Hutchinson’s
Nature
Library

THE COURTSHIP OF ANIMALS

Plate 1.

LOVE-MAKING.

Frontispiece.

Courtship of Animals

BY
W. P. PYCRAFT
OF THE
ZOOLOGICAL DEPARTMENT OF THE BRITISH MUSEUM:
FELLOW OF THE ZOOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF LONDON;
ASSOCIATE OF THE LINNEAN SOCIETY: MEMBER
OF THE ROYAL ANTHROPOLOGICAL INSTITUTE;
MEMBER OF THE BRITISH
ORNITHOLOGISTS’ UNION; HON.
MEMBER OF THE AMERICAN
ORNITHOLOGISTS’ UNION;
ETC., ETC.
Author of “A History of Birds,” “The Natural History Museum,”
“Pads, Paws and Claws,” “The Infancy of Animals,”
etc., etc., etc.
With 40 Plates on art paper
Containing over 80 Illustrations
THIRD EDITION
LONDON
HUTCHINSON & CO.
PATERNOSTER ROW

I DEDICATE THIS VOLUME
TO
H. ELIOT HOWARD
WHOSE OBSERVATIONS OF
THE COURTSHIP OF BIRDS
RECORDED IN HIS “HISTORY
OF THE BRITISH WARBLERS”
CONSTITUTE A BEACON FOR
ALL ENGAGED IN THE STUDY
OF ANIMAL BEHAVIOUR

PREFACE

That “one touch of Nature which makes the whole World kin” is surely nowhere more obvious than in the “Courtship” of Animals. For the “Beasts that Perish,” no less than Man himself, are stirred by the same emotions; the Fever of Love runs as high in them as in ourselves; and its modes of expression are not so different, though they may superficially appear to be so. The nature of these differences and their interpretation, it is the purpose of this book to set forth.

Charles Darwin laid the foundation for the study of this phase of Animal behaviour in his masterly work on the “Descent of Man,” a work which has been much criticized and much misunderstood since Carlyle’s crude abuse of it as the “Gospel of Dirt.” Darwin was the first to show us that the fierce battles, and strange antics, which characterize so many of the “Lower Orders of Creation” under the exaltation of the Sexual emotions are manifestations fraught with tremendous consequences to the race.

The facts which he brought to light, and the discussions to which they have given rise, have, however, unfortunately been too commonly regarded as merely interesting to those who have a liking for Natural History.

This is a most unfortunate mistake. For such facts have a vitally important bearing on the very problems of social well-being which now loom so largely among us. “Reform” is in the air. Its protagonists are busy amongst us with schemes for our regeneration, among which “Sex-problems” are made to occupy a very conspicuous place. But no good can come of their cogitations so long as they fail to realize the springs of behaviour in this regard. The facts herein set down will, it is hoped, help much towards this end.

My labours in the preparation of these pages have been materially lightened by the help and counsel of many friends. To them I desire now to record my very grateful thanks. More especially am I indebted to my friends Mr. H. Eliot Howard, Professor Lloyd Morgan and Mr. John Cooke.

I must also thank those who have contributed towards the illustrations which enliven these pages. The delightful Frontispiece, and many of the plates scattered through this work, I owe to the generosity of Messrs. Rowland Ward, Limited. The excellent rendering of the Birds of Paradise adapted in part from the work of Mr. G. E. Lodge and the late J. G. Keulemans, and partly drawn from specimens in the British Museum, is the work of Mr. Roland Green. The very difficult, and less fascinating, technical figures I owe to the skill of Mr. Philip Whelpley. The wonderful photographs illustrating the “Display” of the Sun-bittern and the Kagu were taken by my friend Mr. D. Seth-Smith.

Finally I have to thank Mr. Roger Ingpen for the immense amount of trouble which he has taken in seeing these pages through the press.

W. P. Pycraft.

October, 1913.

CONTENTS

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

THE COURTSHIP OF ANIMALS

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

The nature of Life and its power of reproduction—The stuff of which Life is made—The Emotions—The simplest living things—Where is neither Birth nor Death yet the Population increases—The First Marriage—The beginning of sex—The two dominating instincts—The conditions of survival—The Oyster’s narrow world—“Fiddling work”—Amorousness—The superior Male—Where Death begins—“Germ-plasm” and what it means—Sex and “Secondary sexual Characters”—Some theories—“Hormones” what are they?

The nature of life is generally regarded as affording a theme which possesses no more than an academic interest: but there is one aspect of this great subject which must attract us all, and that is its power of reproducing itself. Life begets Life, as Love is said to beget Love. The nature of this mysterious power we can only dimly realize, and the forces which underlie its manifestations few even suspect, save perhaps in a vague way. Yet the tree of Knowledge bears no fruit more vitally important to our well-being, than that which will make us “as Gods, knowing good and evil” in all that concerns the processes of reproduction. But curiously enough, this is a forbidden fruit, and those who eat thereof are expected to maintain a discreet silence on the subject. These enlightened ones, however, cannot remain altogether dumb. But they speak, in the veiled language, of Art and Poetry, Literature and the Drama. They talk round the subject rather than of it. Love, Hate, Jealousy, and Envy, are but attributes thereof. We profess to believe that “Knowledge is Power” and to desire to increase its force among us by raising the standard of our system of education. But education which does not, of set purpose, reveal the sources of our being and of our emotions, good and evil, is no more than a travesty of education; and they who seek to foist upon the community Knowledge thus emasculated, are unworthy to wield the power which has been placed in their hands. If social well-being be the aim of the high-priests of Education, then something more than copybook maxims like “Be good and you will be happy” must henceforth be preached. Of what avail is it to exalt the name of Knowledge, while the straightest road thereto is barred across and marked “No thoroughfare!” These blind leaders of the blind seem to imagine that the social well-being they profess to desire can only be attained by side roads, leading anywhere, save in the direction of this Pool of Siloam.

The stuff of which living things are made is called “Protoplasm.” Text-books of Physiology give its chemical constituents with fearsome accuracy, and each of these constituents can be isolated in the laboratory, but “all the king’s horses and all the king’s men” cannot build these up again into living matter. Its consistent inconsistency defies us; every statement we make of it has to be qualified by reservations and saving clauses. Its permanency is attested by the fact that it has endured through millions of years, yet we are daily reminded of its evanescent nature. Its power of reproducing itself according to type, none can doubt, yet no two individuals are exactly alike.

The purely physical phenomena of life, to be rightly appreciated, must always be considered in relation to the psychical phenomena which are the soul of life. These subtle and intangible forces cannot be experimented with in the laboratory, or expressed in formulæ; we cannot denote their strength in horse-power. Just as the physical manifestations of life begin with lowly types, so the psychical begin, and they gather strength and complexity with the bodies they pervade. These manifestations we call behaviour, and in their more intense developments, “emotions.”

These emotions present an infinite range of variety in the higher animals, and they attain their maximum of intensity wherever the reproductive activities are concerned. The part which these activities play in controlling behaviour is by no means always apparent, and is commonly not even suspected. Even man himself is subject to this control. And it is this fact which lifts the “Courtship” of the lower animals out of the category of merely curious phenomena. For the springs of his conduct, his behaviour and “emotions” under varying circumstances, can only be understood, and even then but imperfectly, by comparison with other creatures lower in the scale, so far, of course, as comparison is possible.

This line of inquiry, then, takes one back to the simplest living things, among which there is neither marrying nor giving in marriage, neither birth nor death. Life is reduced to its simplest terms—a speck of animated jelly is all that confronts one, and this is only to be seen under a high power of the microscope. It has neither mouth nor organs of digestion, no visible means of locomotion are traceable, and the special senses of sight and hearing are wanting; but taste and smell, of a nebulous kind, are there. Shape it cannot be said to have, for its bodily outline is constantly changing, thereby it moves. A long tongue of its jelly-like substance, or “protoplasm” as it is called, is thrust forwards, and the rest of the body is, as it were, dragged after it. Whatever animal, or vegetable, matter it passes over, in the course of its wanderings, is drawn up into the semi-fluid substance of this diaphanous body, and its juices extracted, the undigestible residue is left behind in the course of the morning’s walk! In due time it becomes adult; further growth is impossible. When this stage is attained a strange thing happens. A certain minute, more solid portion of this body, which lies in the very centre of the mass and is known as the “nucleus,” begins to assume an hour-glass shape. Speedily the constriction becomes apparent across the whole body and rapidly increasing, cuts it in two, as if by the tightening of some invisible thread. Here Death is cheated, and records of births are unknown! And just as there are no parents so there are no children. But a foreshadowing of what is to be occurs even here. For every now and then two individuals, to all appearances identical, meet and promptly begin to merge the one into the other till they twain become one flesh in very truth. Here is the most primitive form of marriage in Nature. And here, in this union, or fusion, of separate entities of Germ-plasm, we have the beginning of sex. Such unions are common among these primeval forms of life. In many cases this “marriage” takes place between two particles of Protoplasm of which one is rather larger than the other. In such case the smaller is regarded as male, the larger as female. Here we have the first sign of “sexual differentiation” or the evolution of “male” and “female” individuals.

Some such union, some such process of “rejuvenation” by the importation of “fresh blood” seems to be imperative for the continuance of existence throughout the whole animal world, even though it may take place at rare intervals of time. Why should this be? Is this strange meeting and commingling a matter of chance, or is the one seeking the other possessed by a ravenous mate-hunger?

As we ascend higher in the scale it becomes apparent that life has gathered force. That primitive speck of jelly, the Amœba, with which we started, gave but two signs of animation—the power of movement, and hunger. Whether these responses to internal stimuli can be called instinctive is open to argument. But there can be no question about the instinctive nature of the behaviour of these higher animals. After the instinct to feed the two most powerful are the desire for self-preservation—the avoidance of danger—and the desire to mate. These two are the dominating instincts throughout the rest of the animal world, not even excepting man himself.

The tremendous power of “mate-hunger” has been overlooked by a strange confusion between cause and effect. Almost universally its sequel, the production of offspring, has been regarded as the dominant instinct in the higher animals. This view has no foundation in fact. “Desire” for the sake of the pleasure it affords, and not its consequences, is the only hold on life which any race possesses. And this is true both in the case of man himself and of the beasts that perish. Wherever this instinct becomes weak, or defective, extinction speedily and inevitably follows. This “Amorousness” is the motive power of “Courtship” wherever it is met with; manifesting itself in the eccentric, and often grotesque posturings, or in the loud and often musical cries which constitute the study of courtship. Intensity of desire is indispensable to survival.

Only the lowly and sedentary types, of which the Oyster may be taken as an example, lack this fire; and here because it is unnecessary. For the reproductive germs of this animal are discharged into the water, to take their chance of attaining their object. They are liberated unconsciously, discharged like the undigested residue of the food, without effort, and without cognizance of the act. This must be so, for the Oyster merely lives—vegetates. Sightless, and without power of movement, after its larval wanderings are over, it lives merely to eat. And even in this, choice is denied it. The currents of water mechanically brought to afford the necessary oxygen for the maintenance of life, bring with them the food which is to restore the slowly wasting tissues. To such a creature there can be no “outer-world,” no consciousness of the existence of individuality other than its own.

The desire for sexual intercourse is met with only where the co-operation of two individuals is necessary to ensure the production of offspring. Such individuals being free to roam, must have some incentive to seek one another at the time when their germ-cells have attained maturity. And this incentive is furnished by the glands in which these elements are produced: supplemented by the secretions of certain ancillary glands. These stimulating juices, known as the “Hormones,” will be presently described.

But if we owe our existence to the gratification of what may be called our lower instincts, it is no less certain that all that is best in us we owe to our offspring. We meet with the beginnings of altruism, which the begetting of offspring entails, far down in the animal kingdom, and it attains to its full perfection in the human race. Here only, in its best and truest sense, Love begins: though affection may be found, and in a high degree, in many of the lower animals.

Living things are as clay in the hands of the potter. But it is as if they made themselves, for the designer and the guiding hand are alike invisible. No vessel is exactly like its neighbour, either in the quality of its substance or in the details of its construction. And this because the clay of which it is made possesses that mysterious property we call life. A property which endows each new feature as it appears, with an individuality of its own, whose survival, or suppression, depends entirely on its relationship to surrounding parts; on its harmony with its environment, in short. Colour, size, shape, temperament, behaviour, may each be regarded as so many entities depending for survival on whether or not they can exist in harmony with their environment—the several parts which make up what we call the individual.

In like manner the individual—the complex bundle of parts and qualities—must attain, and maintain, a certain harmony with its environment—the outer world. The process of change, both in quality and quantity, which is for ever going on among the several parts of every separate individual, brings about the elimination of unfavourable variations; and “selects” those which vary in the right direction: that is to say, which serve to maintain a place in the sun for the individual in which these momentous changes are going on. But it is not enough that the individual should be in “working order”; it must be in harmony with all the conditions on which existence depends. And the standard of this harmony is set by that very exacting arbiter of life and death, “Natural Selection.” It is not enough that the instincts in regard to this or that habit should be keen, or that this or that particular organ of the body should be efficient—a certain minimum, all-round, standard of efficiency is demanded, or elimination follows. It is through this instability of “temperament,” this tendency to vary in infinite directions, that the balance between the individual and the environment is maintained. Evolution follows the line of least resistance.

The little boy who remarked that it must be “fiddling work, making flies,” was more sage than he knew. The complex web of factors which even a fly represents are beyond the grasp of human understanding. But it is clear that the reproductive instincts, and the emotions they beget, have played, and play, a tremendous part in the evolution of the higher animals.

Those whose business it is, for one reason or another, to study these emotions know well that “mate-hunger” may be as ravenous as food-hunger, and that, exceptions apart, it is immensely more insistent in the males than in the females. But for this, reproduction in many species could not take place: for the sexes often live far apart, and mates are only to be won after desperate conflict with powerful rivals no less inflamed. Thus it is idle to speak of an equality between the sexes in this matter, in regard to the human race. Dogmatism, and the frequent repetition of pretty platitudes, will not alter what Nature has ordained. The failure to realize this is painfully obvious in the utterances of many who speak in the name of the newly-founded “Eugenics” society, which seeks the means to ensure the well-being of the race by the spread of a more intimate knowledge of this all-important subject. The existence of what Mr. Heape has recently called a “sex-antagonism” is beyond dispute, for the instincts of the male and female are fundamentally different. The male is dominated by the desire to gratify the sexual appetite; in the female this is counteracted by the stimulation of other instincts concerned with the cares of offspring.

Amorousness, then, is the dominant feature of the males among all animals: and this sex presents yet another characteristic which is to be borne in mind. In all that concerns the evolution of ornamental characters the male leads. In him we can trace the trend which evolution is taking; the female and young afford us the measure of the advance along the new line which has been taken. Why this should be is inexplicable. But sooner or later the females assume, or will assume, all the features originally possessed by their lords; and finally the young also follow suit. That is to say, the females and young tend to retain the ancestral characters. In the course of time the ability to develop new features by the male loses its impetus, and not till then, apparently, do the females, and still later, the young, begin to share his glory. These remarkable features are strikingly illustrated among the birds, as these pages will show.

Nature is nothing, if not perverse. And hence it happens that there are many exceptions to every rule which one formulates. Among the birds, for example, there are species wherein the rule that the female follows her mate in the acquisition of new characters is, so to speak, set aside. She follows a line of her own. This is true, at any rate, of superficial characters, such as coloration. By some curious change in her “metabolism,” as the conversion into living tissue of the substances taken as food is called, this coloration may attain a brilliance in no way inferior to that of the male, but strikingly different. The beautiful Orange Fruit-pigeon (Chrysoenas victor) furnishes a case in point, the male being of a gorgeous orange-yellow, the female of a no less vivid green. But the differences are not so great as they appear at first sight. For the male was originally green, and the female has thus but intensified the ancestral livery. Green, it should be remarked, of a more or less olive shade, always precedes yellow in development; and yellow may yield to red, but this order is never reversed. A no less striking case is that of the Upland Goose (Cloephaga magellanica), the male of which is pure white, while the female wears a livery of chestnut and brown. But so sharply are the colours defined that it would be difficult to say that one was of a higher order of coloration than the other. To what causes or factors are these departures due?

Reproduction in the simplest living things takes place by a simple division of the body into two as soon as its maximum size or adult condition has been attained. In such simple types the body consists only of a single “blob,” or particle, of jelly. But a new era began when large numbers of such particles, or “cells,” began to form coherent masses, different parts of the mass performing different work for the mutual benefit of the community. Some have come to form what we call the body, which is born, and in due course dies. Others are alone concerned with the task of reproduction. They are nourished by the body, and on attaining maturity, give rise to new bodies. These reproductive cells are excessively small. The male, or “sperm” cell, can only be distinguished under the highest powers of the microscope. The female cell, or “Ovum,” is always larger than the male, because, in addition to the germinal matter which it contains, it is furnished with a store of food in the shape of yolk. This accounts for the relatively enormous size of the egg of the hen. Within the hardened shell the germ develops into the chick, deriving food for its growth from this generous store. Where this yolk is limited in quantity the growing body is hastily fashioned, and launched forth into the world in the form of a “larva,” when it must forage for itself till it has attained its adult form. Or it is retained within the body of the mother until development is complete.

The reproductive cells are the bearers of the Germ-plasm, the stuff of which man and the beasts of the field alike are fashioned. Only a portion of this germ-plasm gives rise to a new body; the rest is, as it were, held over and stored within the new body to give rise to another in due course. That which produces the body we call the “Somatoplasm,” because it is the “plasm” or stuff of which the “Soma,” or body, is made. As to the nature of this Germ-plasm and its mysterious properties, a wide divergency of opinion exists among savants. But the views which find most favour to-day are those of the veteran Professor August Weissmann, as set forth in his work on the “Germ-Plasm, a Theory of Heredity.”

The excessively minute quantity of this germ-plasm which suffices to form a new body is incredible. By what miracle of miracles is the essence of a man distilled? His body arises from the union or commingling of two particles of living matter so minute as to be invisible to the naked eye. One of these particles is the “sperm”—cell furnished by the male parent; the other, the “ovum,” furnished by the mother. True the ovum may measure as much as the one-hundred and fiftieth part of an inch, but the bulk of this is yolk-food necessary to furnish the tender germ with life and energy till it shall have attached itself to the walls of the womb, whence all its future nourishment is derived.

By no process of analysis known to us could the germ-plasm of man be distinguished from that of, say, a jelly-fish; and in the matter of quantity there is no more difference. Yet, identical to our senses, in potentiality how amazingly different are these two particles of jelly! In the lowliest animals, such as jelly-fish, one cannot distinguish male and female at sight. The appearance of separate male and female individuals begins somewhat high in the scale marking an epoch in the history of animal life. For the birth of sex inaugurated not merely individuals producing distinctive “male” and “female” germs, but individuals which, by virtue of their sex, developed differences of behaviour and mentality which were to be followed by tremendous consequences. Certain aspects of this behaviour are to furnish the theme of these pages; others, and no less important, those who will may discover in Professor Arthur Thomson’s “Evolution of Sex.”

We are far, indeed, from being able to explain the attributes of sex. At most, we can but endeavour to interpret the behaviour associated therewith. This was the task which Darwin set himself to achieve in his theory of sexual selection. He was influenced in the train of thought which he followed up with such brilliant success by what he had observed in the behaviour of highly-ornamented species, such as the Peacock and the Birds of Paradise. The strange antics of these birds when under the influence of sexual excitement persuaded him that they were at least dimly conscious of their splendour, and of its power to fascinate. The female, on the other hand, was supposed to be coy, and to bestow her person on the finest performer. In this way the dullest birds and the poorest performers were gradually eliminated. Here, indeed, was sexual selection. The frills thus begotten he called “Secondary Sexual Characters,” a term which is also used, and was used, by him, to include any feature whereby the sexes can be distinguished apart from the character of the genital organs.

Horns, tusks, and spurs are other forms of secondary sexual characters. And these stand for another form of sexual selection—that of selection by battle. Herein victory falls to the strongest and most pugnacious male who, as the spoils of victory, annexes the females which formed the subject of the duel. This theory, which must be discussed at greater length in the course of these pages, has had many critics, and among them men of mark. But whatever modifications may be deemed necessary, they will be such as are demanded by the results of later discoveries rather than to the force and subtlety of the arguments of his opponents.

One of the most formidable of the opponents of the Sexual Selection theory was Wallace. But his arguments were far from convincing, and often inconsistent. He attributed the more frequent occurrence in male animals of brilliant coloration and exaggerations of growth such as give rise to manes, beards, long plumes, and so on, to a “surplus of strength, vitality and growth-power which is able to expend itself in this way without injury,” or, as he sometimes expresses it, to superabundant vitality. He was evidently striving to find words for the faith that was in him, and he was nearer the truth than he knew or than his critics supposed. He was seeking facts which only the physiologist could furnish. And these made their appearance long years after with Professor Starling’s discovery of Hormones. We are far from understanding the origin of these mysterious juices which must be so frequently alluded to in these pages, but they are evidently intimately associated with the expenditure of energy. This may sometimes find an outlet in increased stature, sometimes in pure luxuries of growth. The force of Wallace’s arguments was crushed out by the weight of detail they were made to bear.

Mr. J. T. Cunningham a few years ago entered the lists and failed to achieve his purpose no less completely. His was a theory which assumed too much. In the first place it was based on the transmissibility of acquired characters, of the truth of which there is at present no evidence.

He contends, for example, that the vivid hues of scarlet, blue, yellow and violet which colour the naked skin of the neck of the cassowaries and of both sexes, and the curious horny casque which surmounts the head, are the outcome of the constant laceration of the skin inflicted by the males during their conflicts for the possession of the females. He assumes that such conflicts take place, and he assumes that such “acquired characters” are transmitted. Now, as a matter of fact, these birds do not fight with their beaks, but with their feet. And to this end the claw of the inner toe is enlarged to form a great spur. But there is no evidence that the skin of the neck is ever damaged in such conflicts as they may engage in. No scars are ever found, at any rate, to lend support to this theory. The casque, which is similarly supposed to be a mark of honourable conflict, is an “ornament” of great frailty, for it is composed of a delicate filigree-work of bone covered with a thin sheath of horn. In like manner, the long plumes which surmount the heads of birds like the Peacock, and many Birds of Paradise, and the wattle which surmounts the beak of the Turkey, are supposed to have had their origin in similar pugilistic encounters in the past. Mr. Cunningham is surely pushing the theory of the transmission of acquired characters a little far. For what has been transmitted in these cases is not a number of scarred surfaces, but a series of hypertrophied structures. An amazing array of ornamental characters, symmetrically disposed, and often vividly coloured, in short, has been produced from lacerated tissues which in kind and extent can have varied but little.

Evidence has been accumulating during the last few years which would have rejoiced the heart of Darwin. Had he known that birds of sober hues “display” with the same animation and with as much elaboration of posture as the Peacock and the Pheasant, his theory of “Sexual Selection “would probably have left little for those who came after him to criticize. Since his time it has been discovered that both permanent and recurrent secondary sexual characters, such as the antlers of deer and the temporary nuptial plumage of birds, such as the Ruff for example, are controlled as to their growth by the stimulating action of the “secretions or juices formed by certain of the ductless glands “; that is to say, of glands having no apparent connection with their surrounding tissues. We owe much of our knowledge of this subject to Professor Starling, who has called these secretions “Hormones.”

Darwin knew that the essential sexual glands, the testes and the ovaries, in some mysterious way controlled, in a large degree, the development of these “hall-marks” of sex, for it was known in his time that castrated stags failed to produce antlers, and that hen pheasants, for example, in extreme old age, or when the ovaries were damaged by disease or injury, at once assumed the plumage of the cock; but the part played by these ductless glands was quite unsuspected. They are the Thyroid, and the Thymus glands, which are attached to the outer walls of the trachea or windpipe. The Pituitary body, which forms part of the brain, and the Suprarenal bodies, attached to the kidneys. It would be foreign to the purpose of these pages to enter into the functions of these glands; suffice it to say, that the juices formed therein are taken up by the blood, and distributed over the system. Their action is only very imperfectly understood. We know that any derangement in their efficiency results in disease, and that they play a very important part in the reproductive system, as will become abundantly evident in the course of these pages. Much hitherto attributed to the action of “Sexual Selection” alone, it is now evident is largely due to their action.

The all-sufficiency of the “Sexual Selection” theory to account for the development of armature, such as horns, antlers, and the huge spine-like outgrowths which form so conspicuous a feature of many of the extinct Land-dragons, or Dinosaurs, has been by no means universally accepted. Some authorities like Dr. A. Smith Woodward and Professor Osborne interpret these after another fashion. They hold that these are the “expression points” of inherent growth forces, a process of concentration marking the final stages of evolution prior to extinction. From which it may be inferred that there is a term to the life of a species as there is to the life of the individual. In many cases it is suggested the very exuberance of growth has been the exterminating factor, as in the case of the huge antlers of the Irish “elk,” whose enormous weapons hampered his endeavours to escape his enemies. This is the theory of “Orthogenesis,” or direct development. According to this, new structures, arising in the germ-plasm as “variations,” will of their own inherent vitality go on increasing in each generation unless, and until, checked by “Natural Selection.” Changes in the character of the “Hormones” might very well bring about these excesses of growth. It is well known that the exuberance of growth which produces giants among the human race is due to a derangement of the secretions or hormones of the pituitary body which largely control growth.

Another factor of Sexual Selection which is commonly ignored, but which is of profound importance, is to be found in the part played by the emotions in regard to sexual relationships; the part which the “mind” has played, and plays, in the mating of animals, at any rate of the higher types.

Darwin touched but lightly on this theme. Later writers have almost entirely ignored it. Almost all that is worth knowing on the subject we owe to Professor Lloyd Morgan, who was one of the first to take up this difficult line of investigation, and to Professor Groos. Their researches have shown that there can be no doubt but that the emotions have played and are playing an important part in the phenomena we are striving to analyse. Sexual selection, in short, is concerned not merely with the evolution of the physical characters of the body, but also, and no less, with the psychological attributes thereof. Many new and extremely valuable facts in this regard have been brought to light by Mr. H. Eliot Howard in the course of his remarkable studies on our native warblers. Not until the psychology of sex in the lower orders of creation has been further investigated shall we have a properly balanced account of the part played by sexual selection in the scheme of evolution.

By now it will have become apparent that the study of the “Courtship” of animals is one of alluring interest and full of pitfalls for the unwary. And this because of the apparent difficulty in drawing any hard-and-fast line between the part played by “Natural” and the part played by “Sexual” Selection, at any rate in some cases.

To this aspect of the theme Professor Lloyd Morgan has drawn particular attention. “It is difficult,” he remarks, to accept the view that individual choice has played no part where the sexual instincts are concerned. But supposing that it has played its part ... the effects will be wrought into the congenital tissue of the race if, and only if, there are certain individuals which, through failure to elicit the pairing response, die unmated. Is preferential mating, supposing it to occur, carried to such a degree that some individuals fail to secure a mate? That is the question. If so, sexual selection is a factor in race progress; if not, though it may occur in nature, it is inoperative as a means of evolutionary development. The whole question, in itself a difficult one, is further complicated by the fact that the males which are possessed of the most exuberant vitality, and are therefore by hypothesis rendered the most acceptable through emotional suggestion, are likely to compete with other males of less exuberant vitality by direct combat. Such competition, by which the weakest are excluded from mating through no choice on the part of the female, falls under the head of natural selection, and not of sexual selection, if by that term we understand preferential mating.

“This serves to bring out the difference ... between natural selection through elimination and conscious selection through choice.... Sexual selection by preferential mating begins by selecting the most successful in stimulating the pairing instinct.... The process is determined by conscious choice. It is in and through such choice that consciousness has been a factor in evolution.”

Herein Lloyd Morgan, like Darwin, recognizes the existence of a dual machinery in determining survival, where this depends on the co-operation of two individuals leading separate existences—Natural, and Sexual, Selection—sometimes the one and sometimes the other prevailing. In the former, the females are seized by force; in the latter, won by displays.

But is this really so? In these pages it is contended that a sharp line must be drawn between all those attributes and characters which are necessary to achieve individual survival, the survival of the Ego, and all those which, on the other hand, are necessary to achieve reproduction and the survival of the race. The former are governed, or determined, by Natural, the latter by Sexual, Selection.

The sphere of influence of these two factors may be delimited, if we regard natural selection as the factor accountable only for the qualities necessary for the survival of the individual—necessary to ensure success in the struggle for existence. Then it will become apparent that the qualities and attributes necessary to achieve the survival of the race are of a different kind, and these are the factors which are embraced under the term “Sexual Selection.”

It is a mistake to regard animals in relation to the selection theory as if they were so many tailors’ “mannikins.” Yet a large number of the critics of the selection theory seem to fall into this error, ignoring all but the most superficial characters.

The peculiarities of colour, structure and behaviour, that is to say, the characters and qualities which distinguish the individuals of any given race, are due to inherent qualities of the germ-plasm. Each of such qualities, therefore, may be regarded as entities. Selection determines their survival. Intracellular selection is the first sieve through which they have to pass, natural and sexual selection are others, as circumstances may determine.

As a rule the sex of an individual is attested by more or less conspicuous external features. These are known as the “Secondary Sexual Characters.” But no hard-and-fast line can be established for these, at any rate, so far as colour and ornament are concerned, for such, as will become apparent in the course of these pages, tend to appear first in the male, and then, later, to be acquired by the female, until in many cases the two sexes become again indistinguishable.

CHAPTER II
“MANKIND IN THE MAKING”

The use of the term “Courtship”—Primitive Man and the Foundations of Society—“Amorousness” as a motive force—Polygamy—Our half human ancestors—Standards of Beauty—Disquieting signs.

Our ideas on the subject of the “Courtship” of animals are of necessity largely framed on what has been observed by each of us in regard to our own race; and without any very careful analysis of motives, or thought of what lies behind. But no real insight into this most tremendous subject can be gained which does not strive to penetrate beyond what is actually seen; which does not endeavour to get at the source of conduct in this regard.

“Courtship” is the word we commonly employ to describe the act of wooing; and in civilized human society at any rate, the intensity of the emotions which inspire the desire to woo are held in restraint by a variety of causes—and hence the “Courtship.” In the lower animals it is a moot point whether the term “Courtship” can be accurately applied. They are governed by no conventions, for them there is neither modesty nor immodesty. Desire with them is not made to walk delicately, veiled according to custom; nor is it artificially fostered as among civilized communities by stimulating food and the crowding together of large numbers of both sexes in artificial surroundings. Rather it is a natural, rhythmical, highly emotional state, which gathering force inhibits the ordinary emotions, or, rather, overrides them, begetting an intensity of passion which brooks no control. It demands, without parleying, or mincing matters, what is really the object of courtship among the civilized human communities—the consummation of the nuptial ceremony. The term “Courtship” is a Euphemism. Nevertheless, bearing this in mind, it may conveniently be used in these pages.

We cannot hope to understand the springs of courtship in the human race from what we observe in present-day society, or even from what we have gleaned thereon from the records of remote ages. We must get back, so far as is possible, to the very dawn of the human race: to that period of man’s evolution when his conduct was controlled by purely savage instincts. But even then the mark of the beast must have been fading out. His most valuable asset, his larger brain, even then gave him an advantage over the Apes, his near relations, and over the beasts of the field which he had begun to bring into subjection. We may assume that like his anthropoid relations, he was of a solitary, nomadic disposition, wandering in small parties from place to place as fancy or food determined. His advance to this stage started when, by the activity of his enlarging brain, he began to be oppressed by the gloom of the forest, and drawn by the fascination of more open country, and the ever-varying scenes which exploration brought him. But this life begot new needs and new desires. Hitherto, hunger, self-preservation and self-perpetuation were the only stimulants which roused his activities; and they were also the three forces, and powerful forces, which shaped his love of solitude. The proximity of his fellows threatened his three most vulnerable points—they competed for his food, they endangered his life, and threatened the possession of his family.

This more varied and adventurous existence roused new centres of activity in his brain; he began to perceive, though dimly, the possibilities of a larger life, though doubtless one which would minister to his own comfort rather than to that of his family—the natural and only road to better things. He began to devise more expeditious means of securing food, and circumventing his enemies, among whom the most formidable was his fellow-man, because in him he met his match. In the course of his wanderings he had learned the use of stones as weapons—which he could never have done in the forests—and he had also discovered the value of his family as ministers to his comfort, if only by setting them to collect such food as did not require strength and cunning in its capture. An inherent love of the chase for the sake of the excitement which this afforded probably made him nothing loth to regard hunting as his own peculiar duty. A little later the advantages of neighbourliness were borne in on him, largely for the sake of the greater ease wherewith the animals of the chase could be captured by their combined efforts; but this begat comradeship and some of the graces which follow therefrom.

Thus was laid the foundation of Society and “civilization” with all its attendant barbarities. Then, as now, whatever discordant notes were heard, were those struck by the twin Demons Envy and Jealousy. These disturbers of the peace are parasites on Society, their very existence depends on it. They have played a larger part in fashioning its rules and regulations than is generally realized. Their influence is as powerful to-day as ever in the past. It expresses itself in varying degrees in different individuals, and is roused by varying causes. But the most potent of all is jealousy in regard to sexual matters.

Amorousness, a word with a deep meaning, was, and is, the underlying factor which shaped, and is sustaining, human society; and is no less powerful among the beasts that perish. The motive force in this has not been the desire for offspring, but for the satisfaction of the elemental animal passion, the gratification of the purely sexual emotions which at their height are irresistible. There may be some who will see in this contention a degrading aspect of life. But this view will obtain only among those who prefer the man-made sophistries of life to its Divine mysteries. This dominance of what are popularly called the animal passions is the outcome of a perfectly natural process, whereby those in which these passions were defective died without offspring, while those who tended to excess were similarly eliminated. The desire for offspring for its own sake may exist among our own species to-day but, normally, offspring follows as an effect not as a cause. Many of our social problems would straighten themselves out if these facts were once faced and acknowledged; we are apt to concern ourselves with what should be—according to our ideals—rather than what is. Let it be granted that this rendering is true, and much else that mystifies becomes clear.

Whether primitive man was monogamous or polygamous, or whether he practised promiscuity, are themes which have exercised the minds of the most ingenious since the custom of making books began, and the most diverse conclusions have been arrived at. In coming to any conclusion on this subject probability based on what we know of the higher apes can be the only standard of argument. In these animals monogamy is the rule, the male and female with their young roaming at large in a family party. Occasionally, however, a male is seen accompanied by two females, and this is only what we should expect. The Apes are not very prolific animals nor are they numerous in individuals, hence, should any male be killed either in combat with a rival or by any other means, his mate probably wanders in search of another male, by whom, when found, she is probably readily adopted even if he should be already mated.

In like manner lived our half-human progenitors. But with them family parties no longer wandered aimlessly searching for food, but with a purpose. No longer forest dwellers, or vegetarians, food would require more zeal and discrimination in collecting, and shelter of some kind had probably to be devised, partly as a protection against predatory animals, and partly for personal comfort, since it would now have become apparent that this could be appreciably increased by the exercise of a little effort and ingenuity. This appreciation of creature comforts formed a cement holding the family together; a sense of safety in Society helped still further. Rude tools chipped from flints were among their earliest and most cherished possessions for the sake of the advantages they secured. Here was the earliest form of wealth and the birth of labour and a further step on the road to progress. Little would now occur to derange the harmonious routine of the daily life, save only the ever-present jealousy of the head of the family which was assailable both from within and without. His sons and daughters were probably now regarded as a portion of his wealth, for they ministered to his comfort, and aided in the daily work which had now become a necessity. As his sons attained to maturity, so they became rivals to be watched with a jealous eye, and finally driven off, while his daughters at the same time became potential mates. This danger of close inter-marriage was a real one, though it cannot be supposed that it was in any way realized. The risk was evaded by perfectly natural means. The jealousy of the head of the family which drove him to expel his sons as they attained maturity provided the means. These young bachelors sought their mates from neighbouring families, and it is probable that they would not be hard to lure from their parental control, but in such matters force was able to effect where persuasion failed.

These mate hunting excursions are to be regarded as extremely powerful factors in securing the betterment of the race. They were adventures in which all must fail who did not possess courage, cunning, and brawn, for, paradoxical as it may seem, evolution depends, not so much on the qualities of the individual as on the elimination of the unfit. As yet might was right. But the strife of combat, fierce and merciless, had its beneficial results not only in weeding out the physically and mentally deficient, but in stimulating affection between the victor and his prize.

As the advantages of neighbourliness dawned upon these children of nature, rules and regulations, for the control of the individual on behalf of the good order of the community, came into being; and among the earliest laws to be framed, we may be certain, were those for the regulation of marriage. These, as we may gather from the history of savage races to-day, did not concern themselves with chastity, at any rate before marriage, it was enough if they secured the right of possession, and excluded the dangers of close intermarriage. Promiscuity in the past was never the practice of any race, its existence to-day, among both savage and civilized people, is due in part to imperfections in the social scheme, and in part to the vagaries of individuals.

That the sexual instincts form the bed-rock on which depends the survival of all races of animals, which, for their propagation, require the co-operation of separate sexes, is beyond dispute. And it is no less certain that in so far as the evolution of man is concerned, jealousy has been a powerful integrating factor.

Among the higher animals apart from Man, both polygamy and polyandry are met with, and this with no apparent detriment to the race. It is significant, however, that polyandry is never met with among the mammals, and but rarely among the birds, when, as will be shown, this form of sexual relationship has been accompanied by a profound modification of the behaviour of the sexes in regard, not only to courtship, but to the offspring. The male has lost his masculinity, and the female her femininity. In human society both forms of marriage prevail, and there can be no doubt, from the history of such customs, that of the two types, polygamy is much to be preferred. It is certain that no race which practices polyandry can do more than hold its own, and that in a low grade of development. This cannot be said of polygamy, which might indeed be commended as a solution of some of our own social problems, were it not almost certain that the remedy would prove as bad as the disease.

The subject of “Courtship” in so far as it applies to the human race is one concerning which little can be said. Westermark, Letourneau, Sutherland, and last but by no means least, Darwin, have brought together a mass of facts bearing on the status of women among communities, savage and civilized, ancient and modern, and from these much may be inferred. To this harvest, however, Darwin himself still remains the most important contributor on all that directly concerns the “Sexual Selection” theory. Other writers seem to have paid more attention to the laws governing the possession of women than to the discussion of the motives which may have controlled the choice of mates. Instances of amatory dalliance, such as are met with among the inferior apes, and the birds, seem to be wanting. This negative evidence seems to show that, even among the most ancient, the most Ape-like, half-human races of man such dalliance was unknown. And this because primitive man, in his love-making as in everything else, was accustomed to take what he wanted, or die in the attempt. It is to this forcefulness of character that the human race owes its progress throughout the ages. But did he, when desire possessed him, exercise any sort of choice, when this was possible? What were his standards? These are unanswerable questions; at most we can but infer what his behaviour may have been from observations on existing races of mankind. These seem to demonstrate that while some races profess admiration for certain of their physical peculiarities, these cannot be attributed to the action of sexual selection.

It has been suggested that the low, beetling brows, protruding mouth, and flat, broad nose which characterized the earliest human peoples, were slowly eliminated by the æsthetic taste displayed by the females in their choice of mates. Now in the first place, it is highly improbable that they had any choice allowed them, and if they had, these are just the characters which were most marked in the males and might, or probably would, in consequence, have been deemed “manly” and desirable, for it is hardly to be supposed that such people would be capable of conceiving ideas of a possible refinement of their personal appearance if they could but add to the height of their foreheads and reduce the size of their faces. These graces settled down on them as the brain enlarged and habits changed. But the process of transformation must have been infinitely slow, and quite imperceptible from one generation to another.

The absence of secondary sexual characters in man, such as the brightly coloured areas which are so conspicuous a feature of many of the lower apes, is to be explained by his fundamentally different mode of life. Such vivid hues obtain only in species which live in troops, and they serve as aphrodisiacs, ensuring mating to every female forming a part thereof, which would be by no means certain were there no external signs of her condition. Primitive man, like the higher apes, was instinctively monogamous, and of necessity solitary, till he had acquired a tolerable measure of self-control and neighbourliness. When lust possessed him, he was obliged, in making his maiden venture to scour the country in the search for the object of his desire. This found, and won, probably only after desperate conflict with the head of the family, the nuptial ceremonies would be short.

The greater physical strength of the male and his higher brain capacity are probably the result of Natural, rather than of Sexual Selection. The former would weed out all the weakly and dull-witted in the ordinary course of the struggle for existence, the latter, during the early days of man’s development, would award the prizes of life to the most amorous and cunning, and to the most ambitious of the competitors.

The secondary sexual characters of the female are chiefly negative characters, the absence of those which are conspicuous in the male. She retains more of the primitive characters of the race. This is the rule in regard to the animal kingdom. Wherever we desire to find the onward tendency of evolution, the latest developments of the race, we turn to the male; when we desire to learn something of the past history of the species we turn to the female and young. This standard, of course, yields by no means uniform results, for we find every gradation of progress on the part of the latter, till male and female and young are externally indistinguishable. But the order is almost invariably the same—first the male, then the female, then the young. Thus progress is more or less automatic or “Orthogenic,” as the scientific text books have it, new characters, as they appear, tending to go on increasing in amplitude till checked by Natural selection. It is to be noted, however, that this transference is limited, for the female never inherits characters which are concerned with aggressiveness to the same degree as in the males, as witness, for example, the brow-ridges and huge canines in the case of the gorilla.

Darwin believed that the beards of men have developed by the selective choice of the women who preferred bearded men, while the secondary sexual characters of the women indicate the lines of male choice. There is, however, no evidence to show that in the past—for these characters are as old as man himself—woman had any choice whatever in the choice of her mate, save under exceptional circumstances. He was led to this conclusion by one or two striking instances apparently demonstrating this choice, and on these he seems to have based his version of the influence of sexual selection in man. The first of them is furnished by the Hottentots wherein, in both sexes, there is a marked “Steatopygy,” or accumulation of fat on the buttocks. In the female this is excessively developed, and it is said that such females are highly prized by the males. Darwin cites an instance of a woman in which this accumulation was so enormous, that she could only rise with the greatest difficulty from a sitting position. But there is no evidence to show that less favoured females remained unmarried.

In other tribes the breasts attain excessive proportions, so much so that they can be slung over the shoulder to feed the infant strapped to her back. These may have been increased by sexual selection, the preference of the males for such mates as possessed this feature in the most marked degree; but there is good reason to believe that such characters, which, it must be remembered, are the outward manifestation of germinal variations, once having appeared, would of themselves, of their own inherent vitality, have gone on developing. They won favour from long familiarity, which has imparted a semblance of increment from choice. These increments of growth in any given generation would be imperceptible, but variations in excess of the average would be conspicuous, and excite admiration from their very strangeness.

The part which sexual selection has played in determining the physical characters of the human race has without doubt been overestimated. Its influence may be said to have ceased with the development of the emotional side of his nature. This momentous process began with the male and had its roots in the ebullitions of his inherently amorous nature which has been the dominating factor in his career, and will be to the end, however much its influence may be disguised by the complex conditions of civilization.

These emotions, varying in kind and intensity, are such as are embraced in the term “Love” in the highest sense. They control the selection of mates, but this selection takes no account, save by accident, of qualities which have any value as factors of race-survival. In the lower animals these are determined by natural selection, and sexual selection adopts as it were the material furnished thereby. It “selects” only in so far as it eliminates the non-sexually inclined, and those which lack the qualities essential to ensure reproduction, such as weapons for example. In human communities natural selection is largely avoided, and “mate-hunger” seems now to be swayed by more than the mere desire for its satisfaction. With the development of human faculty new factors have been introduced, complex emotions have come into being, whose influences are as yet only vaguely understood. Whither are they tending? What will be their effect on race-progress? These are matters of grave importance to us all, and to the student of Eugenics in particular.

Of man’s higher emotions, which, it is contended, now govern his conduct, probably the earliest to assert itself was the æsthetic. His quickening mentality could not fail to be captivated by the bright hues of birds and butterflies, and flowers, the glorious colour-effects of dawn and sunset, the seasons in their changes and so forth. And as this sense of the beautiful slowly gathered force he would seek to decorate his naked body with such of the more brightly-coloured objects around him as were suitable or rather with such as could be affixed thereto.

As a signal mark of his favour and affection, he would occasionally transfer some one, or another, of his most lasting ornaments to his mate, and the additional charm this would give her ensured a continuance of such gifts, and paved the way for tribal fashions. But then, as now among savages, the males take the lead in this matter of ornamentation, but in proportion as affection grows, they are transferred from him to her, so that among civilized races to-day, the custom is entirely reversed, the women, not the men, wearing the finery. So soon as families began to be neighbourly and to combine for the sake of company and mutual help, the spirit of rivalry, so essential to progress everywhere, would tend to increase the number of such gifts, and to set “fashions.” With the foundation of society “selection”—by the elimination of the unsocial, would ensure, not only the survival of such fashions, but their multiplication and diversification, producing results which, to our eyes, have often been hideous. The immediate effect of this form of selection, however, was not a change in physical characteristics, but in the evolution of personal ornaments and development of the æsthetic sense. Progress in this direction must have been infinitely slow, and the lower races of to-day furnish us with instructive object-lessons in its course. In many cases uglification rather than refinement has attended their efforts.

It is indeed more than probable that the various types of ornamentation obtaining among savage races had their origin in outbursts of sexual exaltation. One of the earliest methods of personal decoration was probably to daub the body with paint, as is the custom during the performance of various religious and semi-religious rites among the Australian aborigines. A desire to find a permanent substitute for paint led to the practice of cicatrization, and the later and more refined custom of tattooing. But personal mutilation has taken many and strange forms, such as knocking out the front teeth, filing them to saw-like points, inserting gold or jewels, or staining them. No less extraordinary are the various types of lip and ear ornaments, and the suspension of ornaments from the nose. The various fashions of dressing the hair are also traceable to this origin.

That these modes of personal decoration designed for special occasions should in course of time become permanent, and should, in many cases, have lost their original associations is but natural. To-day among savage and barbaric races many of these modes of transfiguration have become associated with religious and semi-religious ceremonies, but many have been retained solely to enhance the personal appearance, even though in our eyes an exactly opposite effect has been attained. Among the natives of the Congo, for instance, the face is covered with raised patterns formed by cicatrization; that is to say, by cuts made with a knife, which are made to form scars on healing by means of pungent juices or heated iron. Further, the teeth are filed to form saw-like cutting edges, producing a revolting effect according to European ideals, but charming according to the standards of those thus patterns which adorn the tattooed face of the Maori present a result more nearly pleasing. Many of the natives of East Africa pierce the lobes of the ear and hang ornaments therein so heavy, that in due course a hole large enough to run the arm through results. These are mutilations of a purely ornamental character. Curiously enough, precisely similar forms of mutilation occur among people dwelling in different continents, as in the case of the lip and ear ornaments worn by natives of Africa and South America. There can have been no means of communication between these races, and hence we must conclude they were independently derived.

More striking still is the practice of deforming the head which prevailed among the Peruvians, the Caribs of the West Indies, and the natives of Vancouver, and the Chinook Indians, wherein it attained its maximum. Among some tribes, the head was depressed from above downwards, giving the skull a cone-shape, the apex pointing backwards; among others the pressure was applied to the back and front of the head, giving a more or less globular shape, and causing the sides of the head to bulge ominously. Now these distortions are to be attributed solely to the whim of Fashion. But how could this have arisen? No adult could have started it, for the form of the skull cannot be altered once its growth is completed. The conception of this diabolical custom apparently then arose in the brain of some fiendishly ingenious person, who realized that to effect its realization pressure must be applied to the head of the infant at its birth and for some considerable time after, by squeezing the head between boards, or tying it round with thongs of hide. That disastrous results would follow from this tampering with the brain would seem an unavoidable conclusion; yet such was not the case. During the moulding process, travellers who have witnessed it tell us, children display no sign of suffering, even though their eyes seemed to be starting from their sockets from the pressure. But they cried when the thongs were loosened. On attaining to man’s estate, such victims to parental folly seemed to be in every way as intelligent as the men of neighbouring tribes which had no such insane customs.

How deeply rooted was the prejudice in favour of this extraordinary fashion is shown by the fact that when, during infancy, from sickness, or other cause, the bandaging was neglected or omitted, and the child, in consequence, attained to man’s estate with a head of the shape designed by nature, he was seriously hampered in the struggle for existence, for no honours among his tribe were possible. Indeed, as often as not he was sold as a slave. But thus did Public Opinion bring disaster on its advocates, for those misguided people have been swept off the face of the earth by their own folly. Those who survived the ordeal, it is true, seemed in no way mentally deficient, but the infant mortality must have been great, and none of the adults could ever have attained to their full potentiality.

These people were, however, not the only lunatics at large. For this extraordinary practice found its devotees in many other widely sundered parts of the world. Deformed heads of various types have been found in rock-tombs near Tiflis, in the Crimea, Hungary, Silesia, in South Germany, Switzerland, and even in France, Belgium and England! How did it spread from one nation to another? Since means of communication were extremely limited centuries ago, one can only suppose that in most cases it arose independently. It is possible that the idea started with the unintentional deformations of the head which follow the practice of carrying the child during early infancy. It is well known that if a child be constantly carried on one arm, so that one side of the head continuously presses against the shoulder, a more or less marked asymmetry of the skull results. It would be enough for the head of one of the chief’s children to show a rather unusually marked asymmetry of this kind for every mother to endeavour to copy the defect, for imitation ever was the sincerest form of flattery!

To place these superficial, non-transmissible, artificially created features, such as deformed heads, mutilated teeth and ears, and so on, in the same category as the “secondary sexual characters” of the lower animals which are physical, inherent and transmissible features, is to ensure confusion of thought. The one represents a physical, the other an emotional development. The persistence of certain forms of mutilation esteemed beautiful in human society is not to be attributed to Sexual selection, or to “preferential mating,” for these things are not only non-transmissible features, but outside the sway of the amorous instincts, as is shown by the case of those individuals who, living in a community where deformed heads are de rigueur, have heads of normal shape. So soon as such perversions become a part and parcel of everyday life, they become essential to the general well-being and comfort of their possessors, enabling them to follow their normal avocations without exciting the dislike or wounding the prejudices of their neighbours. The absence of the “tribal sign” alienates the esteem and comradeship of his neighbours and brings an unenviable notoriety. In like manner albinos among birds, for example, are hunted down by their fellows and killed, and birds of exotic species conspicuous by reason of their unfamiliar appearance are treated in the same manner. The sexual instincts have no part in this.

It will have become obvious in the course of this chapter that Sexual selection as a factor in shaping the evolution of the human race has not played a very conspicuous part. Nevertheless, the balance of opinion to-day is probably in favour of the view that the physical peculiarities by which we distinguish one race from another are, for the most part, due to the influence of this form of selection. A more careful survey of the facts will show that this view is untenable. And there is no more striking demonstration thereof than that it has been inconsequently applied to account for features in one race, which in another are attributed to environment or to Natural Selection. It may safely be asserted that colour, the shape of the nose, the prominence of the jaws, and the character of the hair, are no more the result of “Sexual Selection” than stature, for example. These are the manifestations of inherent growth forces, or “tendencies,” which owe their survival, and development, to the influence of Natural selection.

Sexual selection has brought about the dominance of the male, by the struggle between males for mastery, originally for females. It “selected” for survival, in primitive races, those males with the thickest skulls and the strongest physique; it determined the survival of the keenest witted and most aggressive and most amorous males, and it eliminated those in which the latter features were too active. It assured victory, in short, to those only who possessed just those qualities on which life or death depend in moments of conflict. In the case of the females, it assured survival only to those who possessed strongly developed maternal instincts and submissiveness.

It is by no means realized that the incidence of moulding forces has changed and is changing with the environment of the race. So long as physical force, as between man and man, determined survival, as among savage races to-day, so long does it ensure to such races strong men and strong children, for in conflict with neighbouring tribes victory rests with the most powerful of physique and endurance and the most prolific. This last is an all-important concomitant if repeated conflicts are to be successfully waged. Among civilized peoples such contests began to lose their value in this regard when, by the introduction of arms, physical personality became a steadily diminishing factor. Victory now rests rather with those peoples who are most skilful in devising engines of destruction. The brain, not brawn, tells. But man cannot live by brains alone. With the inevitable decline in his physical nature man’s hold on existence is seriously imperilled. Civilization is making for extinction as much as over-specialization in the case of the lower animals. Hitherto, save in the case of decaying nations, women have played but a minor part in what we may call the “tribal” affairs of the race. Among the civilized nations of to-day, in proportion as the “maleness” of the community becomes more and more effete, the victims of sophistry, and the slaves of shibboleths, so the influence of the females asserts itself. And recent events among us show plainly enough that that influence is the reverse of good. Having its roots in personal vanity, and the love of notoriety, it is intolerant alike of reason and self-restraint, and that way madness lies.

CHAPTER III
MAN’S COUSINS THE APES

The Man-like Apes and their mode of Life—Their “Courtships”—Musical Chimpanzees—How the Orang-utan improves his voice—His likeness to Caliban—The truculent visage of the Gorilla—“Ornament” in the lower Apes—The Concerts of the Howler Monkeys.

We are none of us given to boasting of our poor relations, and most of us indignantly repudiate our kinship with the Apes. But facts are stubborn things: the relationship is there, whether we admit it or not: and those who love truth for truth’s sake will not shirk the comparison between themselves and their remote cousins. Unhappily, from our present point of view, this cannot be carried very far, for the “Love idylls” of the Apes have yet to be written. Such facts, however, as have been gleaned are interesting. Of the higher, man-like, or “Anthropoid” species only the most meagre information is to be obtained; but this nevertheless is interesting. For the most part we have to be satisfied with inferences drawn from a study of the external differences between the sexes—from the “Secondary Sexual Characters,” in short, and from the records of travellers who have encountered these creatures in their native wilds.

The species which throw most light on this theme are the Gorilla, the Chimpanzee and the Orang-utan. Of these the Chimpanzee has most in common with the human race. But it may satisfy the qualms of many to know that between the Ape and the Man there is a great gulf fixed. The brain of the largest Ape is less than half the size of that even of the lowest of mankind. Man is a reasoning, and for the most part a reasonable, creature; he is a tool-making animal. This is more than can be said of any of the apes, even the most intelligent. Their teeth and immensely powerful arms must serve their every need. No ape ever fashioned for himself either a knife, a vessel to carry water, or any means of transport; and herein we have a measure of his brain capacity. The huge jaws and great canine teeth are no less conspicuous “marks of the beast.”

These, however, man himself has but recently lost, as was proved by the sensational discovery of the skull of an ape-like man at Piltdown, in Sussex, during 1912. Herein the jaw was essentially that of an ape, while the base of the skull was as markedly human. The cheek teeth, or molars, were of the human type; but the canine was ape-like, though much inferior in point of size. That the men of this remote age—which was possibly that of Pliocene times and certainly not later than early Pleistocene—had begun to use rudely-fashioned tools, is proved by the roughly-chipped flints found with the remains. With the invention of tools the decline in the size of his “eye” teeth began.

In all the large apes these “eye” teeth are of great size. Their purpose, it would seem, is primarily to serve as weapons in conflicts between rivals. Such conflicts are apparently unintentionally, and unavoidably, provoked by the loud cries uttered by the males in their endeavours to discover the whereabouts of females desiring mates. Of necessity roaming far in search of food, the unmated have no means of making their whereabouts known, save by thus giving tongue to desire. Evidently the normal methods of voice production do not suffice for their urgent needs, for the carrying power of the voice is immensely fortified by means of great air sacs, or chambers, formed in part by an enlargement of the body of the hyoid, or the bone which supports the tongue, and in part by dilatations of the inner walls of the larynx. The females, it is to be noted, are by no means so well equipped in this matter. It is not necessary that they should be. All that those desiring mates have to do is to follow up the cries of avid males, a by no means difficult task, especially when under the spell of the emotions which possess them. But the mechanism which serves the Chimpanzee and the Gorilla by no means fulfils the needs of the Orang-utan. In this uncouth creature the system of resonating chambers is immensely increased by great, thin-walled, membranous pouches extending round the neck and under the armpits, so that when inflated these areas have a most extraordinarily swollen appearance. When the Orang chooses to lift his voice even the deaf must hear.

Where fighting instead of fondling is the sequel to these impassioned cries the conflict is probably not of long duration, for it is certainly severe. This is attested by the fact that captured specimens, if adult, are commonly found to be minus one or more fingers, which have been bitten or torn off in these love affairs.

Plate 2.

From a drawing by I. Thornton.

THE GORILLA PREPARING FOR HOSTILITIES.

Note the “beetling” brows, the large size of the canine teeth, and the great development of the arms in these arboreal creatures, which play an even more important part in locomotion than the legs. The latter in this illustration are, however, relatively too small.

[Face page 42.

An added ferocity of expression is given to the male Gorilla by the development of enormous brow ridges and the huge canines. The former are regarded by some authorities as adaptations to afford increased powers of mastication. But if this were so, then such ridges should be equally developed in both sexes, and this is far from being true. Hideousness, rather than ferocity, has been given to the Orang-utan by the out-growth of enormous ridges on each side of the face, and these, when the great wind-bags encircling the neck are inflated, impart a repulsiveness of expression attained by no other animal living.

Of the normal every-day life of the great Apes but little is known. It would seem, however, that they live in family parties—an adult male accompanied by a female and one or more young of different ages, of which one is commonly an infant in arms. It is difficult to procure positive evidence on the point, but it is commonly believed that the young remain with their parents till they are several years old, when they are gradually driven off to fend for themselves. This is a common procedure with all animals. The dominant impulse in this is something akin to greediness, an indefinable perception that too large a family party will entail too great a strain on the food supply, hence the now no longer helpless young are regarded as a danger to the safety of the family, and are turned adrift. Incidentally this procedure is of immense benefit to the race, for it ensures its distribution, enlarges its chances of survival, and lessens the danger of in-breeding.

Attention must now be turned to the lower Apes. In these it is to be remarked the secondary sexual characters differ conspicuously from those of the man-like species. Manes and beards and brightly-coloured areas of bare skin are now the dominant feature. But canine teeth, in proportion rivalling those of the Gorilla, are found in the Baboons, while in some of the New-world monkeys voice production of quite remarkable power takes the place of ornament.

The precise part played by ornament among these animals can only be inferred from Darwin’s observations on captive animals, and then only in so far as they refer to colour. Manes, beards and moustaches, such as are shown in the adjoining illustrations, are borne only by the males, and sometimes take extravagant forms.

Darwin suggested that the mane of the Baboons, for example, served as a shield when fighting with rivals, protecting the great blood-vessels from injury. Incidentally this end may be attained, but from what we know of similar developments in other animals, this cannot be regarded as the primary function of the mane. One is tempted to look upon it as a protective device because of its position, but it is probably no more so than is the long flowing hair which adorns the flanks of the Guereza. This is of a purely ornamental character, although, according to some, it is to be reckoned as an instance of protective coloration, the long white hair matching the long pendant masses of lichen which hang from the boughs of the trees in the damp forests where these creatures live, and so concealing them from their enemies. Of beards and moustaches many examples might be cited, but the most striking must suffice. These are furnished by the Satan Monkey or Black Saki (Pithecia satanas), and the little Tamarin Monkey (Midas imperator)—one of the Marmosets. In the first-named the beard is thick and full, but in the latter scanty. This, however, is atoned for by the enormous upwardly curled moustache giving the face a most comically human appearance.

Plate 3.

From drawings by I. Thornton.

THE BAROMETER OF MALENESS—AMONG THE APES.

All the Man-like Apes possess great canine teeth and powerful voices. In the Orangutan the Compass of the voice is enormously heightened by means of a huge wind-bag which encircles the neck. The wind-bag is seen in fig. 1, which also shows the great folds of skin developed by adult males on each side of the face. In other species, as in the Tamarin Marmoset (Midas imperator) (fig. 2), and the Satan monkey (Pithecia satanus) (fig. 3), “ornaments” in the shape of beards and moustaches are developed, while in the Mandrill (fig. 4) the face is vividly coloured.

[Face page 44.

In the development of brilliantly-coloured areas of bare skin the monkeys stand alone among the Mammalia. The hues displayed are remarkable for their brilliancy, and this varies in intensity, waxing and waning with the varying moods of their possessors, and attaining their maximum during periods of sexual excitement. Blue, green, red, and violet are the dominant colours, and these are confined to the face, buttocks, and genital organs. The same hues are commonly present in both sexes, though in the female they are less brilliant. Normally the male appears to be unconscious of the conspicuous patches of colour, but when under the irrepressible stimulus of sexual excitement he seems to endeavour to make the utmost possible capital out of such adornments, more especially presenting his buttocks to his mate in an apparent endeavour to stimulate her desire. In some species, as with the Baboons for example, the naked area of this hinder part of the body is a much more conspicuous feature in the female than in the male, becoming enormously swollen and carunculated, and from its vivid red colour presents a positively revolting appearance, according to our standard of what is beautiful. The most vividly coloured species of all is the Mandrill, which, in this matter exceeds all other living Mammals. The face, in the male, is produced forward to give the head a dog-like shape, while the whole of the upper surface of the muzzle has been transformed into a swollen, deeply fluted mass by the excessive inflation of the underlying bone. The bare skin covering this is of a brilliant cobalt blue, with lines of violet in the furrows, while the nose is of a bright scarlet. The naked skin of the buttocks, and the genital organs, are suffused with brilliant tints of scarlet and blue. In spite of the purity and brilliance of the coloration the effect is to make the creature really hideous.

Of the display Cuvier writes: “La partie postérieure du corps n’est ni moins extraordinaire ni moins révoltante. Sous une courte queue sans cesse relevée est un anus entouré d’un gros bourrelet d’écarlate; de larges fesses nues, que l’animal semble montrer sans cesse avec autant de lascivité que d’impudence, sont colorées d’un rose vif nuancé sur les côtés de lilas et de bleu. Les parties genitales enfin sont d’un rouge de feu d’autant plus tranché qu’elles sont absolument nues, et qu’elles viennent a la suite d’un abdomen revêtu de poils blancs.”

While we cannot suppose these animals to possess any standard of beauty or ugliness, it must not be forgotten that they are more or less conscious, not only of the existence of these brightly-coloured areas, but of the effect they produce, as Darwin showed long since in the cases of a captive Mandrill, and some other smaller species of Monkeys, among them a Rhesus Monkey. These, when shown a looking-glass, at once presented their hinder ends to what they supposed to be the new arrival. A similar mark of friendliness was shown towards their keeper, and visitors introduced by him. Periodically, under the sexual stimulus, this desire becomes intensified and becomes an invitation to mating.

In this connection it is interesting to note that in some of the Macaque Monkeys we have signs of a reversal of the usual sequence of coloration. For in the Pigtailed Macaque the young of both sexes are more brilliantly coloured than the adults, in regard to the bare skin areas, while in the Hairy-eared Macaque (M. lasiotis) and the Rhesus Monkey (M. rhesus) the face of the female is brighter than that of the male. This surely means that this coloration is in process of suppression, for according to the rule the male is the first to develop new characters, then the female, and finally they are transmitted to the young. The extra brightness in the young, then, is to be regarded not as an incipient, but as an ancestral character in process of elimination.

As a rule, among the Mammals at any rate, brilliant coloration and weapons of offence are not associated in the same animal. The Baboons, and the Mandrill in particular, are exceptions, for these animals are provided with most formidable “tusks,” the canines of both upper and lower jaws being of great size, and opposed one to another in such a way that they wear away to form sharp, angular cutting-edges, more murderous than the fangs of the Tiger.

Reference has been made already to the existence of large sound resonators for the purpose of increasing the volume of the voice in the Orang, Gorilla and Chimpanzee. Some of the Gibbons are also well provided in this direction. But the most striking instances of the kind are furnished by the Orang, and the monkeys known as Howlers. In these last the base of the hyoid, as the skeleton for the support of the tongue is called, is fashioned into a deep bony cup, which has the effect of intensifying the volume of the voice to a most surprising extent. But more than this, apparently for the protection of this bony voice-bowl the upright branches of the lower jaw have become remarkably deepened, and widened, a correlation of growth between unrelated parts which is fraught with deep significance. “Terrific,” “terrible” and “harrowing” are terms which have been used by travellers like Bates, Belt and Wallace in describing the cavernous roar of these animals, a roar which will easily carry two miles. It would seem that these vocal efforts are not merely confined to what we may call the “Courting” season, as is the roar of the stag, but that they are heard nightly at dusk. They may be resumed again at dawn, and re-awakened when thunder-clouds gather. They have become the normal method of giving vent to excitement, and probably are intensified when isolated males are desirous of discovering the whereabouts of females equally anxious to find a mate.

Among the Apes we meet, as with the human species, with both monogamy and polygamy. But it would be dangerous to assume that the reasons for polygamy are the same in both. Polygamy, indeed, has by no means always the same significance. In the most primitive, half-human races of the past, as with the man-like Apes to-day, polygamy is determined by accident rather than choice. These extinct peoples, like the great anthropoids, were normally monogamous, but on the death of a male in conflict with his neighbour, or from other causes, his mate would probably of her own free will seek out the nearest male and even if he were already mated would be at once adopted into the family circle. This certainly happens in the case of the Gorilla and Chimpanzee to-day. But among living races of mankind, both savage and civilized, multiplicity of wives is a matter of choice on the part of the male, and in many cases to achieve this females from other tribes have to be secured—either by purchase or conquest. With the lower apes, or “monkeys,” polygamy only obtains among gregarious species; and either because the birth-rate of the females exceeds that of the males, or because a considerable number of young males are killed annually by exciting the jealousy of the older males, who are exceedingly pugnacious.

CHAPTER IV
AT DAGGERS DRAWN

The Birth of Weapons—All Flesh is Grass—Utility and Ornament—The Fever of Love—The “Challenge” of the Deer—What it means—More about “Hormones”—“Hummel” Stags—The Age of Deer—The “Courtship” of the Moose—Types of Antlers—Antlered Females—Fighting Topi—The Lance of the Oryx in the Lion’s Flanks—Happiness and Hartebeestes—Odoriferous Suitors—The Bloody Sweat of the Hippopotamus—The Elephant in Love—Concerning Tusks—Polygamy.

From Apes to Antelopes is a far cry, but contrasts are always helpful. Antelopes and Deer, Zebras and Elephants, Rhinoceroses and Swine, are types, taken at random, of that great and important group of animals known as the “Ungulates,” or “Hoofed” animals. These illustrate in a very striking manner what is meant by the term “Secondary Sexual Characters.” They demonstrate no less forcibly what is meant by the term “Sexual Selection.” They are valuable in this connection, because of the often formidable weapons, in the shape of horns and tusks, which so many species have developed during the struggle for mates.

But “Sexual Selection” will not explain their origin, and it is difficult, in the present state of our knowledge, to discover any clues which will reveal this. In seeking these there are certain broad aspects of the problem which are not to be lost sight of. In the first place, horns, at any rate, are confined to the hoofed animals. That the various types of hoofed animals, living and extinct, have had a common ancestry, no one at the present day will probably call in question. The relationship, however, of the various living types, one to another, is by no means always apparent: the missing links are to be sought in the records of the rocks.

When the whole of the evidence comes to be surveyed, and not till then, it becomes apparent that this wonderful diversity is the result of complex factors. That the conditions of existence have controlled the results is beyond question; but it is equally certain that these conditions have been merely controlling and not causative. In other words, we must regard each of these different groups or types—Deer, Antelopes, Horses, Elephants, Swine, and so on—as witnesses of what we call “Heredity.” They are so many “Diathetic types.” That is to say, the forms, or individuals, belonging to each type have inherited certain peculiarities in common; they display a “Diathesis” as the doctors call it: an inherent, inborn tendency, or habit of growth, in a definite direction: a tendency which, ever and anon, develops new qualities, takes new directions. And thus it is that we get Oxen—using this term in its widest sense and not in its special sense—Antelopes, Goats and Sheep, for example. These have, among other things, a “diathesis” in the direction of horn production, and each, too, of a different type. What is meant by this apparently mystifying term “diathesis” will perhaps be made clear by taking the case of the Ox and the Sheep. While very different in appearance, these live on precisely similar food; yet no one has any difficulty in discriminating between the taste of beef and mutton. In the marvellous chemical laboratory of the body the grass gathered in the same field is converted into flesh which even in its uncooked state is easily distinguishable. Though for the purposes of this illustration domesticated animals have been used, the same is true of their wild relations. Sportsmen tell us that the various types of Antelopes and the Zebra, which may be seen feeding together, have yet flesh of very different qualities. These qualities are to be attributed neither to “Natural” nor to “Sexual” selection; they are “accidents.” Similarly, their horns are the witness of a horn-producing “diathesis”: the various divergencies in curvature, and in the form of their spirals, or the number of their encircling rings—as in the horns of Antelopes—are to be interpreted in like fashion. These twists and turns vary in the same way that the taste of the flesh varies, and for the same reason; that is to say, they are not the outcome of “Sexual Selection,” nor have they been brought about by “Natural Selection” to serve the purpose of “Recognition marks,” as Wallace would have us believe.

But horns, as horns, apart from their “accidents” of curvature and ornament, must certainly be regarded as the product of Sexual selection, for having once started into being those individuals had the best chance of leaving descendants which were best armed. The possession of horns was not necessary to the maintenance of the species; but such armature was essential among the males in securing possession of the females. Other things being equal, the male with the biggest horns wins the prize. Since these are also used as weapons of offence, or rather of defence, in warding off the attacks of beasts of prey, it might be contended that they are as much the product of Natural selection as of Sexual selection.

It soon becomes apparent that this interpretation must fail. In the first place, if it were true, the females should be similarly armed. In the second, in the presence of many of their enemies they are useless. The Cape hunting-dog, for example, is more than a match for any antelope. This ferocious animal kills his victim by running it down, persistently tearing at its flanks, until at last the entrails protrude and the horrid chase is ended. Furthermore, the horns are a comparatively late acquirement of the species, as is shown in the case of the Deer; for the earliest known fossil species were hornless. That the females among the Oxen and many of the Antelopes possess horns is an interesting fact, but it can only be regarded as another instance of a character first acquired by the male and later, in successive generations, transferred to the female. And it is to be noticed that this transference is never found save in the cases where the character in question has attained its maximum in the male. The transference of weapons to the female is the more remarkable because there is no evidence that they play any part in the struggle for existence, either in securing mates or in warding off the attacks of enemies. Moreover, these weapons in the female may exceed those of the male, in length, though they are never so massive. They are to be regarded solely in the light of ornaments. There are few more striking instances indeed where the purely ornamental and the strictly utilitarian are so closely associated.

Plate 4.

By the courtesy of Rowland, Ward, Ltd.

WEAPONS OF OFFENCE.

Horns of various types furnish the most conspicuous of the “Secondary Sexual Characters” of the ruminants. In the Deer only are these branched. In the “hollow-horned” ruminants they are either lance-like or more or less spirally curved, or they may form more or less open loops.

1. Black-tailed Deer. 2. Hangul or Kashmir Barasingha Deer. 3. Greater Kudu. 4. Black-buck. 5. Saiga Antelope, remarkable also for its curiously swollen nose. 6. Marco-Polo’s Sheep.

[Face page 52.

Attention may now profitably be turned to the behaviour of these interesting tribes when under the alluring influences of love.

Tradition and the poets have contrived to persuade us that the fever of Love becomes epidemic in the spring. This, however, is by no means true, at any rate in so far as what we are pleased to call the “lower animals” are concerned. For with many, as for example the Deer and the Bats, this fever is not aroused till the time of autumn plenty. With regard to the deer, we can find a reason for this. It is determined in part by the period of gestation, and in part by the peculiar character of the most conspicuous of the male secondary sexual characters—the antlers. The deer, at any rate of the northern hemisphere, carry their young about eight months. Now it is important that they should make their entry into the world just as the food supply is increasing and the temperature is rising. With the summer before them the young have time to gather strength for the encounter with their first winter. We have a striking witness to the truth of this contention in the fact that when the Indian Spotted Deer, or Chital, was first introduced into Europe, nearly all the fawns perished owing to having been born in winter; later, the females took to calving in spring, and from thence onwards the species has held its own among us.

As touching the stags. The antlers, as everybody knows, are shed annually, and their renewal entails a very considerable strain on the system. As a consequence, it is necessary that this period of stress should fall after the trial of winter is overpast, and with the genial summer before them. From the end of March, when the old weapons are shed, till July, the masterful males of the community wander at large, seeking seclusion and avoiding all occasion of quarrel; for they are not only defenceless, but threatened with disaster should any accident befall the growing horns, which, during their formation, are exceedingly sensitive. Even a slight blow would not only spoil their shapely proportions, but, further, might render them useless in the warfare that is before them.

With some species this desire to go into retreat is more marked than in others. The Red-deer, and the Wapiti, on the one hand, and the Moose on the other, well illustrate this. The two first-named pass the winter in herds, in the case of the Wapiti numbering many thousand individuals; no other species, indeed, is so markedly gregarious. With the advance of the spring, however, all is changed, for the males withdraw from their companions to suffer humiliation in seclusion. As chill October arrives, a striking alteration in their demeanour becomes apparent, at any rate in the case of the older males. The new antlers are now hardened, and the blood supply, which has hitherto been building up the new weapons, is cut off. As a consequence, the “velvet,” which till now has been directly concerned with the growth of the antlers, dies, and peels off the underlying bone. To facilitate this work of cleaning, the animal rubs them, first against the stems of saplings, and, later, against larger trees, and even rocks, till at last they are ready for “battle, murder and sudden death.” The “rutting” season, in short, has commenced. And with the final completion of the antlers other signs of that approaching frenzy, which is soon to establish itself, become apparent. The most striking of these are the swelling of the neck, and a marked increase in the mane thereof; while the voice enlarges its compass enormously, whereby the females, so long neglected, are now feverishly sought for.

Plate 5.

Photo by G. IF. Wilson Co. Ltd., from “The Living Animals of the World.”

MANCHURIAN WAPITI “CALLING.”

The “stags” do not begin to call for mate’s until the horns have more or less completely shed their velvet.

[Face page 54.

The Red-deer, maddened with desire, scours the country, calling as he travels with a loud musical roar, ever and anon impatiently listening for the tremulous response of females hardly less anxious to mate than himself. One after another is speedily added to his harem, but not without conflict. For sooner or later he catches the call of another stag in like case. A jealous fury at once takes possession of him, and the call, intended as a message to mateless hinds, becomes translated into a challenge to fight for the mates possessed. Each of the now infuriated challengers makes all haste to come to blows, and speedily they are rushing headlong on one another to meet in a crash of antlers. Then follows a test of strength, a sort of tug-of-war reversed, for each strives to push the other to his knees, and succeeding, to deal a deadly sideways thrust at the kneeling adversary’s heart with the spike-shaped brow-tines. This attempt, however, is rarely achieved. Yet not seldom such encounters become a duel to the death, and one in which both die, for in the remorseless tilt at one another the antlers of one may spring apart, and then close in on those of the other. Once this happens, it seems to be rare indeed that they can be extricated from this close embrace. With heads thus locked, they sway, and twist, and tug, not now for the mastery, but for life itself. But as the hours run they become more and more exhausted by their efforts, weaker and weaker from loss of food and rest, till finally death releases both.

A male having once succeeded in forming a harem, will commonly contrive to repeat his success year after year, withstanding all comers. But sooner or later his vigour wanes and he is ousted by another and younger male. Not else would the stamina of the race be preserved. It is considered a moot point, however, whether physical strength and sexual potency run at the same pace; for it is believed by some that a stag will often contrive to hold a harem against all rivals after his fertility has declined. This, however, is extremely improbable. A lowering of fertility means a decline in the potency of the hormones, and in the development of the secondary sexual characters, among which are the antlers, which are by no means negligible factors. That they are not all-important, however, seems to be shown by the fact that, occasionally, stags appear in a herd which are congenitally unable to produce antlers—a reversion to the ancestral condition—and such are said, occasionally at any rate, to be able to oust their formidably armed rivals. This may be so, but the fact that “hummel” stags, as they are called, are so rare is surely to be regarded as eloquent testimony of the disadvantages of their unarmoured state. They become speedily eliminated, in short, by “Sexual Selection.”

After this outburst of sexual activity has spent itself, the various harems, with their lords, amalgamate; all living in peace through the winter. The stags retain their antlers at this season, partly as a protection against predatory enemies, such as wolves, and other large carnivores, which would otherwise play havoc in their ranks, and partly because the cold of winter and scanty fodder would inhibit the growth of new antlers or reduce their size. With the return of spring the dangers of attack are lessened, temperature rises, and food becomes once more plentiful. Then the inevitable disarmament takes place.

The Red-deer, though mature at six, does not reach his prime till his eleventh year, and from thence till his fifteenth or sixteenth year is at his best. The hinds mature earlier, and appear to be fertile for a much longer period. At any rate, a wild hind in Jura, known by certain peculiarities of its ears, during twenty-one years produced twenty calves. She was killed at last with a calf at her side, but was thin and haggard-looking. She was, therefore, not less than six-and-twenty at her death. The calves, it may be mentioned, are born in May and June.

Old stags shed their antlers, it is remarked, earlier than young ones. And this is an advantage to the species, since it prevents premature breeding on the part of sexually precocious but immature males, and limits competition to the adults.

What obtains in the case of the Red-deer obtains also with minor variations due to environment, climate, and so on, in the case of all other deer. The life-history of the Wapiti, as might be supposed, differs only in detail from that of the Red-deer. But during the winter they form vast herds, numbering thousands. It may be that in primitive times the Red-deer was no less numerous. But in this country, at any rate, conditions favourable to the maximum development, either in bodily size, or in the massiveness of the antlers, have long since passed away. Even in the Highlands of Scotland the conditions of existence have entirely changed owing to disafforestation. Deer are essentially forest dwellers. But the “deer forests” are such only in name, and for the most part the wild stags of to-day must get what shelter they can from rocks and inequalities of the ground. From this cause, and from the very natural desire of the owners of such “forests” to secure the finest heads in each year, the whole race has deteriorated. How great a change has come over it may be seen by comparing the heads of British Stags with those from German forests, where the conditions of existence are more favourable. If we turn to the records of the past we find that the antlers found in the fens, turbaries, and caverns of our islands are vastly larger, heavier, and carry a greater number of points on the sur-royals, than do those of the existing Scotch stags.

Having regard to the fact that hundreds, and in the distant past thousands, of antlers were shed annually, the comparative rarity of these weapons in the haunts of deer excites comment. This is accounted for by the fact that they are greedily eaten by their late owners, apparently, though unconsciously, for the sake of their bone-producing qualities.

By way of contrast with the Red-deer and Wapiti, we may take the Moose (Alces machlis), which at no time, and nowhere, attains to large herds. This is explained by the relatively restricted food supply which obtains in the haunts of these creatures. For they frequent the margins of streams, feeding largely on willows and birch. From the shortness of their necks, and the great length of their legs, they cannot crop grass and other short herbage, for unless they kneel they cannot reach the ground. Hence it is obvious that though their geographical range may be wide, their numbers are kept rigidly in check. They would be fewer still but for the fact that, unlike other deer, they glean no small amount of food from the water, wading out to feed upon aquatic vegetation. The roots of water-lilies are especially sought for, and to obtain these the animal will often disappear entirely under water.

As a consequence of the limited food supply the Moose lead solitary lives. On the Eastern side of America, where the winter is severe, a few individuals, generally a family party, will “yard up,” or make a fortress for their mutual protection by trampling down the snow over a restricted area. But in the Yukon district, my friend Mr. F. C. Selous tells me this is never done.

The rutting season of the bulls begins as soon as the antlers begin to “peel.” What follows is practically a repetition of what has already been related in regard to the Red-deer and Wapiti. And in this connection it is interesting to note that the natives take advantage of the period of desire in the bull to entice him to his death. Generally this is done by imitating the call of the cow in response to the bull’s anxious bellowing. But in Southern Alaska the opposite side of his nature is played upon. This is done by scraping or beating the bushes with the shoulder-blade of a Moose in such a way as to reproduce the sound of a bull cleaning his horns. The very suspicion of a rival enrages him, and, rushing in a blind fury in the direction of the tell-tale sounds, he speedily falls a victim to the trick which has been played him.

That the mating period is the most critical, and most searching in the whole life-history there can be no doubt. Every faculty during this time is put to the test, and from the time of sexual maturity until old age is at last attained it is an annual test. Alertness is all important. Other things being equal, success falls most certainly to those individuals with the keenest perception, and quickest interpretation of sight, sound and smell.

One is puzzled at what seems a concession of Darwin’s to the Lamarckian theory of the inherited effects of use in this connection. For in discussing the bellowing of the stag in “The Descent of Man,” he remarks that it “does not seem to be of any special service to him, either during courtship or battles, or in any other way. But may we not believe that the frequent use of the voice, under the strong excitement of love, jealousy and rage, continued during many generations, may at last have produced an inherited effect on the vocal organs of the stag, as well as of other male animals?” All the evidence goes to show that the production of sound, and the instant interpretation of its significance, is a matter of the highest importance. In the case of the Moose, for example, the noise occasioned by the cleaning of antlers provokes the same frenzy as at another time is aroused by the voice. Dullness of perception not only in these matters, but at all times, is fatal.

As touching the less conspicuous secondary sexual characters of Deer more must be said presently. For the moment the antlers must retain our attention. Time was when the Deer lacked these appendages. When they first appeared, in the now extinct species of the Middle Miocene period, they were no more than short prongs. Later, one of the prongs became elongated, and developed short branches or “tines,” which, in succeeding species, became more numerous, while at the same time, with the gradual evolution of more and more species, these antlers assumed new features both in the matter of size and in the character and number of the “tines,” a development which has reached its maximum to-day. But apart from these specific variations, which have given us such types as those of the Roe-deer, Red-deer, Wapiti, Caribou, Moose, Fallow-deer, Sambar, Schombergk’s deer, the strange Milou-deer, Elds-deer and Mule-deer, each species displays a quite remarkable range of variation in regard to its particular type of antler. Nowhere, perhaps, is this more strikingly marked than in the case of the Caribou and Moose. No doubt this feature is due largely to the fact that the horns are shed annually, and that the variations are due, in part at any rate, to temporary environmental conditions, such as food and weather. But these apart, individual peculiarities are constant, reappearing with more or less exactness each year.

Plate 6.

Photo by Lord Delamere, from “The Living Animals of the World.”

GROUP OF BEISA ORYX.

The lance-like horns of these animals can be used with deadly effect, even against lions.

[Face page 60.

In contemplating these facts one asks: What are the underlying factors of this variability? What is the significance of the branching? What end is attained by the annual shedding? That the antlers constitute very effective weapons of offence there can be no doubt, and one is inclined to regard the branching as the outcome of natural selection, on the assumption that branched antlers would be less deadly than lance-like weapons. It would perhaps be tempting to accept this interpretation as all sufficient were it not for the evidence afforded by the hollow-horned ruminants. The Oryx and the Kudu, for example, are lance-bearers, and therefore show conclusively that stags similarly armed might well have continued to survive in spite of the foils which the “tines” provide. Darwin, long since, guardedly suggested that while these weapons primarily served for offensive purposes, their elaborate systems of branching might have been brought about by sexual selection. That is to say, the extreme beauty of the weapons may excite the admiration of the females as well as our own. Granting this, he inferred they might have played an important part in elaborating the branching by constantly displaying a preference to mate with those males possessed of the largest and most branched antlers. But there are many and serious objections to this suggestion, and the most important of all is the fact that the female is allowed no choice in the selection of her lord and master. We can, then, only regard the antlers of deer as another instance of the survival of a “fortuitous” but inherent variation, which survived because, whatever the defects thereof, they proved advantageous in the struggle for existence.

Having regard to the fact that so many of the females among the hollow-horned ruminants have acquired horns, it is somewhat remarkable that in the Reindeer alone among the deer are these weapons normally possessed by the female. The gradual transference to the female of features which were originally secondary sexual characters in the male is an occurrence which is met with in every group of animals. In writing “The Infancy of Animals” I gave a number of instances of this kind. But the case of the Reindeer affords a more than usually striking illustration of this curious sequence; and this because rudiments of antlers are to be met with among the females in several different species of Deer to-day. They have been found in the females of both Roe- and Red-deer, though such cases are rarely met with. As a rule this assumption of the male secondary sexual characters by the female occurs only in very aged animals, or as one of the sequelæ of diseased ovaries and consequent sterility. But at least one instance is on record of a doe Roe-deer which possessed small antlers while pregnant. Thus, then, we gain a further insight into the process by which the female slowly assumes the outward attributes of the male; that is to say, the secondary sexual characters appear first in the male, and as seasonal characters. Sooner or later they become permanently established. By the time they have become firmly fixed in the male, and apparently not till then, they appear in a dilute form during senility, or in consequence of ovarian disease, in the female. Having once started, however, they appear earlier and earlier in the life-history of succeeding generations of females, and at last in the juvenile stages of both sexes.

The hollow-horned ruminants, which must now be considered, afford some very striking facts in regard to these “secondary sexual characters,” more especially in so far as horns are concerned. In the first place these weapons are permanent structures, taking the form of a bony core ensheathed in horn, with which we may compare the temporary covering of velvet in the deer: in the second, they are unbranched. The only exception to this rule is furnished by the Prong-horned Antelope, wherein the sheath is both annually shed, and branched. The branching, however, is very slight, taking the form of a short forwardly directed prong about half-way up the sheath, which is borne on a long bony pedicle recalling that of the Muntjac. The shedding is due to the formation of new horn material at the base of the old sheath, which is gradually forced off by the growth of the new tissue. Structurally the horn of this remarkable Antelope differs somewhat from that of its relatives.

As may be seen in Plate 4, in the form of the horns the typical hollow-horned ruminants present an exceedingly varied range, and one often of great beauty in the matter of curvature. That they serve as formidable weapons of offence was demonstrated during 1912, when, according to the Annual Report of the Government Game Reserves, published by the Pretoria Government, the game warden, Major Stevenson Hamilton, reported of the Antelopes that “many carcases of males of almost all species, killed in single combat with rivals, were found during the mating season, untouched by anything except vultures.” As a rule, however, these animals, like the Sheep and Goats, and their larger relatives the Cattle, seem to avoid a duel to the death. One or two instances as to the general character of these combats for the possession of mates must suffice. Thus the late A. H. Neumann, a hunter of experience, remarks that he once or twice saw conflicts between the Topi (Damaliscus jimela), an ally of the Hartebeestes. The two rivals would stand a little apart, affecting, apparently, to be unaware of one another’s presence. Suddenly they would rush headlong at one another, bringing their heads together with a clash, each, at the same moment, falling on his knees.

Major Powell Cotton, again, once witnessed an affray between two Beisa Oryx. Here the master bull of the herd was infuriated by the advent of an intruder in his harem. Time after time they dashed at each other, their foreheads meeting with a thud; then, with horns interlocked, they wrestled fiercely; then, separating, they charged again. Yet neither, he remarks, tried to use his lance-points, as they do when cornered by man or beasts of prey. Nevertheless, encounters of a more sanguinary character appear to be by no means rare, for it is no uncommon experience of hunters to kill bulls of this species in which one eye has been burst by a horn-thrust. Another peculiarity of these animals is the extreme thickness of the hide of the neck and withers, which seems to afford a shield against such spear-thrusts during these battles. How powerful is the thrust of these weapons, and how efficiently they can be used, is shown by the fact that lions in making an attack on an old bull are often severely wounded, or even killed. And there are many instances on record of cases where both the lion and his intended victim have died together, the Antelope having been unable to withdraw his horns from his adversary’s body. The beautiful Pala Antelope fights furiously with rival rams, and the vanquished, as with so many of the Antelopes, form herds by themselves, till one by one they gather strength and skill enough to establish their right to mate.

Plate 7.

Photo by courtesy of the Duchess of Bedford, Woburn Abbey.

ELAND COWS.

Among antelopes the females commonly bear horns, which may be even longer than in the males, though less massive.

[Face page 64.

Plate 8.

Photo by courtesy of the Duchess of Bedford, Woburn Abbey.

AMERICAN BISON

The “Secondary Sexual Characters” of the male are here conspicuously developed, and are seen in the massive fore-quarters and enormous head.

The Elands present some puzzling features, for both sexes bear large horns, and they are very massive in the bulls. Yet these animals are generally described as the most inoffensive of all the horned ruminants. That the horns are used to any extent in conflicts between rival males seems doubtful, inasmuch as this species is remarkable for the development of an enormous “dewlap,” a thin pendulous fold of skin which runs from the throat to the chest. Such a form of “ornament”—for in this light we must regard it—would be dangerous, indeed, when much fighting was to be done. Nevertheless, it would be contrary to all our experience to conclude that weapons so well developed as are the horns of the bull Eland were entirely useless. This is a matter which decidedly calls for further investigation.

That our knowledge of that most important period of life of the larger mammals, the period of sexual exaltation, is lamentably incomplete will be realized by anyone who seeks enlightenment on this subject. Most of the meagre information we possess has been collected by travellers and sportsmen, neither of whom have the time to devote to the long and laborious watches that a fuller history demands. Every now and then a glimpse is afforded of this period of the life-history which brings home in a very convincing fashion, how little is really known. It seems certain that the fighting hitherto described is to be regarded as but a phase of a cycle of events which takes place at this time. Thus, for example, the old naturalist and traveller Schweinfurth tells how he once encountered a herd of Hartebeest which were apparently effervescing with animal spirits, for they kept running around in couples, like horses in a circus, using a clump of trees as a pivot. Others, in groups of three or four, stood by, interested spectators. After a time these, in turn, took their places and ran round, two at a time, in their own circuit, and in the same fashion. Their evolutions, he says, were so regular as to suggest the guidance of some invisible ring-master. These gyrations may be regarded as an erotic dance. The Sambar, under like excitement, will stalk about with erected tail, outstretched muzzle and everted face glands, and the Black-buck, among the antelopes, behaves in like fashion.

It cannot be supposed that these quaint performances are peculiar to the species in which they have been observed, but rather it may be inferred that similar antics, besides others yet to be discovered, are performed by all. Their purpose seems plain enough, for they must be regarded surely as aphrodisiacs, excitants to pairing. They recall the erotic dances of savages, or the ceremonial orgies of ancient civilizations. Such performances, on an even more elaborate scale, are to be met with among the birds.

So far, in describing the horned ruminants, the horns only have been considered; but these animals display yet other secondary sexual characters, which, while less conspicuous, are yet no less important during this critical period of life. Some, as for instance the canine teeth possessed by some of the deer, are decidedly puzzling. While absent, or vestigial, in most, in a few they are greatly developed, and this, too, in species which possess relatively large horns, as in the Muntjac. It seems difficult to believe that the co-existence of these very different kinds of weapons can be of vital importance to their possessors; yet unless this be so, one or other would surely have degenerated. It is significant that in the hornless Musk-deer these teeth attain to a very considerable length, at their maximum as much as three inches. That they are used by rival males, and with effect, is shown by the fact that the hides of these animals are often found scored by deep lines cut by these tusks. In those aberrant ruminants, the Camels, quite formidable tusks are present both in the upper and lower jaws, and these are used with effect whenever occasion demands, and often when it does not.

The armoury necessary for successful love-making contains yet other weapons, evolved to supplement physical force, and more subtle in their effect. Such are certain skin glands which, at the rutting season, secrete a copious flow of a creamy, or semi-fluid matter, and pungent odour. In the deer the more important of these are found in the deep pit, or “larmier,” which opens in front of the eye. In the Musk-deer, however, this secretion has a most powerful odour of musk, and is formed in a pouch, or “pod,” of about the size of a small orange, under the skin of the abdomen. The secretion, which is formed by the male only, is of a chocolate colour, and of about the consistence of moist gingerbread. It has a most pungent scent, and when diluted forms the basis of many of our most powerful and most highly-prized perfumes, on which account, it may be mentioned, this animal has for generations been submitted to a most unrelenting persecution. But that is another story.

In most of the antelopes the principal scent gland is seated in a pit in front of the eye, as in the deer. In some, as in the Gnu, it forms instead a swollen, tumid area, oblong in shape, instead of lying in a pit. In the Reedbuck it is placed around the bases of the horns; and in the Rocky-Mountain Goat it forms a great bare cushion behind the horns. All have more or less well-developed glands seated in the skin between the toes. But, wherever placed, the secretions thereof are more or less completely suspended save during the breeding season, when they are poured forth abundantly. The precise rôle they play is by no means certainly known. It seems reasonable to suppose that, in the first place, the odour they disperse enables the males to announce their whereabouts to the females seeking mates, should they fail to hear their bellowing. But the antelopes, for the most part, unlike deer, do not, the year round, lose touch with one another; so that it must be concluded that these odours serve as excitants to the act of pairing, and we know that the sense of smell plays a very important part at this time, which, so far as these animals are concerned, is the only period which comes more or less exactly within the meaning of the term “courtship.”

That scent among the antelopes holds a really important place is shown by the fact that the bull of the common Eland intensifies his natural odours by micturating upon the mass of long hair which grows upon the forehead. To do this the head is bent down and turned tailwards, in order that the tuft should receive its due urinary spray! And goats in captivity exhibit the same curious habit. In them, indeed, it is often pushed to such an excess that blindness results, so that the animal has to be slaughtered.

While in many cases these odours are imperceptible to human nostrils, in others this is far from being the case. Among the ruminants the goat is particularly odorous. So also are the giraffe and the water-buck, both of which may be detected by their smell at considerable distances. And these emanations are most noticeable in the males and at the breeding season. The bull elephant, both in the Indian and African species, during the breeding season produces a copious flow of aromatic matter from a gland which opens above the eye in the form of a tubular aperture large enough to admit a pencil. This aperture in the African elephant is remarkable for the fact that it is invariably found to be “plugged” with numerous spines of the acacia, which have from time to time found their way in as the animal was forcing its way through the dense undergrowth. This extraordinary fact was first noticed by Mr. F. C. Selous, and has since been confirmed by Dr. Einar Lonnberg.

It is probable that the “bloody sweat,” which at times covers the hide of the Hippopotamus just after leaving the water, is associated with the period of rut. This mysterious exudation is accompanied by small crystals; but though red in colour, it contains no blood. So far no reasonable explanation for this remarkable phenomenon has ever been given, but probably it will be found to be associated with the sexual activities and is possibly odoriferous. A precisely similar exudation occurs in the neck of the male of the Red Kangaroo.

That these secretions play an important and perhaps variable part in the selection of mates seems demonstrated in the case of an incident related to me by my friend Mr. John Cooke, who some time ago was watching a flock of some three hundred sheep while it was being driven by the shepherd and his dogs into a field. As soon as they were securely shut in, and the shepherd had gone, three rams who were included in the flock at once began a three-cornered fight. One, presumably the youngest, was soon vanquished. The other two soon settled their differences, and the clashing of horns was at once followed by a very different performance. The master ram began to run in and out among the ewes, sniffing at each, and driving out those whose odour most pleased him. Having at last satisfied himself with a harem of about one hundred, the second ram was allowed to make a like choice, and behaved in a like manner, leaving the remainder to the ram which was first vanquished. May we take it that the strongest and oldest rams selected the youngest ewes, and the oldest were left to the youngest, and first conquered ram? By some such rough and ready method of selection Nature may contrive that the immature male shall do as little harm to the race as possible by mating with the oldest, and in many cases barren females.

Our survey of the “hoofed” animals has so far been confined to the ruminants. Space must now be found for a brief review of what obtains under like circumstances in the case of the great pachyderms—the Elephant, Rhinoceros and Hippopotamus; the Pig and the Camel.

Plate 9.

Photo by Lord Delamere, from “The Living Animals of the World”

ELEPHANTS.

The sexes differ but little in general appearance: and chiefly in the superior size of the male and his more massive tusks.

[Face page 70.

As to actual “courtship” among these animals practically nothing is known; but the varied and formidable weapons which they possess are enough to show that the secondary sexual characters play a very important part in the preliminary capture of mates. That they may also be used for the more prosaic purpose of securing food is nothing to the point. In the Elephant, for example, the tusks are sometimes of enormous size and weight, specimens of eleven feet in length and weighing as much as two hundred and fifty pounds are on record. They are used for cutting through the bark of machabel trees, which is then seized by the trunk and torn off, for elephants are extremely fond of this bark; and they are also turned to account in breaking up roots which have been exposed by digging with the fore-feet. But this is certainly not the main purpose of such weapons. On the contrary, their use is primarily as weapons of offence between rival bulls. As one would expect, they never attain to a very large size in the female, but that they are large enough to serve her at need is shown by the fact that a portion of a tusk, evidently of a cow-elephant, was once found embedded in the jaw of a bull. There can be little doubt but that this was broken off in an endeavour to repel the advances of a too amorous male, for, as with all animals, pairing is impossible without the consent of the female, and this is never accorded until she is desirous that it should take place. As a preliminary to this, an amorous dalliance is perhaps the invariable rule among animals, and this takes many and often strange forms. The Elephant affords a case in point. For the late A. H. Neumann once came upon a pair which were evidently, as he says, “love-making.” Creeping upon them noiselessly, he found the male fondling his mate with his trunk, and then, standing side by side, they crossed their trunks, and put the tips thereof into each other’s mouths, the elephantine form of kissing. Deer, cattle and horses, cats and dogs, constantly lick one another under like circumstances.

Superficial secondary sexual characters are wanting both in the Hippopotamus and the Camel. Both, however, possess a formidable armature of teeth which are capable of inflicting very severe wounds. In the Hippopotamus the canines are of enormous size, and their punishing power is further strengthened by the fact that they work in opposition to a pair of similar teeth in the lower jaw; they cut like a pair of shears, the upper closing upon the lower pair with the precision of scissors-blades. In addition, the lower jaw develops two long, blunt-pointed, ivory spikes, which are scarcely less to be dreaded. With these weapons the bulls fight furiously, and it is no uncommon thing to find vanquished males frightfully mauled, the hide being lacerated from head to tail. Protection, in a measure, is afforded by its enormous thickness, but the great folds and pleats of skin seen in the Rhinoceros are never developed. The females, however, are similarly armed, and the teeth are nearly as large as in the males, which is a rather unusual occurrence.

The Swine, which are near relations of the Hippopotamus, in like manner develop huge pointed canines, and these reach their maximum in the great Wart-hogs of Africa. But in the swine the mechanism differs, for although the canines are closely opposed, the shaft of the upper teeth curves upwards, and the lower teeth are much smaller than the upper. In fighting, these animals do not bite, like the Hippopotamus, but use the upper canines to rip up their antagonist with a sudden, swift upward and sideways movement of the head. How dangerous is the wound thus inflicted those who have hunted the wild-boar know well. A curious exaggeration of this arrangement of the teeth is seen in the Babiroussa. Herein the upper canines grow directly upwards, actually piercing the upper lip as in the case of the downwardly growing tusks of the elephant. That these teeth, however, are of any service in fighting is doubtful, for the upper tooth curves upwards and backwards in a semicircle so that the points are harmless. The tusks of the lower jaw, however, are extremely long and pointed, though their wounding power is limited by reason of the upper teeth. This may account for the fact that the head, the part mostly attacked by enraged boars, presents no sort of armature designed for defence; while in the Wart-hog, on the other hand, great solid bucklers of hide stand out on either side of the head below the eyes, giving the animal a most repulsive appearance, but affording him a very present help in time of trouble. In the wild-boar, where the tusks are shorter, no such protective armature is needed.

Plate 10.

HEAD OF MALE WART-HOG.

In the “Swine” family the canine teeth are always greatly developed, but they attain to their maximum, relatively, in the Wart-hog.

Photos by Scholastic Photo Co., from “The Living Animals of the World.”

MALE AND FEMALE BABIRUSA.

A characteristic of this pig is the peculiar development of the tusks in the male, the upper pair of which grow through the lips and curve upwards.

[Face page 72.

Plate 11.

Photo by Lord Delamere, from “The Living Animals of the World.”

SOMALI ZEBRAS.

The Zebras, unlike their cloven-hoofed relations, have no weapons, save for inter-tribal conflicts. Yet they have been as successful in holding their own against lions and other predatory animals as species provided with horns.

[Face page 72

Plate 12.

Photo copyright by A. H. Bishop.

GIRAFFE.

The horns of this animal can prove formidable weapons of offence on occasion, though they are useless against predatory animals.

While the ungulates, or hoofed animals, are peculiar in the development of horns as weapons of offence, they are by no means singular in the use of teeth for this purpose. In some cases, as in the Muntjac, both forms of armature are present. The only other instances where teeth in this group of animals are used for offensive purposes are those furnished by the Camel and the Horse. But here they do not exhibit that excessive size which is met with in the Elephant, and some of the Swine. In both the Camel and the Horse it is the canine which is used, and both jaws are similarly armed. Since the camel has no upper incisors, the part played by the teeth is beyond dispute; but it has been contended that the horse uses his incisor or “front-teeth” alone when fighting. But this is not so; the canines can, and do, inflict ugly wounds, as is shown by the necks of zebras.

A further method of defence among the larger Ungulates, at any rate, is resorted to when hard pressed: and this is the use of the hoof in kicking. Giraffes kick both after the usual fashion and in striking downwards with the fore-foot. And an interesting demonstration of this has been furnished by Mr. F. C. Selous in his delightful “African Nature Notes.” He relates that on one occasion he came across a calf only a day or two old, with its back broken. From scratches on the calf, and the footprints on the ground in its vicinity, he was at once enabled to gather the cause of its terrible plight. In a word, it had been attacked by two leopards, and the mother, in an endeavour to beat off the assailants with a blow of her fore-foot had accidentally struck her offspring. Horses, Cattle, Antelopes, Camels and Elephants can all kick with precision and effect. So far as the evidence goes, however, this is a method of defence used against beasts of prey, and is rarely, if ever, employed in conflicts between rival males. Females persecuted by the undesired attentions of amorous males, however, do, as we know from the case of domesticated animals, use this device to defend themselves.

It is not difficult to account for the origin of such secondary sexual characters as manes, beards, tusks, and brightly-coloured areas of skin, though whether our interpretations are really correct is another matter. But no attempt to explain the origin of horns has yet achieved a like degree of persuasiveness. These weapons appear only in the Ungulates, a group which has, in past times, given birth to some very extraordinary types of head armature of this kind. These must be excluded from the present discussion; suffice it to say that, as usual, they were the adjuncts of the males. According to current theories it is supposed that these weapons arose as the result of the action of sexual selection. It is assumed that the hornless ancestors of now horned ruminants fought for their mates by “butting” with the forehead. Naturally, other things being equal, the thickest skulled combatants obtained the mastery. Any tendency to develop frontal “bosses” of bone would further enhance the chances of success, and would, indeed, soon become necessary for survival. And from such “bosses” the passage to horns and antlers forms an easy transition. Just such incipient horns or “bosses” actually make their appearance in the domesticated horse: but these animals never butt at one another. If, however, we regard horn-production as an inherent diathesis of the ungulate somatoplasm, we have an intelligible basis for the explanation of horn development.

The formidable horns of the Rhinoceros are of a totally different character, being solid structures formed by hairlike agglomerations, firmly fixed upon a roughened area of the nasal region. These weapons play a very important part in settling disputes between rival males, but on other occasions demanding offensive tactics the Indian Rhinoceros at any rate seems to depend rather on his power of wounding by means of the chisel-shaped lower incisors. These, by means of a swift lateral movement of the head can be made to inflict most terrible gashes, as those who hunt with elephants well know. It is quite possible, however, that the teeth are also thus used during struggles for supremacy. And this may perhaps account for the enormous bucklers of skin developed by the Indian Rhinoceros, but only indicated in the case of the African species.

All the larger Ungulates, and many of the smaller species, are polygamous. The Rhinoceros, and all of the swine-group save the Hippopotamus, among the larger species are exceptions to the rule. The preponderance of females which this implies is generally supposed to be due to the losses sustained among the males by fighting during the struggle for mates. The case of horses, however, seems to militate against this view, for though they undoubtedly fight furiously, no evidence is forthcoming to show that such conflicts terminate fatally.

Were it possible to secure the necessary data it would probably be found that polygamy, and polyandry, are determined solely by the numerical proportions of the sexes: the excess of males or females being due neither to “Natural” nor “Sexual” Selection, but to inherent peculiarities of the germ-plasm tending to produce an excess of males, or females, as the case may be.

Finally, all the evidence goes to show that it is a mistake to suppose that polygamy is due to the excessive sexual avidness of the males, which impels them to first essay the overthrow of all possible rivals, and then to appropriate every female within their sphere of influence, holding them by force. On the contrary, this plurality of mates is thrust upon them. And this because the females, impelled by “mate-hunger,” attach themselves to the nearest male within call: the size of the harem depending on the number of available males. The battles which are fought between rival males are no more sanguinary than in the case of monogamous species. This contention is well illustrated by the African Wydah-birds (Vidua), which are markedly polygamous, though they have no special weapons of offence. In districts where males are numerous the harem will not exceed eight, or ten, females; where males are scarce this number may be increased to fifty. In like manner the varying number of hinds accompanying a stag are to be regarded, not as an index of his prowess, but of the scarcity or abundance of males in the neighbourhood.

CHAPTER V
THE LION AND HIS KIN

A Surprising Relationship—The Lion’s Mane—The Sabre-toothed Tiger—Some Theories about Origins—Sea-lions in Love—Some Strange Ornaments—Whales and Weapons.

That the Lion and the Lamb could possibly have been derived from the same stock seems incredible: yet such is the case, though the pedigree is now well-nigh lost in the mists of a hoary antiquity. It is not surprising, then, that in their present-day garb they should show so little in common. Nor is it strange that among their many points of divergence the one should differ so conspicuously from the other in the matter of secondary sexual characters. For when these are conspicuous among the Ungulates they usually take the form of horns, of which the Carnivores have no need, for the teeth and claws whereby they win their daily portion of meat make equally serviceable weapons of offence when turned against their own kind.

Among the larger Carnivora, the Lion alone displays any obvious distinction between the sexes in the matter of ornament, and this in the form of the well-known mane. Darwin, and later authorities, have regarded this as a shield to protect the great blood-vessels from injury during battles between rivals. But it is not very clear that this alone is sufficient to explain its presence, inasmuch as the Tiger in this respect is defenceless. Mr. F. C. Selous long ago pointed out that the varying abundance of the mane is due to climatic causes. Lions which live in districts where the nights are very cold, as in high table-lands, have large manes; those which occupy lower ground, where the nights are relatively warm, have but a scanty mane. It is clear, however, that the abundance of the mane is not determined by the need for warmth, otherwise it would have been as well developed in the female. Rather we must regard a low temperature as conducive to the growth of long hair when a natural tendency to produce this is present.

There are few men who can claim to have so great a first-hand acquaintance with Lions as Mr. Selous, and he has pointed out to me one significant fact which seems to show not only that the mane has not been developed to serve as a shield when fighting, but that fights between rival males must be rare. And this because of the absence of any evidence in the shape of scars on the skin. With claws so formidable as those of the lion, ugly wounds would certainly be made in any prolonged conflicts, for the skin of this animal is very thin.

In the now extinct Sabre-toothed Tiger the upper canines were of enormous length, and it is not improbable that they, on this account, exceeded the bounds of usefulness; that, while as weapons of offence they may have proved exceedingly effective, yet they hampered the animal when feeding. In many ways one is reminded by these weapons of the huge tusks of the Walrus. These are blunt-pointed, and are said to be used very largely for digging up the large clams and other burrowing shell-fish on which this animal mainly feeds. They are also used as levers to drag the huge body out of the water on to the ice. As fighting weapons they are formidable, and the wounds they inflict are sometimes serious. The polygamous habits of this huge creature may account for the fact that they are so much larger in the males, wherein they may attain a length of thirty inches, and a weight of eight pounds a-piece.

In connection with the monstrous tusks of the Sabre-toothed Tiger there is a point which so far seems never to have attracted the attention it deserves. And this concerns two small flanges of bone which project from the lower border of the end of the lower jaw. In themselves they are unimportant: they lie, it is to be noticed, parallel with the points of the great upper teeth which descend on either side of them. Their full significance is not apparent till we turn to the skull of another extinct animal of quite another type—the huge Dinoceros, one of the Ungulates. This animal was also armed with an enormous pair of tusks, which also, when the mouth was closed, descended on either side of a flange. In this case, however, the flange was developed to such an extent that its free edge descended to the level of the point of the tusk, thus affording it protection against injury. The really striking feature of this curious down-growth is not apparent till an attempt is made to explain its presence. What determined its growth? It seems to furnish us with another of the many instances which are to be found of the correlation of growth between unrelated parts, for there is apparently no traceable connection between the growth of this pair of teeth in the upper jaw and the development of the flanges of the lower border of the jaw which are embraced by these teeth. In the Sabre-toothed Tiger the inciting cause to this flange growth, whatever it may have been, seems to have been much weaker than in the case of Dinoceros.

Naturally one asks, can the whole thing be explained by the theory of Kinetogenesis promulgated years ago by Cope? That is to say, are these curious down-growths the result of a response to a stimulus set up in the lower jaw by constant lateral blows dealt by the tusks against the side of the jaw during the lateral movements of the jaw when feeding or ruminating? Such movements in an Ungulate would be frequent and constant: hence perhaps the more striking result. On account of the scissor-like action of the jaws in the Sabre-tooth such lateral movements were far less extensive, and less powerful. But though this explanation sounds plausible, it presents many difficulties. In the first place it seems to commit one to the admission that the responses of the Somatoplasm during the life of the individual are transmitted to the germ-plasm: that, in short, the characters acquired by the individual during its lifetime are transmitted to its offspring. And there are insuperable difficulties in the way of such a theory. Yet, it must be admitted, it is no less difficult to believe that this correlation of growth is due solely to fortuitous variation, for one cannot really conceive of a variation of this kind taking place in two such different structures independently. Such a conception would have been less difficult if the case of Dinoceros alone were known to us. We could have supposed that, somehow, the lower jaw started to produce its flange just as the teeth began to develop an excess of growth which carried their points beyond the level of the jaw. But the Sabre-tooth shows that the tusks had assumed a growth relatively exaggerated as in Dinoceros, and yet the flange never attained to more than feeble development. We cannot rest content with the theory that the flange is due to the constant stimulus of blows struck against this region of the jaw during the lateral movements which take place when feeding. Were these animals alive to-day it could be tested by extracting the tusks during infancy, when, the stimulus being removed, the flanges should not appear.

There are yet other aspects of the skull of Dinoceros which may well be considered here. The first concerns the excessive armature of horns, there being no less than three pairs supported on massive bony cores; and the second the ridiculously small brain cavity which is proportionately smaller than that of any other known mammal, recent or fossil. This poverty of brain-power was probably one, if not the chief, factor among the causes which brought about the extinction of this strange beast. Even more formidable horns were borne by the extinct Arsinoetherium. But this animal did not display the double armature of horns and tusks.

Among the Carnivora monogamy is the rule, though the Lion is occasionally polygamous. But the Eared-seals (Otaria), or Sea-lions, and Sea-bears afford a striking example of polygamous species and of the ferocity they display when sexually excited. These animals, moreover, are capable of the most astonishing powers of endurance and vitality, exceeding indeed that of all other mammals. Since the habits of the Northern Fur-seal (Otaria ursina) have been more carefully studied than those of any others, it may serve as a sample of the rest.

Living for the greater part of the year in the open sea, the old bulls—animals of six or seven years old—are the first to seek the “rookeries,” or breeding grounds, taking up their territory a full month before the cows arrive. Later, the younger bulls appear, and the more daring endeavour to force their way through the ranks of those who have already taken up positions. This often leads to fighting, but more usually nothing further than “bluffing” is indulged in, though it is commonly supposed that very severe engagements take place. This seems, however, to be only occasionally true. In due course, generally about the second week in June, the cows begin to arrive, at first in straggling numbers, but soon the main body puts in an appearance, and before the end of the month many thousands of both sexes are crowded along the foreshore. But yet, contrary to the generally accepted belief, no serious fighting takes place. The bulls quietly seize the females as they arrive. It would seem that the first arrival serves as a focus of attraction for all later comers landing in the vicinity. The bull holding the most advantageous post—that is to say, that nearest the best landing-place—starts the collection and, unintentionally, the distribution of the cows. Having seized the first arrival, he places her by his side. As the later females arrive he gives each a most cordial welcome, and then proceeds to round up his harem. But soon he has more wives than he can continue to control. Do what he will, he cannot be in two places at once; and thus it is that in rushing off to chastise some covetous neighbour, one or more bulls on the opposite side of his harem proceed to make captures from his horde. And this system of abduction goes on over the whole rookery till all the cows have been appropriated, leaving a crowd of envious bachelors in the background who have not yet developed either courage or strength to secure mates for themselves.

Plate 13.

Photo by New York Zoological Society, from “The Living Animals of the World.”

CALIFORNIAN SEA-LIONS, OR EARED SEALS.

The “bulls” of the Eared Seal are much larger than the “cows”; they have otherwise no very conspicuous “Secondary Sexual Characters.”

[Face page 82.

But within forty-eight hours of their landing the cows give birth to their “pups.” And it is for this purpose, and not for mating, that they come to land. Within a few days of the birth, however, the females are “in use” again. This is the critical period in the life in the rookery. For the bulls now become frenzied with excitement and fight most viciously one with another, each hoping to possess himself of his opponent’s harem. Each tries to seize the other by the fore flipper, and, failing in this, the fangs are buried in the back. They hold tenaciously, each trying to force the other to relax his hold; but commonly this vice-like grip is maintained till the skin gives way, leaving great bleeding rents. Sometimes the contest rages till one or both is fatally wounded. Often during such duels an idle bull, hitherto unable to secure a harem, will rush in and capture that of one of the combatants!

In the management of the harem the bull is an adept. Whether he has five cows or fifty, he is, says Dr. Lucas, “master of the situation.” His will is law. Not that it is always tamely accepted as such, but the result is the same. If a cow becomes restless, and moves about, a warning growl usually quiets her. If the movement is persisted in and an attempt to escape evident, the bull is up at once with a show of fierceness and in chase. He may simply strike her down with his open mouth. Often in doing so his sharp canines tear a gash in her skin. He may even seize her in his mouth and deliberately throw her, or carry her back into the harem. If the cow thinks she has a chance to get away she may try to outrun him. If she miscalculates the distance he seizes her, after a few swift bounds, by the skin of the back, or by the hind flipper, and tosses her, often torn and bleeding, into the family circle. As a rule, however, she avoids this seizure by turning and facing her lord and master, and biting him in the breast and throat. But all to no purpose. In spite of her violent protests he pushes her backwards before him into the fold.

Sometimes in her efforts to improve her position she runs up to, and is seized by, a rival bull. Her lord speedily asserts his ownership by getting a grip wherever he can on the would-be truant. Then begins a tug-of-war between the two bulls, during which the wretched victim of their rage may be torn in pieces. By the elimination in each generation of the more querulous and discontented, the peculiarly gentle and passive nature so characteristic of the females has been developed.

After the first ten days’ sojourn ashore the female is allowed to go to sea to feed, returning presently to suckle her young. The bull, on the other hand, can enjoy no such privilege. For three long months he must keep watch and ward fasting—at first, in order that he may retain his territory; later, that he may retain his harem. This fast, having regard to the loss of energy and blood which this strenuous period entails, is wonderful; for in the case of all other animals fasts are always associated with absolute rest and sleep. Not so with the Sea-lion; he arrives at the breeding-ground fat and well-liking, he leaves a starved and battered wreck.

The foregoing summary of the habits of these most interesting and much persecuted animals is taken from the exhaustive report of Dr. F. A. Lucas and Mr. Charles Townsend. These two distinguished naturalists accompanied the United States contingent of the Fur-seal International Commission despatched in 1896–97 to inquire into the threatened extermination of these animals. Major Barrett Hamilton accompanied the British contingent, and also made a report. And it is curious to note that on some points he is diametrically opposed, not only to the American naturalists, but to all other writers on this theme. He contends, for example, that “nothing could better illustrate the fact that it is the cows, and not the bulls, which have the real control of the harem-system.” He traced the rapid growth of two harems from four or five to as many as eighty cows. And he tells these were completely out of control and free to move about as they wished. “The bulls, in spite of all their bluster, had the flimsiest of nominal dominion, and the cows were always able to, and frequently did, leave the harems daily to dally with the cowless bulls on the outside. Yet ... as long as they chose to sit massed together on the ground which had been appropriated by the two stronger bulls, no weaker rivals could approach to within ten yards of them. The master of the harem had no control over its occupants, but he was absolute lord of the ground on which they sat.” This is certainly curious, but more so is the fact that these females were allowed to return by the “cowless bulls” outside the charmed circle. Later in the season he tells us he witnessed an even better illustration of this singular behaviour. At this time “the division of the cows into harems was a very unequal one, the smaller bull being only able to keep a very few cows, while the larger one claimed the greater part of the rookery. But the cows could pass over to the smaller bull’s ground as often as they liked; and he probably was father to a great many more of the pups born in 1898 than those of the half-dozen cows over whom he claimed control.” In regard to two other bulls in another cart of the island, there came a time when the inequality of the harems reached such a pitch, that the newly-arriving cows “had to lie in scattered groups outside the main mass, and thus permitted the weaker bulls to form new harems out of the reach of the two strong old bulls.” But perhaps the most singular feature of all was the indifference which one old bull displayed towards a little bachelor, permitting him to enjoy the most intimate relations with one of his cows without displaying the least sign of annoyance, as if he could scarcely regard one so young as a rival.

There is much evidence to show that the erotic side of the male-seal develops early. “I saw,” he says, “the little black pups acting to each other in a way that made it certain that their sexual feelings had already made themselves felt.” This one can well understand, for only animals of strong sexual tendencies could survive the strenuous life which the period of sexual activity entails.

The very different interpretation of the behaviour of these animals at this very important stage of their life-history must be due to the fact that different colonies were studied which were living, too, under somewhat different conditions. It seems clear, for example, that the landing of the females so graphically described by Dr. Lucas was a landing under exceptional circumstances, the master bulls having taken up positions at the only spot where access to the desired breeding quarters was to be found; while Major Barrett Hamilton was probably fortunate in seeing phases which were wanting in the “rookeries” examined by Dr. Lucas. And both these observers again differ in the accounts they give of the life of such “rookeries” with those by Mr. Elliot, who explored these teeming colonies some years earlier when the number of animals forgathered there was far larger and the fighting, apparently in consequence, was far more severe.

In the matter of secondary sexual characters the most remarkable of the seal-tribe are those of the Elephant Seal and the Bladder-nosed Seal, and this because of the extraordinary development of inflatable tissue above the muzzle which these animals display. Of their life-history we know little enough, and this despite the fact that for generations the Elephant Seal was mercilessly hunted and slain for the sake of its oil. Millions were slaughtered during the last century, yet only scraps of information on the economy of the creatures has come down to us. All that is of any value, and especially in regard to the “Courting” period, we owe to Mr. Charles Townsend, of the New York Aquarium, and this in regard to the northern species, Macrorhinus angustirostris of Guadelupe, though it may safely be inferred that the Southern, Antarctic species, M. leoninus, differs in no essential respects.

According to Mr. Townsend, the adult bull, having taken possession of his territory and formed a harem, is constantly called upon to wage duels for both with less fortunate rivals. And the severity of such combats was attested by the deep wounds and festering sores of the necks of these old warriors—which, at their maximum, attained in the days of their prosperity a length of nearly thirty feet and a girth of sixteen feet; but the last survivors of the race to-day seem rarely to exceed twenty-two feet. The weapons used in fighting are the canines, and the only armour they possess is that formed by the thickening of the skin of the neck, which forms a great massive shield, so that really dangerous wounds are rare. The great fleshy proboscis, the most vulnerable part, is carefully guarded by the upturned position of the head. The use of this trunk-like organ, which may attain a length of about fifteen inches, is not clear; it seems to serve mainly as an “ornament,” at times, too, furnishing a very definite indication as to the temper of its owner. While the animal is slowly moving its great carcase from place to place, this remarkable organ is relaxed, and pendent; but when fighting it is closely contracted so as to be out of harm’s way. Whether it plays any useful part in the capture of food is not known; but it is probably much displayed during phases of sexual excitement. In young animals, it is significant to notice, as well as in the adult female this trunk is entirely wanting, which seems to suggest that this peculiar feature has only been recently acquired, the young and the adult female, as is the rule, standing nearer to the early forebears of this strange type. There is an enormous difference, it should be remarked, between the sexes in the matter of size, the female not attaining more than half the bulk of her lord. A further interesting point concerns the coloration of the young, which are black, while the adults are brown. Doubtless this is connected with the requirements of the young, the black coat attracting more heat than the lighter-coloured coat of the adult.

As touching that curious creature, the Crested, or Hooded Seal (Cystophora cristatus), a native of the colder regions of the North Atlantic. This animal is remarkable for the development, in the males alone, of a great crest or casque on the head, which is formed by a large inflatable air-sac over the ridge of the nose, and communicating with the nostrils. When fully inflated, it covers the head as far back as the eye. Its purpose is a matter of conjecture. It seems to be inflated either when he animal is greatly excited, as when challenging rival males, or when threatened with danger from other causes, as when attacked by man. The males are exceedingly pugnacious, and fight with one another for the possession of females with great ferocity, such contests being accompanied by cries which can be heard for miles. From the difficulty which Esquimaux and sealers find in killing the animal with clubs it certainly seems as if this strange wind-bag were more than merely ornamental.

Plate 14.

Photo copyright, W. P. Pycraft.

ELEPHANT SEAL.

This is a young animal. Note the great size of the eyes, and the general “seal-like” character of the head as compared with that of the adult.

Photo by courtesy of Charles Haskins Townsend, Director of New York Aquarium.

NORTHERN ELEPHANT SEAL.

Adult male and female, and yearling. The male shows the enormously inflated snout.

[Face page 88.

That those extraordinary creatures the Cetacea—the Whales and their kin—are derived from the same common stock as the typical carnivora there can nowadays be no doubt, widely as they have departed from their land-dwelling relatives in almost every possible feature of their organization. In the matter of their “Courtship” we know nothing, but we may infer certain incidents in this critical period of their life-history from the peculiar nature of the secondary sexual characters which some species display. Thus in the Pilot Whale (Globicephalus) and the Bottle-nose Whale (Hyperoödon) the forehead, in the bulls, is enormously swollen by a mass of fibrous tissue so dense as to turn the blade of the sharpest knife, as I know well from attempts to dissect this region. Now the only use, surely, for such a cushion is that of a battering-ram by rival males in charging one another, as rams and other horned animals will do. In the Bottle-nose Whale this cushion is backed up by an enormous mass of solid bone thrown up by the maxillæ. The origin of this bony growth is interesting, for it appears first as a slight swelling in the rare species Berardius; it is seen at a further stage of growth in the female “Bottle-nose” (Hyperoödon), and attains its maximum in the male, where it stands unique. There are two other species which demand notice here. The first is Layard’s Beaked Whale (Mesoplodon); the second the Narwhal. The former is the only vertebrate which in a wild state wears a muzzle! In this species the teeth have totally vanished save for a pair in the lower jaw, which are found towards the end of the jaw. These in the adult, or perhaps we should say senile, male grow upwards and inwards, finally meeting one another above the upper jaw, so as to make it impossible for the animal to open its mouth more than the fraction of an inch! Surely here we have a secondary sexual character carried to an excess, and so proving not only disadvantageous to the animal, but positively disastrous, for it seems clear that so hampered the creature can feed only on the most minute forms of animal life, which could only be captured and swallowed with difficulty. It is true that the Rorquals feed on excessively minute Crustacea, but they are able to take in enormous quantities at a time, the “whalebone” serving the office of a sieve to prevent their escape. The Mesoplodon has no such aids. One is tempted to believe that the skulls displaying this most curious feature are abnormal, comparable to those, say, of rabbits wherein the teeth have grown so excessively long as to close the mouth, on account of the displacement of the cutting surfaces by accident. But there is nothing to afford support to this view, and one must therefore fall back on the suggestion of senility.

The Narwhal has long been celebrated for the enormous size of the canine teeth, the only teeth present in the jaws. As a rule, only one leaves its bony socket, the other, commonly the right, remaining as a mere vestige, seven or eight inches long within the skull. The protruding tooth, which is spirally fluted, may attain a length of nine feet. Occasionally both teeth are developed, and in this case the spiral is the same, differing in a very striking manner from the spiral horns of ruminants, wherein one presents a right, the other left-handed spiral. But what purpose do these teeth serve? This question has never yet been definitely settled. Some hold that it is used to break open breathing holes in the ice, for the animal lives in the far north: others that it is used as a spear in hunting prey. Some aver that it serves as a weapon of offence, being used by rival males in their struggle for mates. Scoresby, the explorer, indeed, says he has seen young males in mock-battle, fencing with these remarkable weapons. But until we have more satisfactory data, we must regard this armature of the Narwhal as affording another instance of a secondary sexual character of doubtful value to its possessor.

CHAPTER VI
COURTSHIP AMONG BIRDS

Generalities—Darwin v. Wallace—The Peacock in his Pride—The “Display” of the Peacock Pheasant—The Splendour of the Argus Pheasant and the Marvel of its Eyes—The Frill of the Amherst Pheasant—Birds of Paradise in the Toils of Love—Inflated Suitors—Ruffs and Reeves—Fearsome Weapons and their Uses—Birds which dance—Musical Birds—The Bird’s Voice-box—The “Lek” of the Capercaillie—Instruments of Percussion—The Curious Performance of the Wood-pecker.

The fact that so little is known about the mammals during that period when the all-important work of securing mates is going on, and of the subsequent events, is largely due to the difficulties which close observation of this phase of their life-history entails. With the birds matters are far otherwise; their haunts are more accessible; they are far more numerous, and much more easily kept under observation. Consequently, we have a tolerably complete knowledge of the lives of some species, at any rate, during the reproductive period; that is to say, as to the sequence of events from the beginning of the reproductive activities onwards; but the interpretation of what is seen is another matter. No attempt which has yet been made to fathom the psychology of sex has yielded more than a slight insight into what is taking place. Nevertheless, this is an aspect of the subject which has a far more important bearing on the problems of evolution than is generally realized. But these pages are concerned rather with the relations between the sexes, than with the subtle forces which have fashioned and control conduct in this regard.