INTERPRETATION OF SAVAGE SOCIETY 153
lishment of certain general principles of change, he will find himself greatly assisted by a knowledge of the life of the non-civilized races. It is true that the savage never became civilized, and the claim is sometimes made that he therefore has no significance for the study of civilization. But the animal never became human, and it is far from true that the animal on that account has no significance for psychology. And the savage is much closer to the white than the animal is to man. Indeed I believe that the reader who divests himself as far as possible of prepossessions and race-prejudice and reads the selections in this volume, especially those in Part II, will conclude that the savage is very close to us indeed, both in his physical and mental make-up and in the forms of his social life. Tribal society is virtually delayed civilization, and the savages are a sort of contemporaneous ancestry.
I do not, of course, wish to belittle the effort of the historian to establish his facts, but to the young person who is planning to go into history, economics, civics, education, or psychology, I do wish to make this suggestion: If he will plan his work with reference to gaining (1) a sound and comprehensive knowledge of biology, (2) an even more particular knowledge of psychology, and (3) a very intimate knowledge of anthropology and ethnology, he will find himself in possession of an apparatus which will enable him to do a rare class of work in his special field. It is for such a person that this volume is prepared, quite as much as for the student of sociology.
II
But I wish chiefly at this point to indicate a standpoint which will assist the student in the interpretation of the materials in the body of this volume, and which he can bring to bear also on the literature indicated in the bibliographies.
There have been many notable attempts to interpret the social process in terms of so-called elemental or dominant social forces. Among these may be mentioned Tarde's "imitation," Gumplowicz's "conflict," Durkheim's "constraint," De Greef's "contract," and Giddings' "consciousness of kind." Now it is evident
