THE NATURE of
the following work will be
best understood
by a brief account of how it
came to be written. During many
years I collected notes on the
origin or descent of man, without
any intention of publishing on
the subject, but rather with
the determination not to publish,
as I thought that I should thus
only add to the prejudices against
my views. It seemed to me sufficient
to indicate, in the first edition
of my Origin of Species, that
by this work "light would be
thrown on the origin of man and
his history"; and this implies
that man must be included with
other organic beings in any general
conclusion respecting his manner
of appearance on this earth.
Now the case wears a wholly different
aspect. When a naturalist like
Carl Vogt ventures to say in
his address as President of the
National Institution of Geneva
(1869), "personne, en Europe
au moins, n'ose plus soutenir
la creation independante et de
toutes
pieces, des especes," it is manifest that at least a large number of naturalists
must admit that species are the modified descendants of other species; and this
especially holds good with the younger and rising naturalists. The greater number
accept the agency of natural selection; though some urge, whether with justice
the future must decide, that I have greatly overrated its importance. Of the
older and honoured chiefs in natural science, many unfortunately are still opposed
to evolution in every form.
In consequence of the views
now adopted by most naturalists,
and which will ultimately, as
in every other case, be followed
by others who are not scientific,
I have been led to put together
my notes, so as to see how far
the general conclusions arrived
at in my former works were applicable
to man. This seemed all the more
desirable, as I had never deliberately
applied these views to a species
taken singly. When we confine
our attention to any one form,
we are deprived of the weighty
arguments derived from the nature
of the affinities which connect
together whole groups of organisms-
their geographical distribution
in past and present times, and
their geological succession.
The homological structure, embryological
development, and rudimentary
organs of a species remain to
be considered, whether it be
man or any other animal, to which
our attention may be directed;
but these great classes of facts
afford, as it appears to me,
ample and conclusive evidence
in favour of the principle of
gradual evolution. The strong
support derived from the other
arguments should, however, always
be kept before the mind.
The sole object of this work
is to consider, firstly, whether
man, like every other species,
is descended from some pre-existing
form; secondly, the manner of
his development; and thirdly,
the value of the differences
between the so-called races of
man. As I shall confine myself
to these points, it will not
be necessary to describe in detail
the differences between the several
races- an enormous subject which
has been fully discussed in many
valuable works. The high antiquity
of man has recently been demonstrated
by the labours of a host of eminent
men, beginning with M. Boucher
de Perthes; and this is the indispensable
basis for understanding his origin.
I shall, therefore, take this
conclusion for granted, and may
refer my readers to the admirable
treatises of Sir Charles Lyell,
Sir John Lubbock, and others.
Nor shall I have occasion to
do more than to allude to the
amount of difference between
man and the anthropomorphous
apes; for Prof. Huxley, in the
opinion of most competent judges,
has conclusively shewn that in
every visible character man differs
less from the higher apes, than
these do from the lower members
of the same order of primates.
This work contains
hardly any original facts in
regard to man;
but as the conclusions at which
I arrived, after drawing up a
rough draft, appeared to me interesting,
I thought that they might interest
others. It has often and confidently
been asserted, that man's origin
can never be known: but ignorance
more frequently begets confidence
than does knowledge: it is those
who know little, and not those
who know much, who so positively
assert that this or that problem
will never be solved by science.
The conclusion that man is the
co-descendant with other species
of some ancient, lower, and extinct
form, is not in any degree new.
Lamarck long ago came to this
conclusion, which has lately
been maintained by several eminent
naturalists and philosophers;
for instance, by Wallace, Huxley,
Lyell, Vogt, Lubbock, Buchner,
Rolle, &c.,* and especially by
Haeckel. This last naturalist,
besides his great work, Generelle
Morphologie (1866), has recently
(1868, with a second edit. in
1870), published his Naturliche
Schopfungsgeschichte, in which
he fully discusses the genealogy
of man. If this work had appeared
before my essay had been written,
I should probably never have
completed it. Almost all the
conclusions at which I have arrived
I find confirmed by this naturalist,
whose knowledge on many points
is much fuller than mine. Wherever
I have added any fact or view
from Prof. Haeckel's writings,
I give his authority in the text;
other statements I leave as they
originally stood in my manuscript,
occasionally giving in the foot-notes
references to his works, as a
confirmation of the more doubtful
or interesting points.
* As the works
of the first-named authors
are so well known, I
need not give the titles; but
as those of the latter are less
well known in England, I will
give them:- Sechs Vorlesungen
uberdie Darwin'sche Theorie:
zweite Auflage, 1868, von Dr.
L. Buchner; translated into French
under the title Conferences sur
la Theorie Darwinienne, 1869.
Der Mensch, im Lichte der Darwin'schen
Lehre, 1865, von Dr. F. Rolle.
I will not attempt to give references
to all the authors who have taken
the same side of the question.
Thus G. Canestrini has published
(Annuario della Soc. dei Naturalisti,
Modena, 1867, p. 81) a very curious
paper on rudimentary characters,
as bearing on the origin of man.
Another work has (1869) been
published by Dr. Francesco Barrago,
bearing in Italian the title
of "Man, made in the image of
God, was also made in the image
of the ape."
During many years it has seemed
to me highly probable that sexual
selection has played an important
part in differentiating the races
of man; but in my Origin of Species
I contented myself by merely
alluding to this belief. When
I came to apply this view to
man, I found it indispensable
to treat the whole subject in
full detail.* Consequently the
second part of the present work,
treating of sexual selection,
has extended to an inordinate
length, compared with the first
part; but this could not be avoided.
* Prof. Haeckel was the only
author who, at the time when
this work first appeared, had
discussed the subject of sexual
selection, and had seen its full
importance, since the publication
of the Origin; and this he did
in a very able manner in his
various works.
I had intended adding to the
present volumes an essay on the
expression of the various emotions
by man and the lower animals.
My attention was called to this
subject many years ago by Sir
Charles Bell's admirable work.
This illustrious anatomist maintains
that man is endowed with certain
muscles solely for the sake of
expressing his emotions. As this
view is obviously opposed to
the belief that man is descended
from some other and lower form,
it was necessary for me to consider
it. I likewise wished to ascertain
how far the emotions are expressed
in the same manner by the different
races of man. But owing to the
length of the present work, I
have thought it better to reserve
my essay for separate publication.
PART ONE
DESCENT OR ORIGIN OF MAN |