The human species

by A. de Quatrefages

We ought, perhaps, to refer to the idea of property the manner in which adultery is regarded by some peoples. In countries where the woman may be bought, it is evidently a violation of the rights of the proprietor. Nevertheless, even amongst the most savage tribes, a more elevated feeling, and one which is connected with moral or social ideas, as we ourselves understand them, may be proved, often in the clearest manner. The gravity of the punishment incurred by the culprit scarcely permits of a doubt that it is so. The Australian, uncorrupted by the vicinity of the White and brandy, never forgives one who has destroyed the purity of his wife, and kills him on the first occasion. With the Hottentots, death again is the punishment for adultery. It is the custom among the Negroes of the Gold Coast for the culprit, as a general rule, to make an arrangement with the injured party, if it is a question of one of the women of the third order, who are merely concubines. But if it is a question of the great wife or the Fetish wife, then death, or at least the ruin of the culprit, will alone suffice to avenge the injury.

Yet Negresses are not Penelopes. I do not for a moment think of challenging the unanimous evidence of travellers on this point, and the husbands, as we have just remarked, do not always invoke the rigour of the local code. What may we legitimately infer from this fact? Merely that the customs and the law of these races are at variance. But is it not often so amongst ourselves. Is adultery practised with impunity only among Negroes? Do complaisant husbands exist only among Australians?

IV. Respect for human life is universal. The murderer is everywhere punished. But, amongst ourselves, murder supposes certain conditions. In spite of the law, he who kills his adversary in a fair duel is regarded by no one as a murderer; he who kills or causes the death of a great number of enemies in pitched battle is a hero.

With the savage the formula is still more elastic. As I have just remarked, he regards a stranger in almost every case as an enemy, and to kill him is no crime; it is often a title of honour. Moreover, among the greater number of savage or barbarous peoples, blood demands blood, and for vengeance to be complete, it is not necessary that the true culprit should be overtaken. Every individual of the same family, tribe, or nation, can, and must pay for his crime if occasion offers. When Takouri treacherously massacred Captain Marion du Fresne and his sixteen sailors, he only obeyed the laws of his country. He had avenged his relative Nagui Noui, treacherously carried off three years previously by Surville, who wished to punish the theft of a canoe. In this manner many Europeans have fallen victims to the misdeeds of their countrymen, and certain peoples have acquired an unmerited reputation for ferocity.

But let us remember that the Scotch and the Corsicans scarcely acted differently in their vendetta. With them, as with the Red-Skin, the Maori, and the Fijian, the blood of every member of the family or clan might atone for the blood spilt by another. Again, that which we now call wilful murder, was no more considered by the European as an act of cowardice or treason than it is by the savage. Let us remember, moreover, that in the Middle Ages, chiefs occupying the highest positions in European society, did not hesitate to act in this manner; let us remember that the commanders of our ships, when punishing savages for some attack, bombard and burn the first villages that they meet without any scruple, although they may be almost sure that many innocent will pay for the guilty; and perhaps we shall be less severe.

As to a want of respect for human life, the white European race cannot reproach the most barbarous. Let us look back upon our own history, and recall some of those wars, those pages written in letters of blood in our own annals. Let us not, above all, forget our conduct towards our inferior brethren; the depopulation which marks every step through the world; the massacres committed in cold blood, and often for amusement; the man-hunts organized after the manner of stag-hunts; the extermination of entire populations to make room for European colonies, and we shall be forced to acknowledge that if respect for human life is a moral and universal law, no race has violated it oftener, or in a more terrible manner than our own.

V. Modesty and sense of honour are undoubtedly two of the principal manifestations of self-respect. Neither the one nor the other are wanting among savage peoples. But the former, especially, often shows itself in customs and practices widely opposed to our own, or bearing no resemblance whatever to them. This has given rise to many misconceptions, such as that which, among certain Polynesians, has been considered as a refinement of immodest sensuality, what in their opinion is only an act of elementary modesty.

I might multiply examples of this nature, but for what purpose? Is it not the same in matters of politeness? We rise and uncover the head before a stranger or a superior; in a similar case the Turk remains covered, and the Polynesian sits down. Though differing so entirely in form, are they not inspired by the same sentiments? Is not the faculty by which they are called into play everywhere the same?

It is the same also with the sense of honour. Here, however, more than in any other case, we meet with conceptions remarkably in accordance with our own. The history of savage nations abounds with traits of warlike heroism, and nothing is more common than to see savages prefer torture and death to shame. The Algonquin and the Iroquois challenge their executioners to invent fresh tortures. The Kaffir chief asks as a favour to be thrown to the crocodiles rather than lose the feather, which to him represents the epaulette, and serve as a common soldier after having been an officer. The duel of the Australian is more logical than ours, and always in earnest.

That which we call chivalrous generosity in speaking of Europeans, is by no means wanting in savages. In the struggles at Tahiti several officers owed their lives to this feeling. After peace had been concluded, Admiral Bruat asked a Tahitian chief, to whose fire he had been exposed for an hour while he bathed, why he had not fired: “I should have been dishonoured in the eyes of my people if I had killed such a chief as you, naked, and by surprise,” replied the savage. Could the most civilized man have acted or spoken better?