Animal Sociology

ANIMAL SOCIOLOGY. The distinctive note of an animal society is that a number of individuals of the same species act together as a unity, combining their efforts in defence or in attack or in work. Thus a troop of monkeys, a beaver village, a herd of horses or cattle, a pack of wolves, a colony of viscachas, a rookery, a flock of cranes, may serve as illustrations of cor porate life, which is in a sense more than the sum of its parts. The mere living together of a multitude, like mites in the cavern of a cheese or rabbits in a warren, does not constitute a society; the criterion is some capacity for acting coherently and harmoni ously as a unit. In a large societary form like an ant-hill there may be a number of simultaneously active units, each a corporate body. When beavers unite their efforts to make a canal through a large island in the middle of a river, or when rooks combine against a hawk, there is a distinctive social note. The degree of the sociality varies greatly ; thus baboons show more concerted action than prairie dogs, and beavers than bisons, and rooks much more than parrots. Considered from the individual point of view, social life among animals implies some measure of self-subordina tion to communal activity and interests. The contrast is a solitary individualistic mode of life, an each-for-himself regime. There is no warrant for ethical imputations, which do not seem more than incipiently relevant among animals. An otter is self-sufficient as effectively as the beaver is co-operative; the two ways of living are suited for different conditions of existence. Another feature of the social and gregarious mode of life is some alleviation of the individual struggle for existence. To some extent, the com munal life serves as a shield for types of individual that could not otherwise stand alone. This may go so far as to allow of the prolonged survival of non-viable types, such as queen termites, and of individuals that cannot find food for themselves, like the drones of the beehive.

There are two main groups of animal societies—(a) those mainly on an intelligent basis, as among monkeys, horses, cattle, elephants, beavers; and (b) those mainly on an instinctive basis, as among ants, bees, wasps, and termites. But this is not a hard and fast dichotomy, for beavers show much instinctive behaviour and bees may be occasionally intelligent. Social birds show both instinctive and intelligent behaviour. At the same time, there is an obvious contrast between a society mainly intelligent and a society mainly instinctive. If the concept of corporate unity among near kin be extended downwards in the animal kingdom, it naturally leads to colonies of physically united individuals, as in hydroids, sea-pens, reef-corals, Polyzoa and compound Tuni cates. The occurrence of dimorphism or polymorphism is of in terest, since this division of labour naturally leads from aggregates like a reef-coral to genuine integrates, like the Portuguese Man of-War, a multitudinous colony of polymorphic individuals that can swim as if it were one animal. These physically continuous colonies, formed by repeated budding, might almost be termed vegetative societies—for many individuals act as one, there is physiological self-subordination, and there is a modes vivendi found for individual types which, in some cases, could not survive in isolation.

Advantages of Social Life.

Theadvantages of some form of social, communal, gregarious or co-operative life may be summed up: (I) Many small animals, with no strong individual foothold, become safe and indeed irresistible in their societies, as ants well show. (2) Operations impossible for a single individual may be effected by corporate effort, as when several ants combine to bring large booty to the nest, or when wolves surround their prey, or when pelicans form a living seine-net for fish. (3) There may be an economization of energy, at a high level, when one wild goose relieves another as leader of the flying phalanx, or, at a low level, when a number of ants reduce the loss of heat by huddling into a living ball. (4) Economy is enhanced when it is backed by division of labour, as among the specialized castes of ants and termites. (5) There is an opportunity for forming permanent products, such as ant-hill, termitary, bee-hive and beaver-dam, which doubtless operate as evolutionary factors. (6) Although one must postulate more or less kin-sympathy or the like in the initiation of a societary form, a milieu will be increas ingly developed in which the psychical aspect has more chance to find expression than in the solitary mode of life. The social milieu is one in which there is likely to be a fostering of wits and kindly feelings, besides such anticipations as play and artistic products. The idiosyncrasies illustrated in ant-communities are manifold, such as keeping slaves, guests, and the analogues of domestic animals. In some cases, it must be admitted, the shield of the society allows of the survival of strange phenomena border ing on the pathological. Thus in a slave-making community of ants, the dominant caste may require to be not merely foraged for, but literally fed, by the so-called slaves. Some of the Coleop terous and Dipterous guests of termites pass into a practically diseased condition called physogastry, in which the abdomen becomes swollen, the wings drop off, the insects become quite or almost blind. According to Wheeler this is the Nemesis of life in the termitary with its close humid atmosphere, its cramped quarters, its narrow passages, and the superabundance of carbo hydrate food. But the aegis of animal society is more often progressive than retrogressive. It is not maintained that the in dividual stimulations towards expertness and sympathy have entailed results which accumulate as part of the racial endowment. That is as it may be (see HEREDITY). What is suggested here is merely that the social milieu is one in which germinal variations in the direction of, say, better brains and stronger sympathies will have an increased chance to survive. (7) By itself, as most fundamental, must be ranked the shield that a society affords to its members, giving them a firmer foothold in the struggle for existence, and allowing variations and experimental initiatives to be tested without being subject to too severe external selection.

Pre-Conditions of Sociality.

Ifthe social way of life has all the advantages indicated, the question naturally arises why it has not been adopted by a larger number of animal types. The answer is to be found in the pre-conditions which make sociality possible. First, there must be some capacity for kin-sympathy and fineness of brain. Fishes may swim in shoals but there is hardly any hint of integration. Mites may congregate in millions but they have not the brain for sociality. Secondly, there must be the possibility of large numbers. A small society is almost a contradiction in terms. Therefore an animal society demands either prolific multiplication, as in ants and bees and still more in termites, or a long period of reproductivity, as in elephants. Thirdly, the habits of the animal must be congruent with life in a community. Thus among spiders, which are highly evolved types, there are only two or three social species. Solitary hunters, such as otters, are precluded from social life. Thus we see that while the social way of living is very advantageous, and brings indirect as well as direct rewards, it is far from being open to all.

Social Activities.

Theactivities of an animal society find diverse expression: (A) Some may be grouped as communal enterprises. There may be united defence, as of wasps against an intruder, wild cattle against a large beast of prey, rooks against a hawk. Or there may be concerted attack, as when small birds mob a hawk or an owl, or a pack of weasels attack a dog. There may be co operation in securing food, as when monkeys raid an orchard, or wolves surround their victim, or pelicans in a half circle close in upon fishes. In some cases there is combined action in making a shelter, like a termitary, or a well-housed store, as in a hive. A beaver's dam or canal, necessarily a co-operative achievement, is accessory to transport and storing.

In many cases the corporate endeavour has considerable sub tlety, as in the slave-making raids of the Amazon ants, in which the existing slaves may play a major part in recruiting others of the same species. Migration is often a social phenomenon, with detailed features of interest, such as flying in a V-shaped formation, so familiar in wild geese but seen in many other birds. Gregarious nesting as in rooks is hardly in itself social, but the social note is sounded in the composite nest of Republican Birds. Some social activities of animals are very striking, such as the wars of some kinds of ants and the social plays of others; the drilling manoeuvres of penguins and their games; the choruses of some birds; and the community singing of the Howling Monkeys.

(B) Other expressions of social life are to be found in the evolution of means of communication. This is clearest, though not most primitive, in the case of sound-signals. The utterance of a kin-call may bring other members of the society to the rescue ; a sentinel's danger-cry may save a crowd. But from such simple beginnings there is a gradual rise to the use of many "words" with specialized significance, sounds that come to be associated with particular stimuli, feelings, experiences, or even objects. In many cases, however, the medium of communication is by odours. Thus in the life of bees a part is played by the "queen-odour" and the "sting-odour." There is a visual and olfactory communication when a worker that has found a particu lar treasure of nectar executes on her return to the hive a special ized dance on the honeycomb and also betrays by the scent the kind of flower she had just visited. In the antennary communica tions between ants there is a mingling of tactile and olfactory stimuli. In many mammals there are often gestures as well as words.

(C) Social life is expressed also in what may be called customs, conventions or traditions, as the case may be. These have a mental or subjective aspect, namely certain instincts or pre dispositions with their attendant feelings ; and they have an ob jective aspect in permanent products, like the termitary, and in the organization of the society, as in the existence of polymorphic castes. It seems possible to distinguish a hereditary compulsion, such as prompts the feeding of the hungry, and an environmental compulsion imposed by the nature of the home, the food, and the division of labour. A crowded hive must be kept clean ; the soldier termites must be fed by the workers. But in some cases it seems necessary to postulate a social compulsion, remotely analogous to public opinion, such as that expressed in the gradual cold-shouldering of the drones in a bee-hive, accentuated into fatal stinging towards the end of the season.

It is a convention that the appeal of a hungry ant must be met by a neighbour who is full ; that a cry for help must be answered ; that stores must not be privately pillaged ; that, after a certain stage, there must be no thieving of nest-sticks in a rookery. Very suggestive, in an instinctive community, is the graduated apprenticeship of worker-bees. Very suggestive in an incipient intelligent community is that among chimpanzees a cry of protest may arouse an uproar of indignation in the whole com pany. But it is not possible as yet to do more than illustrate the activities that find expression in the social life of animals.

Different Forms of Family.

The sociological study of ani mals must include an inquiry into the different forms of family. Many animals have abundant progeny, and yet show no hint of family life. This is generally the case with animals which illustrate the spawning method of multiplication, as in fishes that liberate eggs and sperms somewhat fortuitously in the water. Similarly in frogs, the spawn in the ditch is left to itself, and- the tadpoles that hatch out from the clump do not remain together in any coherent way. It is noteworthy, however, that in expression of different constitutions and in adaptation to different conditions of life, types that are structurally not remote from one another may exhibit very different relations as regards their offspring. The starfish Luidia is credited with producing two hundred million eggs in a year, and could hardly be expected to have a family circle; and yet Muller's starfish carries its comparatively large eggs about until the development is completed. Miniatures of this species are sometimes seen clambering on the body of the mother —obviously the beginning of family life.

Four types of family occur among animals: (I) The typical bi-parental family is that in which both parents remain for some time in helpful company with their offspring. According to Reichenow, a band of twenty or thirty gorillas may consist of five families—each with a father, a mother and a number of offspring. In the Common Wren (Troglodytes troglodytes) both parents share the family duties and may use the old nest as a shelter in winter, not for themselves alone, but for a number of young birds as well. In some ducks and geese' the offspring remain for the greater part of a year under the protection and tutelage of their parents. Even in some pronouncedly predatory mammals, such as lion and fox, the father stands by the mother and the family for a long time, helping not only in defence, but in providing food. At a much lower level, in a few fishes, such as Labrus and Eupomotis, there is the beginning of a bi-parental family.

(2) The second kind of family is maternal, where the mother takes sole charge. Thus the female spider may not only carry the developing eggs in a silken cocoon, but may bear the hatched young ones on her back until they are able to fend for them selves. A hen with her chickens illustrates a maternal family under man's shield, but there are many similar instances among polygamous birds in wild conditions. Small herds of eight or more elephants are said to consist, in some cases at least, of a mother and her offspring, whose births have been spaced out over many years. This approaches a small society. A distinction, though not a hard and fast one, should be drawn between parental care before birth and helpful association afterwards. Thus while some female fishes (African cichlids) carry their few eggs in their mouth, some go farther, for there are instances of the young ones returning after they have been hatched and liberated. Some illustrations are startling; thus it is recorded of certain kinds of scorpions that the mother catches insects for her off spring and even prepares the food by tearing it into small pieces.

(3) The third kind of family is paternal, where the father takes sole charge. Remarkable paternal care is illustrated by the male Sea-Horse which carries the eggs in a ventral pouch, or the New Guinea Kurtus which carries them attached to a hook on the top of the skull, or the American Gaff-Topsail which carries them in his mouth,—a procedure that seems to involve fasting for about two months; but this is transcended by the nest-making male sticklebacks which guard the progeny for some time after they are hatched. The male Arius not only incubates the eggs in his mouth, but after the young ones are liberated opens his jaws for them to return when danger is imminent. The male of the American Bow-Fin mounts guard over a rough and ready "nest" that has been cleared among the waterweeds ; and after the young are hatched and leave their cradle he shepherds them for about four months. This is the beginning of a simple kind of family life.

(4) There is a fourth type of animal family, approaching a small society, and that is the "children-family." It consists of an association of young animals of the same age, but the associa tion is not helped by the presence of parents. It is said to be illustrated at various levels, e.g., by reindeer, certain cetaceans, some of the pythons, various fishes such as herring, and some caterpillars like those that form processions. But it is possible that these associations of young animals of the same age should be ranked as incipient societies rather than as families. In any case they must be considered by the comparative sociologist. The same may be said in regard to such phenomena as the property sense in some animals, the "territories" of some birds, the "preserves" of some predatory types, and the various relations of mates, such as monogamy and polygamy.

BIBLIOGRAPHY.-A. Espinas, Les Societes Animales (1877) ; P. Girod, Bibliography.-A. Espinas, Les Societes Animales (1877) ; P. Girod, Les Societes chez les Animaux (1800) ; P. Kropotkin, Mutual Aid, a Factor of Evolution (1902) ; W. M. Wheeler, Social Life Among the Insects (1923) ; F. Hempelmann, Tierpsychologie (1925) ; Fr. Alverdes, Social Life in the Animal World (trans. London, Iq27) ; J. A. Thomson, Minds of Animals (1927) ; A. Forel, Social World of the Ants (trans. London, 1928) . (J. A. TH.)