not mean that all members of the White race had the power of originating or developing the essential elements of civilization with equal rapidity. But the White race does show a remarkable power of assimilation, which does not seem to have manifested itself to an equal degree in any other race.25 The problem is, therefore, one of explaining why the tribes of ancient Europe readily assimilated the civilization that was offered to them by Rome and Greece, while at the present time we find primitive peoples dwindling away before the approach of modern civilization. In the first place these barbarous peoples were in their appearance, like the civilized men of their times. The stigma of inferiority, because they had not developed a civilization like the ancient civilization, did not attach to these peoples. The colonies of ancient times grew by accretion from among the more primitive people. Then, in ancient times, the devastating influences of diseases. which nowadays begin to ravage the inhabitants of territories newly opened to the whites, were not so marked. These peoples lived in more permanent contiguity, and, being always in contact with one another, were subject to the same influences; consequently no isolated portion of the race had opportunity to become immune to certain diseases through natural selection. In modern times, the settling of an area near the habitation of some primitive folk is followed by epidemics among them contracted from the whites which sweep away large numbers, disturbing or completely destroying the whole social or economic structure of the people. But the most potent fact which accounts for the apparently greater powers of assimilation possessed by 25 Ibid. the ancestors of the European peoples, is found in the differences of culture which are economic. The contrast between the culture represented by the modern white man and that of the primitive man is far more fundamental than the contrast between the ancients and the people with whom they came in contact. This is particularly in economic and industrial activities. The industries of primitive peoples of our times are exterminated by the cheapness and enormous quantity of the products imported by the white trader. The slow and laborious industrial processes of primitive peoples cannot compete with the power of production of the machines of the whites. Moreover, primitive tribes are swamped by the numbers of the immigrating race, which crowd them out of their old haunts so rapidly that there is no time for gradual assimilation. In olden times there was no such immense inequality in numbers as we observe in many regions to-day.26 "We conclude, therefore, that the conditions for assimilation in ancient Europe were much more favorable than in those countries where in our times primitive people come in contact with civilization. Therefore, we do not need to assume that the ancient Europeans were more gifted than other races which have not become exposed to the influences of civilization until recent times."' 27 SUPPLEMENTARY READINGS. BOAS, F.-The Mind of Primitive Man. GIDDINGS, F. H.-Principles of Sociology, part iii, chapter ii 27 Ibid.; also Gerland, Georg-Das Aussterben der Naturvölker; Ratzel, F.-Anthropogeographie, vol. ii, pp. 330 et seq. reference as it has been advanced since "The Principles' was published, and is taken with Professor Giddings' permission from notes of his lectures at Columbia University.) KEANE, A. H.-Ethnology. RIPLEY, W. Z.-The Races of Europe. VIII TRIBAL SOCIETY THERE are three means of determining approximately the characteristics of social life among prehistoric men: first, a considerable mass of archeological remains; second, the existence of survivals in the traditions of civilized society indicating a time when the ancestors of these peoples lived under very primitive conditions; and third, a general parallelism between some features of prehistoric cultures and some features of the culture of primitive societies which exist to-day among the Australian aborigines, the American Indians, and other savage peoples. But this parallelism has certain important limitations which must be remembered in any comparison we may wish to make. Modern savage groups live in relatively barren, inhospitable, inaccessible regions of the earth, into which they have been crowded by stronger peoples.1 Moreover, the spread of the European race with its highly developed civilization has cut short the growth of the existing independent germs of civilization among these primitive peoples without regard to their mental aptitude. Thus the parallelism is not exact, for while we cannot premise any marked intellectual superiority of prehistoric man over existing savages in explaining present cultural differences, we must recognize that advantage of some sort was possessed by the prehistoric 1 Giddings, Principles of Sociology, p. 210. 2 Boas, op. cit., p. 17. ancestors of civilized races over the early ancestors of existing savage peoples. The archeological remains of prehistoric man reveal to us much of his culture and practices. We have mentioned briefly in the third chapter the various types of implements which prehistoric men manufactured. They were made of rough chipped flint, and later of polished stone, and finally of rude metal. The arts of pottery and weaving were practised. When we examine the flint and stone implements of primitive men living in the savage state to-day, we find that their implements resemble these old remains which come down to us from prehistoric times. Comparison of prehistoric pottery and weaving with the pottery and weaving carried on by existing savages reveals a similar identity. Thus we have evidence which leads us to believe that as regards the arts of manufacturing flint and stone implements, and even in the more pacific arts of pottery and weaving, existing savage societies are passing through the same cultural stage of development that the ancestors of European peoples passed through in prehistoric times. This identity in important phases of culture leads us to believe that in other respects the culture and social organization of prehistoric men were similar to the culture and social organization of modern savage societies. Consequently, if we would understand the social organization of prehistoric peoples, we must study the social organization and culture of modern primitive groups. The most characteristic fact of primitive social organization among all groups of savage peoples-Eskimo, Australians, American Indians and others-is that the bond of union is always and everywhere one of ficti3 See figures 74 and 75 and compare with figure 43. |