The observation has often been made that too great uniformity of work impedes the development of individual characters in physical appearance. In savage communities, where the division of labour is almost unknown, all men must necessarily be more or less like one another.[305] Especially if the home of the tribe be some closely defined area of uniform climatic conditions, there will be within the tribe almost no material for selection. Where endogamic marriage prevails, the conception “lover,” which is transmitted from mother to daughter, and which, by “objective heredity,” becomes imprinted on the mind of every girl that grows up in this narrow milieu, must therefore be one with a very restricted content. Alongside of this increasing predilection for a fixed and narrowly circumscribed type of the opposite sex there will, as its complementary feeling, develop a strong antipathy to every feature that diverges from this type. For the evolution of national ideals this negative influence has been of perhaps even greater importance than the positive preferences.
It is evident that strictly endogamous marriage customs could never be upheld in tribes which have any intercourse with their neighbours if the social institution were not supported by a real psychological aversion to outsiders. It has therefore been congruous with the advantages of society to promote in the youth the feeling that any man or woman outside the tribe is a being with whom no emotional exchange is to be thought of. To make this feeling possible, on the other hand, it is necessary that everything which is connected with the foreigner should be held up to contempt. Their dress, their language, their manners, and so on, have thus been considered as something to be kept at a distance. It is needless to point out that marriage systems are not alone responsible for the development of this feeling. Religious differences, so important in primitive communities, have undoubtedly often given rise to the common notion that people outside one’s own tribe do not, properly speaking, belong to the human species. Continual war induces a feeling of contempt, which in the stronger tribe is mingled with pride and in the weaker with bitterness, and which in both cases extends to the smallest details of physical appearance and behaviour. And apart from all regard to these social causes, the primitive man, in civilised as well as in savage nations, is always apt to look upon everything unusual with a feeling of scornful disdain. No doubt such a disdain can even be coincident with exogamous marriage customs. But it seems evident that it must everywhere have strongly influenced sexual selection during those unknown endogamic periods in which the racial and tribal differences were developed and fixed.[306] And it may even now be observed among living tribes of man to how great a degree antipathy to every detail in the outward appearance of foreigners precludes union between members of different tribes. The national and parochial dresses of modern peasants no doubt exercise a great influence on the love-life of the respective boys and girls. The most telling example that could be quoted in this connection is the case of Savakot and Äyrämäiset in Eastern Finland. When examining a Savakko youth as to the reason why none of his tribe had ever chosen a wife from among their neighbours, Ahlqvist[307] received the characteristic answer: “Se kuin on heillä Äyrämäisillä niin hirveä vaatteen manieri niin siihen ei meidän pojat uskalla puuttua”—that is, As these Äyrämä girls have such horrid dresses, our boys do not dare to approach them.
This instance, although it is one of modern times and refers to relatively civilised individuals, can no doubt be considered as illustrative with regard to the distinguishing marks and dresses of primitive men. The outward signs of the tribe not only exercise a strong attraction upon all its members; they are also for outsiders associated with a repugnance which is perhaps equally strong. In the same way as it has been advantageous for the young of both sexes to have an appearance which appeals as powerfully as possible to the instinctive predilections of the opposite sex, it has been necessary for them not to exhibit qualities which could be confounded with those of the alien. The individual who endeavours to attract attention for his person by a conspicuous and extravagant appearance is, therefore, narrowly restricted within the boundaries prescribed by tribal sympathies and antipathies. The safest expedient by which to distinguish himself from others without outraging the national idea is, therefore, that of exaggerating the common characteristics of the tribe.
These theoretical reasonings can be amply corroborated by ethnological facts. As early as 1814 Humboldt observed and commented upon the fact that the deformations which appear most arbitrary generally only tend to carry into excess some natural peculiarity of the tribe.[308] And since his time, numerous instances have been adduced in the ethnological literature, all pointing in the same direction. In the case of people who blacken their teeth it has been remarked that the dental enamel is naturally darker than usual; where heads are artificially deformed, it is found that there exists a general disposition to develop pointed or flat crania; where the hair-growth is scanty, baldness is artificially produced; and so forth.[309] By exaggerating and accentuating in their own appearance the common qualities of the tribe, the individual males or females have thus created a more and more differentiated tribal type. And the inherited predilections and aversions of the opposite sex have, on the other hand, by continuously influencing positive and negative choice, contributed to the fixing of these types as tribal ideals, not of beauty, but of sexual attractiveness.
CHAPTER XVI
THE ORIGINS OF SELF-DECORATION
It is evident, as might be proved by more numerous and detailed references than it has been possible to adduce above, that precisely such bodily deformations, such systems of distinguishing ornament, and such conspicuous articles of clothing and decoration as are most generally found among both the primitive and the cultivated tribes of mankind have been of especial importance as means of sexual attraction. Nothing could be more natural, therefore, than to explain the various forms of cosmetics as so many endeavours to work upon the preferences—whether arising from the æsthetic sense or from associated ideas of sexual excitement—of the opposite sex. Such an explanation, moreover, derives support from the assertion of the primitives themselves, who often positively state that they dress and array themselves for the purpose of winning the love of their women. And it has on its side the merits of simplicity and unity. By bringing together under one head all the different forms of self-decorative art it disentangles the different questions of primitive æsthetics in a most plausible manner.
However alluring this uniform explanation may be for lovers of clearness and theoretical consistency, it must nevertheless be abandoned upon an impartial examination of the ethnological facts. It is no doubt conceivable that a more or less conscious desire of acquiring the favour of the opposite sex should have called forth all the various means of attraction. As was shown above, they could in such a case have scarcely developed a more effectual conformation than they really have done. But from the effect we are not entitled to draw any conclusion as to the intention. When considering all the various motives, often almost incomprehensible to the civilised mind, which govern the activities of primitive man, one loses the confidence that is necessary in order to accept any general explanation, however probable it may seem. A careful and impartial examination can only lead to the result that scarcely any form of dress or ornament can be quoted which could be considered with certainty as an outcome of the impulse to attract and charm the opposite sex.
To begin with the class which stands in the closest connection with sexual life, we have already shown that all the various coverings by which primitive man conceals his nakedness, by attracting the attention are likely to produce a sort of sexual stimulation in the primitive spectator.[310] In some cases,—for instance that of the dancing girdles, which are especially put on for the occasion of erotic dances and festivals,—this stimulation is evidently intentional.[311] But it seems impossible to assume that a knowledge of this effect can have been the motive for the use of those phallocrypts which are worn by the Amaxosas in South Africa, by the natives of Central Brazil, by the Melanesians in the Admiralty Islands and on the north-western and south-western coasts of New Guinea, by the Australians of north-western Central Queensland, and by the Polynesians of the Marquesas Islands.[312] As far as we know, it is only in Australia that these things are especially employed at corroborees and public rejoicings.[313] Nor is there anything that could attract the eye in all the simple bamboo sheets that can be seen at the Museum für Völkerkunde in Berlin. In some cases they have perhaps been worn for the purely practical purpose of protecting a sensitive part against insect bites.[314] But it seems more probable, on an examination of their shape, that they really are intended as means of concealment in the proper meaning of the word. There is of course no reason why they should not be considered as fulfilling the requirements of modesty. But even if such be their purpose now, it is difficult to assume that they were originally called into existence by a feeling which, from the evolutionist point of view, one rather would consider as a product of clothes than as their cause.[315]
This difficulty, however, is easily avoided by reference to another feeling which in psychical evolution has probably preceded the appearance of modesty. It is perhaps impossible to decide at what stage sexual life began to be surrounded with feelings of shame,—in other words, in what instances one is entitled to speak of modesty and conscious chastity. But there is no doubt that even among the lowest savages the facts of generation are regarded with a wonder which sometimes approaches awe, and sometimes rises to religious respect.[316] Since at a somewhat higher degree of development phallic symbols occupy so dominant a place in religious systems, it is only natural to suppose that the realities represented by these symbols have been regarded by the primitive with superstitious feelings. It is probable, therefore, that there are many primitive tribes which, in the same way as the aborigines of the New Hebrides, cover themselves in the most scrupulous manner, “not at all from a sense of decency, but to avoid Narak, i.e. magic influence,” the sight even of another man’s nakedness being considered as most dangerous.[317] The large prevalence of phallic motives in amulets and magically protecting paintings,[318] the supposed effective sorcery of indecent gestures, so widely used even now by the modern Italians,[319] indicate that the organs of generation have been universally considered as the seat of a powerful and dangerous magic. Perhaps this superstitious idea has even been the original source of the notion that exposure involves the gravest offence against the honour of the beholder.[320] Sometimes, on the other hand, dread of this supposed mysterious power may have prompted the evolution of moral institutions, and thus indirectly furthered the moral feelings. But it is evident that even before any such transformation took place regard for public safety may have induced the males to conceal the seat of so dangerous an influence.
The reproductive organs, however, are not only, in virtue of their connection with the mysterious miracle of life, objects of superstitious awe: they themselves, owing to the same consideration, need more than anything else to be protected against dangerous influences. Fear of the evil eye has thus, as Ratzel suggests, had something to do with the origin of male and female dress.[321] And the notion of malignant looks is only one of the superstitions that keep the savage man in a state of constant fear. All the innumerable spirits that populate his atmosphere constitute so many dangers, against which he has to protect himself by every possible means. This necessity is probably even greater for the female sex than for the men.