PROGRESS AND CONSERVATISM Such then was man's original equipment for getting civilized. He had, obviously, no means of foreseeing the enterprise in which he was engaged. His evolution as a civilized being was no more premeditated than his rise from earlier simian ancestors. There seems to be sufficient evidence that for hundreds of thousands of years changes in his mode of life were so gradual and rare as to pass unperceived. Each generation accepted the conditions in which it was reared without thought of betterment. Our modern hope of "progress"—an indefinite increase of human knowledge and its application to the improvement of man's estate—was prac tically unknown even to the Greeks and Romans. From the t3th century onward a few writers dwelt upon the promise of the future, but they were outclamoured by those convinced that human woes were attributable to a departure from ancient stand ards. The Humanists strove to re-establish the wisdom of the classical writers, and the Protestants sought to revive the beliefs and practices of the early Christians. Only three centuries ago did Bacon unroll a programme of aggressive search for the hitherto unknown, which had any very wide influence. In the t 8th century the conception of reform and progress found illustrious spokes men, and their anticipations of coming changes in the economy of human life were destined, as it proved, to be far outrun by the events of the tgth and early loth centuries.
We can, however, still note on all hands illustrations of man's confidence in routine sanctified by ancient authorities; his sus picion of innovation in wide realms of belief and practice. This dogged obstinacy in clinging to his habits, and his general suspicion of the unfamiliar, are exactly what might have been anticipated when we consider his animal origin. This trait has served to slow down the process of change, but at the same time has greatly increased the security and permanence of each achievement. Here we find a possible explanation of the great role that the veil of sacredness has played in man's development. He has cast it over beliefs and practices and so hid them from pert scrutiny and criticism. The number of those who can tolerate somewhat critical thinking here and there, has, nevertheless, greatly increased of late, but they are still few indeed. What we call to-day a conservative or reactionary mood must have been characteristic of mankind from the beginning. It corresponds to animal in clinations.
Among animal proclivities there is, however, from the one celled organisms upward, a life-saving tendency to make random movements, extensions and contractions, to hasten hither and thither, in the pursuit of food and mates. This restlessness and groping are among man's legacies also. They offset his routine and static habits, and lie behind and back of the inventions and discoveries he has made. There is, too, especially obvious among the higher animals, something auguring what in man becomes curiosity. The danger of attack made preliminary scouting a valuable asset in survival. So men were by nature wont to pry and try and fumble, long before they scientifically analysed and experimented.
There can be no doubt that hundreds of thousands of years were required for man to reach even the lowest degree of culture to be found among the simplest tribes to-day. The discovery of fossil skulls, teeth and bones at different geological levels shows that more or less ape-like men have been on earth for from half a million to a million years. Several species, such as the Java man, the Heidelberg man and the much later Neanderthal race are now extinct. The only vestiges of their handiwork con sist in chipped flint tools, becoming better made and more varied as time went on. There is no way of telling what other arts, beliefs and practices were associated with a particular assortment of flint utensils. Sollas, in his Ancient Hunters, has sought to draw ingenious analogies between these prehistoric weapons and the civilizations of the Tasmanians, Australians, Eskimos, etc. The so-called Cro-Magnon race had finely developed skulls quite as good as those of to-day. To them are ascribed the remarkable paintings and drawings found in caves of southern France and northern Spain. They are believed to be from 25 to 3o thousand years old. Halving this period we come upon traces of ground and polished stone tools, coincident with the relinquishment of hunting as man's exclusive pursuit and a settling down to sow and reap, spin and weave. Halving it again, we get news of the use of copper, the precursor of the metals on which our civilization largely rests. This can but be a rough chronology subject to much revision as time goes on and the earth is more thoroughly searched for evidences of man's past.
To get the matter clearly before one, let us imagine, as the writer has suggested elsewhere, that soo,000 years of developing culture were compressed into 5o years. On this scale mankind would have required 49 years to learn enough to desert here and there his inveterate hunting habits and settle down in villages. Half through the fiftieth year writing was discovered and practised within a very limited area, thus supplying one of the chief means for perpetuating and spreading culture. The achievements of the Greeks would be but three months back, the prevailing of Chris tianity, two ; the printing press would be a fortnight old and man would have been using steam for hardly a week. The peculiar conditions under which we live did not come about until Dec. 31 of the fiftieth year.
There is a school of anthropologists, the diffusionists, who would derive all the higher types of civilization—writing, metal lurgy, the construction of imposing stone buildings—from a single region, Egypt. They have collected much evidence to show that through the commerce of the Phoenicians, Egyptian inventions spread eastward into India, China and Japan, then across the Pacific to form the basis of Maya culture in Central America. The merits of the "diffusionist" arguments cannot be considered here. G. Elliot Smith, one of the best known advo cates of this theory, dwells on the common lack of inventiveness and the reluctance of mankind to adopt new ideas, his tenacious hold on old ones and "his thick armour of obstinacy." "To obtain recognition of even the most trivial of innovations it is the common experience of almost every pioneer in art, science or invention to have to fight against a solid wall of cultivated prejudice and inherent stupidity." All anthropologists are well aware of this hostility to change, which we may regard, as shown above, as a natural trait of mankind. They also admit the wide dissemination of inventions through commerce and conquest. Nevertheless many maintain that the same or similar discovery has been made independently in different parts of the earth, as the result of similar needs and conditions. When we have examined the exigencies of successful inventions in the following section we shall see that however commonplace they are now, with the accumulation of the past to build upon and modern facilities to work with, they were beyond measure difficult at the start when mankind still led the life of an animal. When once made and adopted by some tribe it is far easier to think of them as being introduced to other peoples than to assume that their presence represents an independent discovery.
Civilization depends upon the discoveries and inventions man has been able to make, together with the incalculable effects these have had upon his daily conduct, thoughts and feelings. As knowledge and ingenuity increased he departed further and further from his original wild animal life. The manner in which he began to learn is a matter of conjecture, since the manufac ture of tools and weapons, the invention of language and arti ficial ways of producing fire, far antedate any written accounts of advances in man's education. The same may be said of the much more recent spinning, weaving and farming. As we have seen, it required hundreds of thousands of years to reach the degree of civilization represented by these achievements. Their importance, however, cannot be overestimated, since they formed the absolutely essential basis of all later developments. We may feel a certain pride in contemporary inventions, but let us remem ber that we owe to savage hunters and illiterate neolithic farmers the accumulation of knowledge and skill without which none of our modern experimentation would be possible. Where would we be without fire, speech, clothes and bread ! Since invention, discovery and the increase of knowledge are the stuff of which civilization is made, it is pertinent to our theme to consider how they occur. There is plenty of evidence available in the reports which discoverers now make of the manner in which they reach their conclusions. There is also evidence of how their results are received and acted upon by others. All explorers must be exceptionally curious and at the same time patient gropers. The curiosity observable in most children tends to die away, but survives in one form or another in rare instances through life. These exceptional persons possess a drive alien to their fellows. They may be the handyman of a village or a member of a highly endowed research staff. They avail themselves of what has already been found out ; the village mechanical genius does not have to invent a monkey-wrench or bit of insulating tape, nor does the biologist need to know much about the optical principles of his lenses, much less invent or manufacture them. The geologist before he makes any discoveries is familiar with hundreds of treatises on his subject. It would be generally conceded by investigators that their discoveries are seemingly accidental. They do not know what they are going to find, and quite commonly find what they were not looking for, even as Saul, chasing lost asses, came upon a kingdom. All this applies to every kind of increase of knowledge, whether it have to do with the operations of so-called Nature or with novel sug gestions in the realms of philosophy or art. All are the result of curiosity, patient examination and thought. At best they are no more than foot-notes and glosses added to existing human knowl edge. This is now so varied and voluminous that no single person can compass it except in this detail and that. Should he attempt to do so, all chance of adding to it would be excluded.
But an invention or discovery or the rectification of an ancient error, does not become a part of civilization until it has been accepted by the tribe and been added to its habits of action and thought. Plenty of shocking tales could be recalled of pro fessional and popular opposition to innovations on grounds which now seem grotesque. We owe discoveries to individual men and women, but new information and skill can only be propa gated and disseminated in a favourable culture medium. Many instances could be cited of promising knowledge which has so far failed to get a footing in civilization.
The influence of particular discoveries and mechanical devices is by no means confined to their more immediate and obvious applications. It is impossible to foresee what wide-ranging effects they may ultimately exert on human life. Fire will cook a meal, harden an earthen bowl, keep a group of naked savages warm, frighten off prowling animals, soften or melt metals; it may also consume sacrifices to the gods, or form the central interest of a stately temple and be replenished by an order of vestal virgins. It may play its part in the symbolism of the theologian and the poet. The Indians of the North American plains were deeply affected by the introduction of the horse, and African tribes by fire-arms and whisky. The motor car and telephone altered social relations. The perfecting of the steam engine revolutionized the transport of men and their wares; it promoted city life ; further, it caused Marx to write a big book which became the gospel of a momentous social upheaval, which threatened the peace of mind of all nations.
The invention of clothes—quite material things, whether of linen, wool, silk or cotton—not only created great industries but enabled men by changing their hide artificially to establish social distinctions akin to biological genera and species. Through clothes entered in prudery and the pious horror of bare bodies which has wrought consternation and disaster among the dark skinned folk. After the World War women's skirts were gradually shortened. The warmth of houses and vehicles permitted this. One of the conventional distinctions . between girls and women was thus obliterated. The unveiling of women's faces in Moham medan countries, the breaking down of purdah in India—all these material changes imply modifications of woman's life and of the attitude of the sexes to one another. They forecast further impor tant changes in traditional civilization.
In view of these facts, and indefinitely more that each one can easily add for himself, it would seem that what are esteemed the "nobler" aspirations and creations of mankind, whether in art and literature or the pursuit of truth, are all not only dependent upon "material" inventions but so strangely interwoven with them and their effects that it is no easy thin to separate the higher and the lower, except in imagination. What is sometimes called "the higher life of man" arises from his more humble and practical knowledge and skill; accordingly the old distinction between the material and spiritual seems to be greatly attenuated as they are both seen to merge into the newer conception of civilization as a whole. This will become even more apparent when we come to deal with words.