasdeveloping.On the other hand, we have seen that no great weight


32/306

16 THE MIND OF PRIMITIVE MANcan be attributed to the earlier rise of civilization in theOld World, which is satisfactorily explained as due tochance. In short, historical events appear to have beenmuch more potent in leading races to civilization thantheir innate faculty, and it follows that achievements ofraces do not without further proof warrant the assumptionthat one race is more highly gifted than another.

After having thus found an answer to our first problem,we turn to the second one: In how far are we justified inconsidering those anatomical traits in regard to whichforeign races differ from the White race as marks of in-feriority? In one respect the answer to this question iseasier than that to the former. We have recognized thatachievement alone is no satisfactory proof of an unusualmental ability of the White race. It follows from this,that anatomical differences between the White race andothers can be interpreted as meaning superiority of theformer, inferiority of the latter, only if a relation betweenanatomical form and mentality can be proved to exist.Too many investigations relating to mental character-istics of races are based on the logical fallacy of first as-suming that the European represents the highest racialtype and then interpreting every deviation from the Eu-ropean type as a sign of lower mentality. When the for-mation of the jaws of the Negroes is thus interpretedwithout proof of a biological connection between the formsof the jaw and the functioning of the nervous system anerror is committed that might be paralleled by a Chinamanwho would describe Europeans as hairy monsters whosehirsute body is a proof of a lower status. This is emotional,not scientific reasoning.The question that must be answered is: In how far doanatomical traits determine mental activities? By anal-ogy we associate lower mental traits with theromorphic,


33/306

INTRODUCTION 17brutelike features. In our naive, every-day parlance,brutish features and brutality are closely connected. Wemust distinguish here, however, between the anatomicalcharacteristics of which we have been speaking and themuscular development of the face, trunk and limbs due tohabits of life. The hand, which is never employed in ac-tivities requiring those refined adjustments which arecharacteristic of psychologically complex actions, will lackthe modeling brought about by the development of eachmuscle. The face, the muscles of which have not respondedto the innervations accompanying deep thought and re-fined sentiment will lack in individuality and expressive-ness. The neck that has supported heavy loads, and hasnot responded to the varied requirements of delicatechanges of position of head and body, will appear massiveand clumsy. These physiognomic differences must notmislead us in our interpretations. We are also inclined todraw inferences in regard to mentality from a recedingforehead, a heavy jaw, large and heavy teeth, perhapseven from an inordinate length of arms or an unusual de-velopment of hairiness. A careful consideration of therelation of such traits to mental activities will be required,before we can assume as proven their significance.It appears that neither cultural achievement nor outerappearance is a safe basis on which to judge the mentalaptitude of races. Added to this is the one-sided evalua-tion of our own racial type and of our modern civilizationwithout any close inquiry into the mental processes ofprimitive races and cultures which may easily lead to er-roneous conclusions.The object of our inquiry is therefore an attempt toclear up the racial and cultural problems involved in thesequestions. Our globe is inhabited by many races, and agreat diversity of cultural forms exists. The term primi-


34/306

18 THE MIND OF PRIMITIVE MANlive should not be applied indiscriminately to bodilybuild and to culture as though both belonged together bynecessity. It

is rather one of the fundamental questionsto be investigated whether the cultural character of a raceis determined by its physical characteristics. The term raceitself should be clearly understood before this question canbe answered. If a close relation between race and cultureshould be shown to exist it would be necessary to studyfor each racial group separately the interaction betweenbodily build and mental and social life. If it should beproved not to exist, it will be permissible to treat mankindas a whole and to study cultural types regardless of race.We shall thus have to investigate primitiveness fromtwo angles. First of all we shall have to inquire whethercertain bodily characteristics of races exist that doom themto a permanent mental and social inferiority. After wehave cleared up this point we shall have to discuss thetraits of the mental and social life of those people whomwe call primitive from a cultural point of view, and see inhow far they coincide with racial groups and describethose features that distinguish their lives from those ofcivilized nations.


35/306

2. HISTORICAL REVIEWThe problem of the relations between race and culture

has engaged the attention of many investigators. Onlyfew have attacked it impartially and critically. Judgmenthas been influenced too often by racial, national and classprejudice.The theory that racial descent determines the characteror ability of a people or of a social class has been held fora long time. Linne, in his description of racial types, as-cribes to each mental characteristics. The whole theoryof a privileged aristocracy is based on the assumption of aclose correlation between individual excellence and descentfrom a noble line. Until the end of the eighteenth centurythe organization of European society favored the assump-tion of a close correlation between descent and culture.When Boulainvilliers in 1727 studied the political historyof France he concluded that the old aristocracy was de-scended from the Franks and the bulk of the populationfrom the Celtic population, and inferred that the Franksmust have had a superior mental endowment. Amongmore recent writers John Beddoe refers to the mentalcharacteristics of the various types of Scotland and Eng-land, and A. Ploetz ascribes mental characteristics to thevarious races.Gobineau developed these ideas with stronger emphasisupon the permanence of physical form and mental func-

tions of all races. His essential viewpoints appear in thefollowing statements: 1. Wild tribes of the present havealways been in this condition, no matter with what higher

19


36/306

20 THE MIND OF PRIMITIVE MANcultural forms they may have come into contact, and willalways remain in this condition; 2. the wild tribes cancontinue to exist in a civilized mode of life only if thepeople who created this mode of life are a nobler branchof the same race; 3. the same conditions are necessarywhen two civilizations influence each other strongly, bor-row from each other, and create a new civilization com-posed of the elements of their own; two civilizations cannever be mixed; 4. civilizations originating in races en-tirely foreign to each other can form only superficial con-tacts, they can never penetrate each other and will alwaysbe mutually exclusive. On the basis of the identificationof historical and racial data, Gobineau develops his ideaof the paramount excellence of the Northwest European.His work may be considered the first systematic develop-ment of this thought. It has exerted a remarkably stronginfluence.Klemm's (1843) division of mankind into an active or male and a passive or female half is based on cul-

tural considerations. He decribes the activities of theEuropean as those of the active half and says l that theirmental characteristics are strong will power, desire formastery, independence, freedom; activity, restlessness,longing for expansion and travel; progress in every direc-tion; an instinctive inclination for investigation and test-ing, stubborn resistance and doubt. Persians, Arabs,Greeks, Romans, the Germanic peoples, and also Turks,Tartars, Tcherkess, the Inca of Peru and Polynesians 2belong to this group. His description of the body form ofthe passive half of mankind is based very largely on gen-eral impressions derived from the appearance of the Mon-golids. 3 He acknowledges that there are differences be-tween Mongols, Negroes, Papuans, Malays and American

1 Vol. I, p. 197. 2 Vol. IV, p. 451. 3 Vol. I, p. 198.


37/306

HISTORICAL REVIEW 21Indians, but he emphasizes as unifying characters, thedark pigmentation, the form of the skull, and most im-portant of all

the passivity of the mind. According tohis theory the passive half of mankind had spread at an

early time over the whole globe and is represented by theconservative part of the populations of Europe. The activerace developed in the Himalayas, gradually spread overthe whole world and became the dominant race whereverthey went. He assumes that many of the most importantinventions were made by the passive race, but that they didnot progress beyond a certain point. He sees as the movingpower in the life of man the struggle for a union betweenthe active and passive races that will represent mankindcompletely, and the aim of which is civilization. Klemm'sopinions were accepted by Wuttke.

Carl Gustav Carus (1849) recognizes that Klemm's di-vision is essentially a cultural one. His own views whichhe first expressed in his System of Physiology (1838) arebased on speculation. He believes that the conditions ofour planet must be reflected in all living forms. Theplanet has day and night, dawn and dusk, and so there aresome animals active, and plants blooming in daylight,others at night, still others at dawn or dusk. So it mustbe with man, and for this reason there can be only fourraces, a day race, a night race, a dawn race and a duskrace. These are, respectively, Europeans and West Asi-atics, Negroes, Mongols, American Indians. After havingfound these groups he claims, following Morton, that thesize of the brain of the day race is great, of the night racesmall, and those of the dawn and dusk races intermediate.He also interprets the facial form of the Negro as beingsimilar to that of animals. The remaining argument isderived from what at his time seemed to be the culturalconditions of the human races. Among the different races


38/306

22 THE MIND OF PRIMITIVE MANhe gives prominence to the Hindu, the creator of truth,the Egyptian, the creator of beauty, and the Jew, thecreator of human love. The duty of mankind is to de-velop in each race to the fullest extent its own inborncharacters.Among early American writers Samuel G. Morton based

his conclusions upon a careful investigation of racial types.His general views were largely influenced by the interestin the question of polygenism or monogenism, whichdominated the minds at that period. He reached the con-clusion that there must have been a multiple origin ofhuman races, and claimed that the distinguishing charac-teristics of races were intimately associated with theirphysical build. He says: [The Caucasian race] is dis-tinguished by the facility with which it attains the highestintellectual development. ... In their intellectual char-acteristics the Mongols are ingenious, imitative and highlysusceptible to cultivation. . . . The Malay is active andingenious and possesses all the habits of a migratory, pre-dacious and maritime people. ... In their mental char-acteristics the Americans are averse to cultivation, slow,cruel, boisterous, revengeful and fond of war, and entirelydestitute of maritime adventure. ... In disposition theNegro is joyful, flexible and indolent, while the manygroups that constitute this race possess a singular diversityof character of which the far extreme is the lowest strain ofhumanity.

Referring to particular groups he says, The mentalfaculties of the Eskimo from infancy to old age, present acontinued childhood; they reach a certain limit and expandno further ; and of the Australians; It is not probablethat this people as a body are capable of any other thantheir slight degree of civilization. His point of viewappears clearly in the footnote added to this remark:


39/306

HISTORICAL REVIEW 23This moving picture is derived from the great majorityof observers of Australian life. The reader may consultDawson's 'Australia' for some different views, which,however, appear to be biased by a genuine and activespirit of benevolence. In the appendix to Morton's work,George Combe, the phrenologist, discusses the relationbetween the form of the head and character, and dwellsparticularly on the fact that the brain of the European isthe largest and that of the Negro the smallest, inferringfrom this a corresponding intellectual status. There is nodiscussion of the contradiction between this statement andthe data given in Morton's work, according to which theadvanced people of America have smaller heads than theso-called barbarous tribes.Morton was followed by a number of writers whose

views were colored by their endeavor to defend slavery asan institution. To them the problem of polygeny andmonogeny was important particularly because the distinctorigin and the permanence of type of the Negro seemed tojustify his enslavement. The most important writings ofthis group are those of J. C. Nott and George R. Gliddon.Nott in his introduction to Types of Mankind says: Thegrand problem, more particularly interesting to all readers,is that which involves the common origin of races; for uponthe latter deduction hang not only certain religious dog-mas, but the more practical question of the equality andperfectibility of races we say 'more practical question,'because, while Almighty Power, on the one hand, is notresponsible to Man for the distinct origin of human races,these, on the other, are accountable to Him for the mannerin which their delegated power is used towards each other.Whether an original diversity of races be admitted ornot, the permanence of existing physical types will not bequestioned by any Archaeologist or Naturalist of the


40/306

24 THE MIND OF PRIMITIVE MANpresent day. Nor, by such competent arbitrators, can theconsequent permanence of moral and intellectual peculiar-ities of types be denied. The intellectual man is insepa-rable from the physical man; and the nature of the onecannot be altered without a corresponding change in theother. In another place he says, To one who has livedamong American Indians, it is in vain to talk of civilizingthem. You might as well attempt to change the nature ofthe buffalo.A line of argument similar to that of Gobineau was takenup by Houston Stewart Chamberlain. His influence seems

also more due to the fact that he presented in an attractiveform current views, than to his scientific accuracy andpenetrating thought. He says (2) : Why should we enterinto lengthy scientific inquiries to determine whether thereare different races and whether racial descent is of value,how this is possible, etc.? We turn the tables and say:it is evident that there are racial differences; it is a fact ofimmediate experience that the genealogy of a race is ofdecisive importance; all you have to do is to investigatehow these differences came about and why they are there.You must not deny the facts to protect your ignorance.. . . Whoever travels the short distance from Calais toDover feels as though he had reached a new planet suchis the difference between the French and English notwith-standing the many ties that unite them. At the same timethe observer may see by this example the value of thepurer inbreeding. By its insular position England is prac-tically isolated, and there has been reared the race whichat the moment is undeniably the strongest in Europe.He formulates his principles as follows: It is a fundamen-tal law that the development of a great civilization requiresfirst of all excellent stock; next inbreeding with properselection and finally an old mixture of different but closely


41/306

HISTORICAL REVIEW 25related lines of great excellence, which, however, must befollowed by a period of isolation. He derived these state-ments from the experience of husbandry, transferring itsrules to human societies. He tries to support this procedureby historical examples that, to his mind seem to sustainhis views. He ascribes degeneration particularly to con-tinued mingling of heterogeneous elements.

Chamberlain's (1) lack of scientific method is madeclear by his statement in a letter to Cosima Wagner inwhich he acknowledges to have used a diplomatic trick(einen diplomatischen Schachzug) to prove his point(22nd of May, 1899).The influence of Gobineau and Chamberlain and of thecurrent race prejudices are also reflected in the writings ofMadison Grant.

His book is a dithyrambic praise of the blond, blue-eyedlong-headed White and his achievements and he prophesiesall the ills that will befall mankind because of the presenceof Negroes and dark-eyed races. The entire argument isbased on the dogmatic assumption that wherever a peopleexhibits eminent cultural characteristics these must be dueto a leaven of Nordic blood. As an example may be quotedthe following: To what extent the Nordic race enteredinto the blood and civilization of Rome it is not difficultto say. The traditions of the Eternal City, its organiza-tion of law, its military efficiency as well as Roman idealsof family life, loyalty and truth, point clearly to a Nordicrather than to a Mediterranean origin. In this passage,as throughout his writings, the main thesis is assumed asproven, and is then applied to explain cultural phe-nomena, and biological facts are juggled to suit the fanciesof the author. In some places he stresses head-form asfundamental, in others as irrelevant. Stature is sometimesgiven great importance as a dominant hereditary feature;


42/306

26 THE MIND OF PRIMITIVE MANlater it is claimed to be the first trait likely to vanish incases of mixture. Notwithstanding the slight importanceassigned to environmental influences, he claims that thenative American population by the middle of the nine-teenth century was rapidly becoming a distinct type, andwas on the point of developing physical peculiarities ofits own.

Unfortunately biologists, who in their own sciences en-joy a well-earned reputation, permit themselves to followthe lead of uncritical race enthusiasts. An eminent palae-ontologist states his own position in the New York Times,April 8, 1924.The Northern races as is well known to anthropolo-gists, include all those peoples which originally occupiedthe western plateau of Asia and traversed northernEurope, certainly as early as 12,000 B.C. In the countrywhich they occupied the conditions of life were hard, thestruggle for existence severe, and this gave rise to theirprincipal virtues, as well as to their faults, to their fightingqualities and to their love of strong drink. Increasingbeyond the power of their own country to support them,they invaded the countries to the south, not only as con-querors but as contributors of strong moral and intellectualelements to more or less decadent civilizations. Throughthe Nordic tide which flowed into Italy came the ancestorsof Raphael, Leonardo da Vinci, Galileo, Titian. . . .Columbus from his portraits and from busts, authentic orno/, was clearly of Nordic ancestry.

Lothrop Stoddard writes: Every race is the result ofages of development which involve specialized capacitieswhich make the race what it is and make it capable ofcreative achievement. These specialized capacities (whichare particularly marked in the superior races, being rela-tively recent developments) are highly unstable. They are


43/306

HISTORICAL REVIEW 27what the biologists call 'recessive' characteristics. Hence,when a highly specialized stock interbreeds with a differentstock the new, less stable specialized characteristics arebred out, the variation, no matter how great its potentialvalue to human progress, being irretrievably lost. Thisoccurs even in the mating of two superior stocks if thesestocks are widely dissimilar in character; the valuablespecializations of both breeds cancel out and the mixedoffspring tends strongly to revert to generalized medi-ocrity. Further on the author says that civilization isthe body and race the soul, and that civilization is theresult of the creative urge of the superior germ plasm.This is playing with biological and cultural terms, notscience.

E. von Eickstedt has made an attempt to establish thefoundations of a race psychology. Notwithstanding hisclaims to a strictly logical argumentation his reasoningseems to be based on the same fallacy as all the others.He is influenced by the modern Gestalt-psychology andconsiders that we see the evident fact of a race-psycho-logical element that consequently it must have a struc-ture and that bodily build and mental behavior of racesmust be considered a unit. From an aesthetic, pictorialpoint of view this is true enough, as in a landscape topo-graphic form, plant life, animal life and human culturebelong to the picture, although a structural unity in thesense of causal relations cannot be given. Soil and climatefavor certain forms of life, but they do not determine whatplants, animals and forms of culture exist. A scientificstudy of the totality of phenomena should never lead to anomission of the study of causality. The presence of a num-ber of traits in a picture is not necessarily due to theircausal relation. Correlations may be fortuitous, not causal.The proof of causal relation is indispensable. Differences


44/306

28 THE MIND OF PRIMITIVE MANin mental traits of races must be proved, not assumed, tobe biologically determined and external influences mustbe proved, not assumed, to exist. Only if the exact proofcan be given that individual behavior depends upon bodilybuild, and that what may be true of the individual is alsotrue of the racial group, or if the relative importance ofheredity and environment in individual and racial be-havior is determined is it possible to look at them as atotality, except from an aesthetic and emotional point ofview. Von Eickstedt is aware of the extraordinary plas-ticity of the dispositions given by heredity, but they donot find a place in his discussion.

I shall not attempt to follow in detail the historical de-velopment of modern theories which claim that racialdescent determines the mental and cultural qualities ofthe individual. It is however, worth while to consider theconditions that favored their growth. At present the beliefthat race determines mental behavior and culture rests onstrong emotional values. Race is considered as a unifyinglink between individuals and a call for race allegiance. Anew group concept is replacing that of nationality, or isbeing added to it, just as in earlier times the concept ofnationality replaced that of group allegiance to the feudallord, and the religious bond holding together all Christian-ity a tie still potent in Islam. Its sentimental effect isanalogous to the class consciousness of the modern com-munist, or that of the nobleman who still believes in thephysical and mental superiority of the nobility. Groupingsof this kind are ever present. The only problem is why thebiological grouping has come to be of such importance atthe present time, and whether it has any justification. 1

1 A historical presentation of race theories has been given by TheophileSimar: Etude Critique sur la Fondation de la Doctrine des Races, Brussels,1922. The presentation, however, misses much of its force because a


45/306

HISTORICAL REVIEW 29It seems likely that the development of modern tradeand travel brought the existence of foreign races to the

notice of wide circles that in earlier times had no personalknowledge of distinct types of man. The superior powerthat the European owes to his inventions and that enableshim to subject and exploit foreign peoples, even peoples ofhigh culture, gives emphasis to the feeling of Europeansuperiority. It is worth noting that before the officiallyfomented drive against Jews in Germany and the tradi-tional anti-Jewish feeling in Poland and Russia the feelingused to be nowhere more intense than among the Englishwho first came into close contact with foreign races, andthat it developed at an early time in America where thepresence of a large Negro population kept alive a constantawareness of racial differences. However, other causesmust have contributed to such popular feeling because thesame attitude is not developed as strongly among theSpaniards, Portuguese and French although it is not en-tirely absent. The modern French pose of equality of allraces is presumably dictated more by political reasons,such as the need of soldiers, than by an actual absence ofall feeling of race differences. The attitude of the Parisianis fundamentally different from that of the colonial admin-istration.The permeation of our whole thinking by biological

viewpoints is probably a much more important element inthe development of the opinion that culture is determinedby descent.The development of physiological psychology whichCatholic and anti-German point of view dominate the whole book. Theauthor misinterprets the views of all those authors who dwell upon the dif-ference in the genius of cultures, as defending the theory of hereditary de-termination. This appears particularly in his discussion of Herder and ofthe whole Romantic school. See also Jacques Burzon, Race, A Sludy ofModern Superstition, New York, 1937.


46/306

30 THE MIND OF PRIMITIVE MANnecessarily treats of organic determinants of mental func-tions, has left its impress upon modern psychology, andhas led to a comparative neglect of the influence of theexperience of an individual upon his behavior. In recentyears the behavioristic and Freudian schools have turnedaway from this one-sided attitude, and a more critical viewis also held by many psychologists of other schools. Never-theless, in many quarters the popular view still prevailsthat all psychological tests reveal an organically determinedmentality. It is believed therefore that innate intelligence,emotional character and volition may be determined bypsychological tests. This is essentially a biologically ori-ented psychology.The current methods of biology give added strength tothese views. At present no subject attracts wider atten-tion of both scientists and general public, than the phe-nomena of heredity. A vast amount of material has beenaccumulated that proves how thoroughly the bodily formof the individual is determined by his ancestry. The suc-cesses of breeders of plants and animals who raise varietiesthat fulfill certain demands made upon them suggest thatby similar methods national physique and mentality mightbe improved, that inferior strains might be eliminated andsuperior ones increased in number. The importance ofheredity has been expressed in the formula, Nature notnurture, meaning that whatever man is or does dependsupon his heredity, not upon his bringing up. Through theinfluence of Francis Galton (2, 3) arid his followers theattention of the scientist and the public has been called tothese questions. To this has been added the study of thehereditary character of pathological conditions and of thegeneral constitution of the body.Thecombined influence ofphysiologicalpsychology and ofbiology seems tohave strengthened the view that themental


47/306

HISTORICAL REVIEW 31and cultural functions of individuals are determined byheredity and that environmental conditions are negligible.A constitutional determination of mentality is assumedwhich brings it about that a person of a certain type will

behave in a way corresponding to his habitus and that,therefore, the composition of a population will determineits mental behavior. Added to this is the assumption thatthe hereditary character of mental traits has been proved,or that it must exist because all heredity is controlled byMendelian l laws. Since these involve the permanence ofexisting traits in the population, we must expect that thesame mental traits will reappear constantly. Only on thisbasis can Eugen Fischer (1) say that he considers it provedby many observations that the human races and theircrosses are distinct in their hereditary mental characteris-tics. It is, however, only a question of the fuller or a morerestricted development, of a quantitative increase or de-crease in intensity of mental qualities common to all hu-man groups (and distinct from those of animals), thecombination of which results in varied forms. A clearunderstanding of the origin of these forms is made still moredifficult by the influence of the history of the people (i.e.,by environmental conditions) which as in the individual,may develop the innate qualities in the most varied ways.And in another place, 2 To a great extent the form of men-tal life as we meet it in various social groups, is determinedby environment. Historical events and conditions of na-ture further or impede the development of innate charac-teristics. Nevertheless, we may certainly claim that thereare racially hereditary differences. Certain traits of themind of the Mongol, the Negro, the Melanesian and ofother races are different from our own and differ amongthemselves.

1 See p. 54. * Fischer 2: p. 512.


48/306

32 THE MIND OF PRIMITIVE MANThe most serious studies made in this direction refer to

the interrelation between individual constitution and men-tal life rather than to the hereditary characteristics ofmental traits of races.The differences in cultural life have also been approachedfrom an entirely different point of view. We shall not

dwell on the ideas of the rationalists of the eighteenthcentury, who, with Rousseau, believed that there existeda happy, simple, natural life. We are rather concernedwith the views of those who saw and felt clearly the in-dividuality of each type of cultural life, but who inter-preted it not as an expression of innate mental qualitiesbut as a result of varied external conditions acting upongeneral human characteristics. The understanding of thecharacter of foreign cultures is much more definite amongall members of this group. Herder who had a marvelousaptitude for entering into the spirit of foreign forms ofthought and who saw clearly the value of the manifoldways of thinking and feeling among the different peoplesof the world, believed that natural environment was thecause of the existing biological and cultural differentiation.The geographical point of view was stressed by Karl Hitterwho studied the influence of environment upon the life ofman. He believed that even continental areas could im-pose their geographical character upon their inhabitants.The fundamental point of view of this group has beenexpressed by Theodor Waitz. He says: We assert, more-over, in opposition to the usual theory, that the degree ofcivilization of a people, or of an individual, is exclusivelythe product of his mental capacity; that his capacities,which designate merely the magnitude of his performances,depend on the degree of cultivation which he has reached.

Since that time ethnologists in their studies of culturehave concentrated their attention upon the differences in


49/306

HISTORICAL REVIEW 33cultural status and have disregarded racial elements com-pletely. The similarity of fundamental customs and beliefsthe world over, without regard to race and environment, isso general that race appeared to them as irrelevant. Theworks of Herbert Spencer, E. B. Tylor, Adolf Bastian,Lewis Morgan, Sir James George Frazer, and among themore recent ones, those of Durkheim, Levy-Bruhl, tomention only a few, notwithstanding material differencesin point of view, reflect this attitude. We do not find intheir writings any mention of racial differences. On thecontrary, it is only the difference between culturally prim-itive man and civilized man that is relevant. The psycho-logical basis of cultural traits is identical among all races,and similar forms develop among all of them. The customsof the South African Negro or of the Australian are analo-gous and comparable to those of the American Indian, andthe customs of our European predecessors find their paral-lels among the most diverse peoples. The whole problemof the development of culture is therefore reduced to thestudy of psychological and social conditions which are com-mon to mankind as a whole, and to the effects of historicalhappenings and of natural and cultural environment. Thisdisregard of races appears also in Wundt's general FolkPsychology, and Sumner's Science of Society, and in most ofthe modern sociological discussions. To those who seek toestablish an evolution of culture, parallel to organic evolu-tion, the varying forms fall into an orderly array no matterwhat the bodily form of the carriers of the culture. Thesociologist who tries to establish valid laws of cultural de-velopment assumes that their manifestations are the samethe world over. The psychologist finds the same form ofthinking and feeling in all races that are on similar levels ofculture.

It may be granted that the ethnologist is not sufficiently


50/306

34 THE MIND OF PRIMITIVE MANinterested in the problem of the relation between bodilybuild and cultural form, because his attention is directedto the similarities of culture the world over which justifythe assumption of a fundamental sameness of the humanmind regardless of race; but this does not signify that finerdifferences may not exist that go by unnoticed on accountof general similarities.The problem remains whether there is a more or lessintimate relation between the bodily structure of racialgroups and their cultural life.


51/306

3. THE COMPOSITION OF HUMAN RACESBefore attempting an analysis of the relation between

race and culture we must obtain a clear conception of whatwe mean by the terms race and culture.The anatomist who studies the form of the human body

is interested, first of all, in those characteristics which arecommon to mankind as a whole, and general anatomicaldescriptions deal with the organs of the body primarily asthough no individual differences existed. At the same timewe know that this is merely a convenient generalization,that in reality 110 two individuals have an identical form.More penetrating study shows also that certain groupsof mankind are somewhat alike among themselves and

differ more or less strikingly from other groups. Thesedifferences are sometimes quite considerable and appeareven in external characteristics. The European has wavyor straight hair, is slightly pigmented, has a narrow face,thin lips and a narrow, high nose. The Negro has frizzlyhair, dark skin, dark brown eyes, thick lips and a wide, flatnose. The differences between the two groups stand out soclearly that, when comparing the two races, we disregardthose peculiarities that distinguish various groups of Euro-peans and of Negroes. The European who visits CentralAfrica sees at once the distinguishing traits of the Negro.

Similar impressions are created even when the differ-ences are not quite so striking. When Caesar's legions en-countered the German followers of Ariovistus they wereimpressed by their blue eyes and blond hair and by otherpronounced features that were rare among Romans, al-

35


52/306

36 THE MIND OF PRIMITIVE MANthough not entirely unknown to them. This contrast be-tween the two groups must have created an impression ofracial distinction.In the same way a Swede from the interior provinceswho at home has comparatively speaking few opportuni-ties of seeing people with dark eyes and black hair will beimpressed by this feature, while the Scotchman, who isthoroughly familiar with black hair and dark eyes maynot consider it a particularly distinguishing characteristic.Furthermore, to the Swede who is accustomed to see blueeyes, blond hair, tall bodies and long heads, the people ofnorthern Germany will appear partly similar to the Swed-ish type, partly distinct; while to the North German itwill rather seem that in the northern country the distribu-tion of individual forms is different from that prevailing athome. In Sweden the light, tall, blond individuals withwhose appearance the German is quite familiar, are morenumerous than in his home country, the darker ones arerarer.

According to our familiarity with the bodily forms foundin various localities, we are apt to establish these as definiteconcepts according to which we classify the great varietyof human types. We pursue the same process in the classi-fication of our general experiences, which always dependsupon the character of our previous impressions, and onlyto a lesser extent upon objective characteristics. The naiveclassification of human types does not represent a group-ing according to biological principles, but is based on sub-jective attitudes.

Nevertheless there is a tendency to give biological realityto classifications arrived at quite irrationally and depend-ent upon previous individual experiences. Thus it hap-pens that we claim mixed descent for a population thatcontains a number of types which have been conceptual-


53/306

THE COMPOSITION OF HUMAN RACES 37ized. This is the case, for instance, in southeastern Norwaywhere an unusually large number of brunettes live. Bythe same procedure it has been claimed that the PuebloIndian population consists of Pueblo, Navaho and Utetypes. In these cases a composite descent is possible, butit cannot be proved satisfactorily by the identification ofindividuals with types abstracted from previous observa-tions in other localities.We must bear in mind that groups impressing us as aconglomerate of different conceptualized types may actu-ally be of common descent, and that others appearing tous as representatives of one type may include groups ofdistinct origin.A race must not be identified with a subjectively es-tablished type but must be conceived as a biological unit,as a population derived from a common ancestry and byvirtue of its descent endowed with definite biological char-acteristics. To a certain extent these may be unstable,because subject to a multitude of outer influences, for thebiological character of the genealogical group finds ex-pression in the way in which the body is shaped undervarying conditions of life.The difficulties that we find in defining races is due tothe variability of local forms. The similarities of forms in-

habiting contiguous areas make it necessary to defineclearly what we mean when we speak of racial character-istics and of differences between races.

This problem confronts us in the study of man just inthe same way as we encounter it in the study of animalsand plants. It is easy to describe what distinguishes a lionfrom a mouse. It is almost as easy to give a satisfactorydescription that enables us to distinguish the type of theSwede from the type of the Central African Negro. It is,however, difficult to give a satisfactory description that


54/306

38 THE MIND OF PRIMITIVE MANwill set off a Swede against a North German, or a lion ofNorth Africa against a lion from Rhodesia. The reason isclear. Not all Swedes are alike, and some cannot be dis-tinguished from North Germans, and the same is true oflions of different localities. The variability of each groupis considerable, and if we want to know what a Swede iswe must know all the different forms that may be foundamong the descendants of a group of pure Swedes.Among the Swedes of our present period some are tall,some short; the hair is blond or dark, straight or wavy; theeyes vary from brown to blue; the complexion is light ordark; the face more or less delicate. So it is with theNegroes: The degree of darkness of skin; the amount ofprojection of the teeth; the flatness of the nose; the frizzli-ness of the hair all these traits show a considerable de-gree of variability. When we compare these two distincttypes they appear to us fundamentally different notwith-standing their variability. Certain human types are thussharply set off from others, as the Negro by his frizzly hairfrom the straight-haired Mongol; the Armenian by hisnarrow nose from the flat-nosed Negro; the Australian byhis pigmentation from the rosy-hued Scandinavian. Onthe other hand, when we compare contiguous groups, likethe Swedes and North Germans, or the Negroes of theCameroons with those of the Upper Congo, we find essen-tially the same range of individual forms, but each occur-ring with a different frequency in each area. Those formswhich are frequent in one district may be more or less rarein the other.

It is a characteristic feature of all living beings that in-dividuals descended from the same ancestors are not iden-tical, but differ among themselves more or less, not onlyin outer form but also in details of structure and in chem-ical characteristics. Brothers and sisters are not alike in


55/306

THE COMPOSITION OF HUMAN RAGES 39bodily form; the chemical composition of the blood may bequite different.W. Johannsen studied the descendants of self-fertilizedbeans. Since all had an identical ancestry we might be in-

clined to suppose that they all would be alike. All thebeans he measured were descendants of a single bean raisedin 1900 and belonged to the third generation which wasraised in 1903. The length of these beans varied from 10to 17 mm. 1 The distribution of sizes in per cent of theirfrequency is interesting.Length in mm. 10-11 11-12 12-13 13-14 14-15 15-16 16-17

0.4 1.4 4.7 21.3 45.2 25.2 1.8

The reason for these variations is easily understood.There are so many uncontrollable conditions that influ-ence the development of the organism that even with iden-tical ancestry the same form and size cannot always beexpected. If we could control all the conditions beginningwith the formation of the sex cells and following throughfertilization and growth, and if we could make all of theseuniform, then we should, of course, expect the same resultin every case.We are dealing here with the fundamental differencebetween a constant and a variable phenomenon whichmust be clearly held in mind if we want to understand themeaning of the term race.Wherever we are in a position to control a phenomenoncompletely we can also give a complete definition. To givean example: A cubic centimeter of pure water at its great-est density may be considered as completely defined. Itssize, composition and density are known and we supposethat there is nothing to prevent our preparing a cubic cen-timeter of pure water at greatest density whenever we

1 Johannsen, p. 174.


56/306

40 THE MIND OF PRIMITIVE MANmight wish to do so, and since it is completely defined,since nothing remains uncertain in regard to its character,we expect the same results when we study its characteris-tics. The weight of this quantity of pure water at greatestdensity is expected to be the same every single time it isweighed at the same place, and in case it should not be thesame we should suppose that an error had been made, inregard to the size, purity or density. If we are less accu-rate in our definition and ask simply for the characteristicsof one cubic centimeter of water, there will be uncontrolledconditions of temperature and purity that bring it aboutthat the water will not behave always in just the same way ;and the more numerous the uncontrolled conditions themore variable may be the behavior of the samples. How-ever, the water will not behave like mercury or oil, andtherefore within certain limits we may still define its char-acteristics that are determined because we are dealing withmore or less pure water. We may say that the sample thatwe are studying is a representative of a class of objectsthat have certain characteristics in common but whichdiffer among themselves in minor respects. These differ-ences will be the greater the more uncontrolled conditionsare present.Exactly the same conditions prevail in every incom-pletely defined phenomenon. The samples are not alwaysthe same. A study of the frequency of occurrences of eachparticular form belonging to the class shows that they aredistributed in a regular way characteristic of the class. Adifferent distribution indicates that we are dealing withanother set of circumstances, with another class. Anaccurate description of any variable phenomenon musttherefore consist in an enumeration of the frequency dis-tribution of the characteristics of the individuals that com-pose the class.


57/306

THE COMPOSITION OF HUMAN RACES 41To give only one example: The temperature of a given

date at noon in New York is never the same in successiveyears. Still if we note the temperature of that particularday year after year we find that the same temperaturesoccur with definite frequency, and the distribution of thesefrequencies characterizes the temperature of the dayselected.

It is just the same with animal forms. It does not matterwhether we believe the cause of variation to be due to vary-ing combinations of genetic elements or to accidental con-ditions of other kinds, it is certain that a very large num-ber of uncontrolled and uncontrollable elements influencedevelopment and that the general class characteristics willappear modified in one way or another in each individual.The description of the class requires an enumeration of thefrequency of each form and we cannot expect sameness ofform in all the individuals composing the group.

Let us suppose now that we are familiar with two dis-tinct individual human forms that have impressed them-selves forcibly upon our rninds, perhaps one tall and long-headed, the other short and round-headed. We now becomefamiliar with a variable type in which individuals of bothtypes occur. Then we shall be inclined to claim that wefind a type composed of two races. We forget that weare perhaps dealing with a type that may vary so muchthat both forms which stand out as distinct in our mindsoccur here. Before concluding that we are actually dealingwith two distinct types we ought to prove that the an-cestral forms do not vary in such a way that both formsmight have developed from the same single uniform an-cestry. In other words, in a cautious study of racial char-acteristics we must begin with a description of local formsas they appear to us. We must describe the frequency ofthe various forms that occur in each local or social unit.


58/306

42 THE MIND OF PRIMITIVE MANAfter this has been done we may ask ourselves whether thevariations are due to varying internal organic conditions drwhether we are dealing with a mixed population in whichgenetically distinct types occur. In some cases a carefulanalysis of the interrelations of measurements makes itpossible to answer this question (Boas 4).The preliminary work, namely the description of types,must therefore be an enumeration of the frequencies ofindividuals of distinctive forms.

In a study of racial distributions it will be necessaryfirst of all to determine whether the groups investigatedare identical or not. Our previous consideration shows thatsameness of two racial groups can be claimed only if thefrequency distribution of forms is identical. If the relativefrequency of the same form is not the same in the twoseries, then there must be certain unknown causes whichdifferentiate the two groups that we are comparing. If wefind that among 6687 young Italians born in Sardinia3.9 and among 5328 born in Udine 8.2 have a statureof 167 cm. we must conclude that the two populations arenot identical. Conversely we may say that if two popula-tions agree in the frequency distribution of numerousforms, that they are probably identical. This conclusionis not quite as binding as the one from which we concludediversity, because two populations may have the same dis-tribution without being identical, and because other traits,not examined, may show differences in distribution.

It would be very difficult to describe accurately popula-tions in the manner here indicated if the frequency dis-tributions in each group followed different laws. It has,however, been shown that in a great many cases the typeof frequency distribution is very much alike. Even a cur-sory examination of forms shows that extreme aberranttypes are rare and that the mass of the population is fairly


59/306

THE COMPOSITION OF HUMAN RACES 43uniform. Extremely tall and extremely short persons arenot common, while an average stature occurs frequently.Thus among the Scotch statures around 172 cm. are nu-merous; 20 of all Scotchmen have statures between 171and 173 cm. Only 1 are shorter than 159 cm. and only1 are taller than 187 cm. Among Sicilians 28 measuredbetween 164 and 168 cm. and only 1.2 were shorter than152 cm. and 5 taller than 180 cm. 1 The massing aroundthe middle in each group is one of the causes that gives usa strong impression of a type in those cases in which we aredealing with measurements. When we isolate a strikingform such as a Roman nose or an upturned nose, or strik-ing hair-colors such as blond or black, or blue and browneye-colors, these forms may not prevail, but neverthelesswe find ourselves inclined to classify the frequent inter-mediate forms and colors with the extremes that havebeen conceptualized in our minds.The empirical study of frequency distributions hasshown that we can predict with reasonable accuracy thefrequency of any form, provided we know certain easilydetermined values.The general type of distribution is shown in Fig. 1, in

which points on the horizontal line represent the numerical

FIG. 1values of an observation stature, weight or any othermetrical value while the vertical distances between the

1 Boas 6: p. 356; pp. 274-276.


60/306

44 THE MIND OF PRIMITIVE MANhorizontal line and the curve represent the frequency ofthat observation to which the vertical distance belongs.The curve representing the distribution of variables willbe the more contracted laterally and the higher in the mid-

dle the more uniform the series, and conversely, the moreexpanded laterally and the flatter in the middle, the morevariable the series. In Fig. 2 two such curves are repre-

FIG. 2sented which show two overlapping phenomena. It will benoticed that those observations that are in the area com-mon to both curves may belong to either group.A series is the more variable the more frequentlystrongly deviating types occur. If we determine therefore,the average type and the range of varying forms, we havea measure of the most frequent type and of the degree ofits variability. An example will illustrate what is meant.The frequencies of statures on the facing page were ob-served among 3975 boys 6 years old and 2518 boys 14^years old.

This table shows that in a given population boys 14^years of age are more variable than boys 6^ years of age,and we may express this by figures. We determine theaverage for each group by adding all t

Documents

the Mind of Primitive Man Classic Reprint