Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 8.djvu/638

Rh 616 ETHNOGRAPHY bone which are retained in the bodies of animals aud even in the human frame, as relics of a former construction. But sooner or later they will fall to the ground. Nature closely husbands her means ; she may keep for a while forms that are apparently useless ; it seems that she has forgotten them, or that she intends to fall back on them in case of failure; but when the new type is firmly settled, everything that is not serviceable disappears. The scientific exploration of caverns with a view to dis covering the remains of ancient men and beasts, as Pengelly has described it in the case of the Kent Cave, may serve as a model to ethnographers. The explorers did not leave an inch of soil untouched ; all the mound was dug out yard by yard, and carefully sifted ; nothing was taken up, nothing thrown away without good reason; the objects collected were labelled with care, and even the nature and the condition of the refuse recorded. So the main work of the ethno grapher consists in scooping the historic or the prehistoric noil, in picking up everything that has lived, or that has been touched by living hands, and not rejecting as valueless anything as long as he is not perfectly cognizant of its nature. Thus he finds precious things and valuable information wherethe ignorant seesbut heaps of offal and scourings. And when he travels, especially in semi-civilized countries, there is no limit to the things he may look aud inquire after ; the less the people are civilized, the richer the harvest he may gather in. One investigator prefers to study the people themselves, another their institutions. But whatever be the study, the first rule will always be to observe the facts with unprejudiced eyes; to draw a deep line of demarcation between them and all mere conjectures. Besides, all explanations have to be called m question, even those which seem sensible and juduious ; the student is in duty bound to distrust every theor_ r and interpretation, especially his own glosses and commentaries. Rushing to conclusions is a fault into which beginners are sure to fall. The unscientific mind resembles the child in many respects, and in none more than this ; it is impatient and cannot bear suspense. Ready acquiescence in the assertion of others is dangerous, and easy conviction in one s own ideas is the worst bane to science. One single fact well observed, well authenticated, is a positive gain,_and may turn out to be of the highest value in future studies. But a single fact proves too much or too little ; as long as it stands alone, nobody can know whether it demonstrates a general law, or only an exception, as we see by the controversies still held on the famous skull of Neanderthal. Laws are obtained by grouping analogous facts I in series. In nature, as in history, a series may be termed the development of an idea. Therefore, when the ethno grapher does^not restrict himself to the simple description of a single subject, of a single locality, of a single custom, he will have to search for analogous facts, that he may give the reader a scale of comparison. For he would expose himself and his readers to gross errors if he were to conclude from a single trait to the whole institution, or from a single institution to the whole national organization. Such primi tive populations as the Aleutians or the Todas it would be easy to represent as living either in a moral paradise or in a moral hell, according as one chose to regard only the attractive or only the repulsive side of their character. A fine ethnographical portrait, which is an abstract representa tion, will be always difficult to draw. In the sketch of that collective individual, a nation, the features must be impressed with the many lines and furrows which the wear and tear of existence have left on the original. In describing an institution which is a collective fact, the numerous and contradictory feelings must be indicated yhich it stirred up in the many minds and hearts on which it acted, and which reacted on .it. But masters only know j how to blend light and shade how with some few colours to express a multitude of things. Ethnology, having entered on the scientific stage of development, requires to be treated as a science. The fields of anthropology aud ethnology are no longer the tilting-yard for fancies against opinions, for hypotheses against guesses ; they are now the place where facts well authenticated are stored up and gathered into orderly groups. Ethnology has become a science of observation, a branch of natural history. It was born the last of all sciences, not because it is the most difficult, but, ou the contrary, be cause, being easy enough, people have dealt with it too lightly. Everybody thought himself able to judge, and his sentences expressed his biases or dislikes. Now, ethno logy requires of its adepts that they be as unprejudiced as mathematicians, that they discard all preconceived judg ments as much as do the chemists and physicists. Ethno graphers must be exact observers and faithful recorders Science and virtue alike begin and prosper by the same means by sincerity and by effort. IV. Material Development. Any inquiry into the mate rial progress of man bears upon a multitude of detail*. Briefly stated, the most important are Food, its nature and its preparation; Weapons, Tools, and Implements; Shelter and Clothing ; Domestic and Public Fires ; Baiter and Trade. Food. Man has been defined as a digestive tube. He is happily something else as soon as his most imperious physical wants are satisfied, but it must be confessed that, until the cravings of his hunger or thirst are allayed, he is little better than a ravenous brute. For the states man and the economist there is scarcely any question of more gravity than that of subsistence, even in the face of our enormous accumulation of wealth, in spite of our gigantic means of communication. There are four great phases through which nations pass, or have passed, hunting and fishing, sheep and cattle tending, agriculture, and industry ; and these are nothing else than a succession of improvements in the means of raising food. All the results of manifold culture converge towards a grand total, more food for more men, better food for every man, and consequently lives longer and more numerous. A simple calculation shows how much modern industry increases the amount of disposable food. From the United States census, showing the extent of land occu pied by the Redskins in 1825, it was calculated that the hunting tribes, although they raised some maize, required 1 75 square miles per head. At that rate, all Europe, including Russia, could feed two millions of Indians and no more ; but, thanks to its agriculture and to its industry, it supports three hundred millions o? inhabitants. It would be hazardous to estimate how many more Indians the North American prairies might feed, if those Indians had taken to bison breeding instead of bison hunting. According as the chief produce of the herd is to be milk or meat, the calculations would vary by large amounts. Nor ought the yield of our improved breeds to be taken as the measure. But, to proceed, it is reckoned that an area under wheat affords from ten to twelve times more human food than it would give under grass for cattle or sheep. That ratio, ten or twelve to one, may express in human lives the progress which was realized whea husband men succeeded to nomad communities. With the intro duction of steam as our great mechanical agent, we are entering the period of large cities. Human anthills of one million souls and more exist already in many parts of the world ; they increase constantly both in absolute numbers and relatively to the population at large. It is already necessary that the supply of food to these immense agglo merations of &quot; digestive tubes &quot; be as regular as clockwork.