Alfred
Russel Wallace : Alfred Wallace : A. R. Wallace :
Russel
Wallace : Alfred Russell Wallace (sic)
How to Civilize Savages (S113:
1865/1900)
Editor
Charles H. Smith's Note: This essay originally appeared in the Reader of
17 June 1865; the following is an expanded version printed in Wallace's Studies
Scientific and Social in 1900. Original pagination indicated within double
brackets. To link directly to this page, connect with:
http://www.wku.edu/~smithch/wallace/S113.htm
[[p. 107]] Do our missionaries really
produce on savages an effect proportionate to the time, money, and energy
expended? Are the dogmas of our Church adapted to people in every degree of
barbarism, and in all stages of mental development? Does the fact of a
particular form of religion taking root, and maintaining itself among a people,
depend in any way upon race--upon those deep-seated mental and moral
peculiarities which distinguish the European or Aryan races from the negro or
the Australian savage? Can the savage be mentally, morally, and physically
improved, without the inculcation of the tenets of a dogmatic theology? These
are a few of the interesting questions that were discussed, however
imperfectly, at a meeting of the Anthropological Society in 1865, when the
Bishop of Natal read his paper, "On the Efforts of Missionaries among
Savages;" and on some of these questions we propose to make a few
observations.
If the history of mankind teaches us one thing more clearly than another, it is
this--that all true civilizations and all great religions are alike the slow
growth of ages, and both are inextricably connected with the struggles and
development of the human mind. They have ever in their infancy been watered
with tears and blood--they have had to suffer the rude prunings of wars and
persecutions--they have withstood the wintry blasts of anarchy, of despotism,
and of neglect--they have been able to survive all the vicissitudes of human
affairs, and have proved their suitability to their age and country by
successfully resisting every attack, and by flourishing under the most
unfavourable conditions.
[[p. 108]] A form of religion which is to
maintain itself and to be useful to a people, must be especially adapted to
their mental constitution, and must respond in an intelligible manner to the
better sentiments and the higher capacities of their nature. It would,
therefore, almost appear self-evident that those special forms of faith and
doctrine which have been slowly elaborated by eighteen centuries of struggle
and of mental growth, and by the action and reaction of the varied
nationalities of Europe on each other, cannot be exactly adapted to the wants
and capacities of every savage race alike. Our form of Christianity, wherever
it has maintained itself, has done so by being in harmony with the spirit of
the age, and by its adaptability to the mental and moral wants of the people
among whom it has taken root. As Macaulay justly observed in the first chapter
of his history: "It is a most significant circumstance that no large
society of which the tongue is not Teutonic has ever turned Protestant, and
that, wherever a language derived from that of ancient Rome is spoken, the
religion of modern Rome to this day prevails."
In the early Christian Church, the many uncanonical gospels that were written,
and the countless heresies that arose, were but the necessary results of the
process of adaptation of the Christian religion to the wants and capacities of
many and various peoples. This was an essential feature in the growth of
Christianity. This shows that it took root in the hearts and feelings of men,
and became a part of their very nature. Thenceforth it grew with their growth,
and became the expression of their deepest feelings and of their highest
aspirations; and required no external aid from a superior race to keep it from
dying out. It was remarked by one of the speakers at the Anthropological
Society's meeting, that the absence of this modifying and assimilating power
among modern converts--of this absorption of the new religion into their own
nature--of this colouring given by the national mind--is a bad sign for the
ultimate success of our form of Christianity among savages. When once a mission
has been established, a fair number of converts made, and the first generation
of children educated, the missionary's [[p. 109]]
work should properly have ceased. A native church, with native teachers, should
by that time have been established, and should be left to work out its own
national form of Christianity. In many places we have now had missions for more
than the period of one generation. Have any self-supporting, free, and national
Christian churches arisen among savages? If not--if the new religion can only
be kept alive by fresh relays of priests sent from a far distant land--priests
educated and paid by foreigners, and who are, and ever must be, widely
separated from their flocks in mind and character--is it not the strongest
proof of the failure of the missionary scheme? Are these new Christians to be
for ever kept in tutelage, and to be for ever taught the peculiar doctrines
which have, perhaps, just become fashionable among us? Are they never to become
men, and to form their own opinions, and develop their own minds, under
national and local influences? If, as we hold, Christianity is good for all
races and for all nations alike, it is thus alone that its goodness can be
tested; and they who fear the results of such a test can have but small
confidence in the doctrines they preach.
The views here expressed are now, after more than thirty years, receiving
unexpected support, if we may rely on a well-written and thoughtful article by
Mr. E. M. Green in the Nineteenth
Century of November, 1899. It
appears that in our Colonies in South Africa the educated Kaffirs are beginning
a movement for a church of their own with native ministers and native
organisation. There is said to be ample education, talent, and religious
enthusiasm to support such a church; but instead of being welcomed and fostered
by encouragement and assistance, it seems to be viewed with suspicion and
dislike by the official representatives of the local churches. The South African Congregational Magazine, for example, writing on this movement,
remarks: "The ground of their revolt appears to have been a sense of
resentment against the social barriers in the way of their advancement to the
chief seats of official authority in their ecclesiastical system. Conceiving
they had a grievance on the ground of such [[p.
110]] suppression of their self-importance, the dream of a formation of
a native Church, dissociated from all European influence and control, began to
impress itself on their imaginations."
The writer goes on to say that as there was no hope of financial aid from any
section of the colonial constituencies, a new idea struck the "curly
pow" of the Rev. Mr. Dwaine, which was to get the negroes of America to
take up the movement. Then the writer tells us that this "Rev. Mr.
Dwaine" is an accomplished linguist (although a Kaffir), "speaks
English as to the manner born," as well as Dutch and his own native
tongue, and has a record of unsullied reputation and honourable Christian
service; that he went to America, and "was enthusiastically received into
the fellowship of the Methodist Episcopal Church, blessed by its bishops, and
sent back with the assurance that the new cause would be taken up and backed by
the available resources of the denomination in America."
Mr. Green visited this Mr. Dwaine, and tells us that he was dressed as a
clergyman, and his English was excellent. He said: "The missionaries
cannot understand how we feel about our old customs, and we think that if all
the ministers for natives were natives themselves it would be better. You tell
us that we are all the same in God's sight, but your people will not worship in
the same church with our people."
Mr. Green adds, that as Dwaine's position is national rather than doctrinal, it
is probable that he will influence his people in large numbers; and I told him
that I had never attended a missionary meeting in London about Africa without
hearing that a native ministry was the end to keep in view. His reply was:
"They say that in London, but they do not say it here."
Nothing more strikingly illustrates the way these educated natives are treated
in the Colonies than the fact that when Dwaine visited England to get funds in
order to found a South African College for natives, he wished much to see St.
Paul's Cathedral, but was afraid of being turned out. But some one told him to
walk in, and he did so, and finding he was not turned out, he went again, and [[p. 111]] also went several times to Westminster
Abbey to hear noted preachers, and he was surprised at the toleration of the
white man--in London. Here we have the skin-deep Christianity that preaches
brotherhood and equality, but acts the very opposite; while the colonial
dislike of the idea of a native church is evidently due to another form of that
love of place and power which, notwithstanding fine promises and theories,
still refuses all self-government or political rights to the countless millions
in British India, as well as to these educated Kaffirs who are still subjected
to the most irritating and degrading subjection to petty officialdom, as strikingly
illustrated by cases which Mr. Green gives us.
Yet these people are quite as intelligent and as capable of benefiting by a
good education as are average Europeans. This is well shown by a letter to the Queenstown Free Press, from a Basuto named Pelem, which
is given in Mr. Green's article. This letter is not only very good sense, but
is written in clearer and better English than are the average letters that
appear in our own local newspapers, showing to what a marvellous extent
education has spread among these people, and how high are their natural
capacities.
But we are told to look at the results of missions. We are told that the
converted savages are wiser, better, and happier than they were before--that
they have improved in morality and advanced in civilization--and that such
results can only be shown where missionaries have been at work. No doubt, a
great deal of this is true; but certain laymen and philosophers believe that a
considerable portion of this effect is due to the example and precept of
civilized and educated men--the example of decency, cleanliness, and comfort
set by them--their teaching of the arts and customs of civilization, and the
natural influence of the superiority of race. And it may fairly be doubted
whether most of those advantages might not be given to savages without the
accompanying inculcation of particular religious tenets. True, the experiment
has not been fairly tried, and the missionaries have almost all the facts to
appeal to on their own side; for it is undoubtedly the case that the wide
sympathy and self-denying charity [[p. 112]]
which gives up so much to benefit the savage, is almost always accompanied and
often strengthened by strong religious convictions. Yet there are not wanting
facts to show that much may be done without the influence of religion. It
cannot be doubted, for example, that the Roman occupation laid the foundation
of civilization in Britain, and produced a considerable amelioration in the
condition and habits of the people, which was not in any way due to religious
teaching. The Turkish and Egyptian Governments have been, in modern times, much
improved, and the condition of their people ameliorated, by the influence of
Western civilization, unaccompanied by any change in the national religion. In
Java, where the natives are Mohammedans, and scarcely a Christian convert
exists, the good order established by the Dutch Government and their pure
administration of justice, together with the example of civilized Europeans
widely scattered over the country, have greatly improved the physical and moral
condition of the people. In all these cases, however, the personal influence of
kindly, moral, and intelligent men, devoted wholly to the work of civilization,
has been wanting; and this form of influence, in the case of missionaries, is
very great. A missionary who is really earnest, and has the art (and the heart)
to gain the affections of his flock, may do much in eradicating barbarous
customs, and in raising the standard of morality and happiness. But he may do
all this quite independently of any form of sectarian theological teaching, and
it is a mistake too often made to impute all to the particular doctrines
inculcated, and little or nothing to the other influences we have mentioned. We
believe that the purest morality, the most perfect justice, the highest
civilization, and the qualities that tend to render men good, and wise, and
happy, may be inculcated quite independently of fixed forms or dogmas, and
perhaps even better for the want of them. The savage may be certainly made
amenable to the influence of the affections, and will probably submit the more
readily to the teaching of one who does not, at the very outset, attack his
rude superstitions. These will assuredly die out of themselves, when [[p. 113]] knowledge and morality and civilization
have gained some influence over him; and he will then be in a condition to
receive and assimilate whatever there is of goodness and truth in the religion
of his teacher.
Unfortunately, the practices of European settlers are too often so
diametrically opposed to the precepts of Christianity, and so deficient in
humanity, justice, and charity, that the poor savage must be sorely puzzled to
understand why this new faith, which is to do him so much good, should have had
so little effect on his teacher's own countrymen. The white men in our Colonies
are too frequently the true savages, and require to be taught and Christianized
quite as much as the natives. We have heard, on good authority, that in
Australia a man has been known to prove the goodness of a rifle he wanted to
sell, by shooting a child from the back of a native woman who was passing at
some distance; while another, when the policy of shooting all natives who came
near a station was discussed, advocated his own plan of putting poisoned food
in their way, as much less troublesome and more effectual. Incredible though
such things seem, we can believe that they not unfrequently occur whenever the
European comes in contact with the savage man, for human nature changes little
with times and places; and I have myself heard a Brazilian friar boast, with
much complacency, of having saved the Government the expense of a war with a
hostile tribe of Indians, by the simple expedient of placing in their way clothing
infected with the smallpox, which disease soon nearly exterminated them. Facts,
perhaps less horrible, but equally indicative of lawlessness and inhumanity,
may be heard of in all our Colonies; and recent events in Japan and in New
Zealand show a determination to pursue our own ends, with very little regard
for the rights, or desire for the improvement, of the natives. The savage may
well wonder at our inconsistency in pressing upon him a religion which has so
signally failed to improve our own moral character, as he too acutely feels in
the treatment he receives from Christians. It seems desirable, therefore, that
our Missionary Societies should endeavour to exhibit [[p.
114]] to their proposed converts some more favorable specimens of the
effect of their teaching. It might be well to devote a portion of the funds of
such societies to the establishment of model communities, adapted to show the
benefits of the civilization we wish to introduce, and to serve as a visible
illustration of the effects of Christianity on its professors. The general
practice of Christian virtues by the Europeans around them would, we feel
assured, be a most powerful instrument for the general improvement of savage
races, and is, perhaps, the only mode of teaching that would produce a real and
lasting effect.
*
*
*
*
*
http://www.wku.edu/%7Esmithch/index1.htm