Descent of Man [ 1871 ]

Charles Darwin [ 1809 - 1882 ]

Introduction




  THE NATURE of the following work will be best understood by a

brief account of how it came to be written. During many years I

collected notes on the origin or descent of man, without any intention

of publishing on the subject, but rather with the determination not to

publish, as I thought that I should thus only add to the prejudices

against my views. It seemed to me sufficient to indicate, in the first

edition of my Origin of Species, that by this work "light would be

thrown on the origin of man and his history"; and this implies that

man must be included with other organic beings in any general

conclusion respecting his manner of appearance on this earth. Now

the case wears a wholly different aspect. When a naturalist like

Carl Vogt ventures to say in his address as President of the

National Institution of Geneva (1869), "personne, en Europe au

moins, n'ose plus soutenir la creation independante et de toutes

pieces, des especes," it is manifest that at least a large number of

naturalists must admit that species are the modified descendants of

other species; and this especially holds good with the younger and

rising naturalists. The greater number accept the agency of natural

selection; though some urge, whether with justice the future must

decide, that I have greatly overrated its importance. Of the older and

honoured chiefs in natural science, many unfortunately are still

opposed to evolution in every form.

  In consequence of the views now adopted by most naturalists, and

which will ultimately, as in every other case, be followed by others

who are not scientific, I have been led to put together my notes, so

as to see how far the general conclusions arrived at in my former

works were applicable to man. This seemed all the more desirable, as I

had never deliberately applied these views to a species taken

singly. When we confine our attention to any one form, we are deprived

of the weighty arguments derived from the nature of the affinities

which connect together whole groups of organisms- their geographical

distribution in past and present times, and their geological

succession. The homological structure, embryological development,

and rudimentary organs of a species remain to be considered, whether

it be man or any other animal, to which our attention may be directed;

but these great classes of facts afford, as it appears to me, ample

and conclusive evidence in favour of the principle of gradual

evolution. The strong support derived from the other arguments should,

however, always be kept before the mind.

  The sole object of this work is to consider, firstly, whether man,

like every other species, is descended from some pre-existing form;

secondly, the manner of his development; and thirdly, the value of the

differences between the so-called races of man. As I shall confine

myself to these points, it will not be necessary to describe in detail

the differences between the several races- an enormous subject which

has been fully discussed in many valuable works. The high antiquity of

man has recently been demonstrated by the labours of a host of eminent

men, beginning with M. Boucher de Perthes; and this is the

indispensable basis for understanding his origin. I shall,

therefore, take this conclusion for granted, and may refer my

readers to the admirable treatises of Sir Charles Lyell, Sir John

Lubbock, and others. Nor shall I have occasion to do more than to

allude to the amount of difference between man and the

anthropomorphous apes; for Prof. Huxley, in the opinion of most

competent judges, has conclusively shewn that in every visible

character man differs less from the higher apes, than these do from

the lower members of the same order of primates.

  This work contains hardly any original facts in regard to man; but

as the conclusions at which I arrived, after drawing up a rough draft,

appeared to me interesting, I thought that they might interest others.

It has often and confidently been asserted, that man's origin can

never be known: but ignorance more frequently begets confidence than

does knowledge: it is those who know little, and not those who know

much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be

solved by science. The conclusion that man is the co-descendant with

other species of some ancient, lower, and extinct form, is not in

any degree new. Lamarck long ago came to this conclusion, which has

lately been maintained by several eminent naturalists and

philosophers; for instance, by Wallace, Huxley, Lyell, Vogt,

Lubbock, Buchner, Rolle, &c.,* and especially by Haeckel. This last

naturalist, besides his great work, Generelle Morphologie (1866),

has recently (1868, with a second edit. in 1870), published his

Naturliche Schopfungsgeschichte, in which he fully discusses the

genealogy of man. If this work had appeared before my essay had been

written, I should probably never have completed it. Almost all the

conclusions at which I have arrived I find confirmed by this

naturalist, whose knowledge on many points is much fuller than mine.

Wherever I have added any fact or view from Prof. Haeckel's

writings, I give his authority in the text; other statements I leave

as they originally stood in my manuscript, occasionally giving in

the foot-notes references to his works, as a confirmation of the

more doubtful or interesting points.



  * As the works of the first-named authors are so well known, I

need not give the titles; but as those of the latter are less well

known in England, I will give them:- Sechs Vorlesungen uberdie

Darwin'sche Theorie: zweite Auflage, 1868, von Dr. L. Buchner;

translated into French under the title Conferences sur la Theorie

Darwinienne, 1869. Der Mensch, im Lichte der Darwin'schen Lehre, 1865,

von Dr. F. Rolle. I will not attempt to give references to all the

authors who have taken the same side of the question. Thus G.

Canestrini has published (Annuario della Soc. dei Naturalisti, Modena,

1867, p. 81) a very curious paper on rudimentary characters, as

bearing on the origin of man. Another work has (1869) been published

by Dr. Francesco Barrago, bearing in Italian the title of "Man, made

in the image of God, was also made in the image of the ape."



  During many years it has seemed to me highly probable that sexual

selection has played an important part in differentiating the races of

man; but in my Origin of Species I contented myself by merely alluding

to this belief. When I came to apply this view to man, I found it

indispensable to treat the whole subject in full detail.* Consequently

the second part of the present work, treating of sexual selection, has

extended to an inordinate length, compared with the first part; but

this could not be avoided.



  * Prof. Haeckel was the only author who, at the time when this

work first appeared, had discussed the subject of sexual selection,

and had seen its full importance, since the publication of the Origin;

and this he did in a very able manner in his various works.



  I had intended adding to the present volumes an essay on the

expression of the various emotions by man and the lower animals. My

attention was called to this subject many years ago by Sir Charles

Bell's admirable work. This illustrious anatomist maintains that man

is endowed with certain muscles solely for the sake of expressing

his emotions. As this view is obviously opposed to the belief that man

is descended from some other and lower form, it was necessary for me

to consider it. I likewise wished to ascertain how far the emotions

are expressed in the same manner by the different races of man. But

owing to the length of the present work, I have thought it better to

reserve my essay for separate publication.
Last updated: Friday, 30-Jan-98 10:45:17 MST