SSS SS SS = = S SS SS SS SSS SS ~ SSS Ss SS SS WS . SS RK * SS = SSS : SS SRS He ~~ Soe Ss ~~ RI MM a SSNS SS REV SS S Soo ~S SSS SS SS a SS DIVISION OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY U. S$. NATIONAL MUSEUM THE HRDLICKA LIBRARY Dr. Ales Hrdlicka was placed in charge of the Division of Physical Anthropology when it was first established in 1903. He retired in 1942. During this time he assembled one of the largest collections of human skeletons in existence and made outstanding contributions to his science. On his death, September 5, 1943, he bequeathed his library to the Division, -with +the~proviston-that— ———-4--be—kept-exctusively _in-the said Division,-where-it-may—be-consulted but-not-toaned_out_——. _ _"" 4 “t SBBCH OH MONKEYS. Cage: d a . ay PEE SPEECH OF MONKEYS , BY R’ LAGARNER IN TWO PARTS Rew Work CHARLES L. WEBSTER AND COMPANY 1892 een nee wy _ COPYRIGHT, 1892, BY CHARLES L. WEBSTER & COMPANY | ss [All Rights Reserved.) 4 . ~ 4 - + , eee 7 f 2 og = > : ; * ‘ 7 Vv. fee & ¥ a Dedication. OnvM YY DEV OLE DE Wire. WHOSE ZEAL FOR MY SUCCESS IS THE LIGHT WHICH GUIDES ME ALONG THE HIGHWAY OF MY LABORS: AND TO ‘THOSE EARNEST FRIENDS, Mr. WALTER S. LOGAN, JUDGE CHARLES P. DALY, Mr. SAM- UEL S. MCCLURE, Hon. O. B. POTTER, DR ALEXANDER MELVILLE BELL, CoL. JOHN HAY, PrRoF. S. E. TILLMAN, Mrs. HENRY DRAPER, MR. J. V. BOOREAM, Mr. G. HILTON SCRIB- NER, AND MR. B. SCHLESINGER, WHO HAVE OPENED THEIR PURSES, AS THEY OPENED THEIR HEARTS, AND AFFORDED ME THAT AID WHICH MAKES IT POSSIBLE FOR ME TO CONTINUE MY RESEARCHES. WITH THEM IT SHALL GLADLY SHARE THE GLORY OF ALL THAT MY EFFORTS MAY ACHIEVE. TO THEM, WITH PROFOUND AND AFFECTIONATE GRATITUDE, THIS FIRST CONTRIBUTION TO SCIENCE ON THIS SUBJECT IS JUSTLY DEDICATED BY THE AUTHOR. eae PREPAC E. I DESIRE here to express my gratitude to The New Review. The North American Review, The Cosmopolitan, The Forum, and many of the lead- jae journals of America, for the use of their valuable and popular pages through which my work has been eiven 19 ithe public, «Tocthe press, both foreign and American, I gladly pay my tribute of thanks for the liberal discussion, candid criticism, and kind consideration which they have bestowed upon my efforts to solve the great problem of speech. In contributing to science this mite, I do not mean to intimate that my task has been com- pleted, for I am aware that I have only begun to explore the field through which we may hope to pass beyond the confines of our own realm, and invade the lower spheres of life. This volume is intended as a record of my work and a voluntary report of my progress, to vil Vill PREFACE. let the world know with what results my labors have been rewarded, and with the hope that it may be the means of inducing others to pursue like investigations. In prosecuting my studies, I have had no prec- edents to guide me, no literature to conem and no land-marks by which to steer my course. I have, therefore, been compelled to find my own means, suggest my own experiments, and solve my own problems. Nota line on this subject is to be found in all the literature of the world; and yet the results which I have obtained have far surpassed my highest hopes. Considering the difficulties under which I have been compelled to work, I have been rewarded with results for which I dared not hope, and this inspires me to believe that my success will meet my highest wishes when I am placed in touch with such subjects as I expect to find in the forests of trop- ical Africa. The records in Part I. of this volume are only afew of my experiments; but as they illustrate my methods and set forth the results, they will serve to show, in a measure, the scope of my work. I shall not describe like experiments only in so far as may be found proper to confirm the de- PREFACE. ix ductions from one experiment by the results of another. In Part II. of this work will be found a defi- nition of the word speech as I have used it, and the deductions which I have made from my ex- periments. I shall not venture into any extreme Paconics, either to confirm or controvert any opinions of others, but simply commit to the world these initial facts and the working hy- potheses upon which I have proceeded to obtain them. I beg here to call attention to Chapter V. of Part II.,in which I have mentioned the partic- ular characteristics that mark the sounds made by monkeys as speech and distinguish them from mere automatic sounds. With sincere convictions, I commit this vol- ume to the friends of science as the first con- tribution upon this subject. R. L. GARNER. New York, June Ist, 1892. CONTENTS. PART =i; PAGE DEDICATION, ° “ : : : - = : cae eey PRERACE, + ae : ‘ : ; 3 : Cian! CHAPTER I. Early Impressions.—First Observations of Monkeys.— First Efforts to Learn their Speech.—Barriers.— The Phonograph Used.—A Visit to Jokes.—My Ef- forts to Speak to him.—The Sound of Alarm In- spires Terror, ; 4 ‘ : 2 F : ae CHAPTER II. The Reconciliation.—The Acquaintance of Jennie.—The Salutation.—The Words for Food and Drink.—Little Banquo, Dago, McGinty, and others, : : diphthong “eu, sound, as in “ye. So far I have found no trace of the English vowels “a,” “i,” or “o,” unless it be in the sound IO THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. emitted under stress of great alarm or in case of assault, in which I find a close resemblance to the: vowel “1° Short, asin “mt | After having acquired a sound or two I ex- tended my field of operations, and began to try my skill as a simian linguist on every specimen with which I came in contact. In Charleston a gentleman owns a fine speci- men of the brown Cebus whose name is Jokes. He is naturally shy of strangers, but on my first visit to him I addressed him in his native tongue, and he really seemed to regard me very kindly; he would eat from my hand and allow me to caress him through the bars of his cage. He eyed me with evident curiosity, but inva- riably responded to the word that I uttered in his own language. On my third visit to him I de- termined to try the effect of the peculiar comme of “alarm” or “assault” which I had leanmed from one of this species; but I cannot very well represent it in letters. While he was eau from my hand I gave this peculiar piercing note, and he instantly sprang to a perch in the top of his cage; thence in and out of his sleeping-apart-* ment with great speed and almost wild with fear. As] repeated) the sound his fears seemed THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. EI to increase, until from a mere sense of compas- sion I desisted. No amount of coaxing would induce him to return to me or to accept any offer of peace which I could make. I retired to a distance of about twenty feet from his cage, and his master induced him to descend from the perch, which he did with the greatest reluctance and suspicion. I gave the sound again from where I stood, and it produced almost the same results as before. The monkey gave out a sin- gular sound in response to my efforts to appease him, but refused to become reconciled. After the lapse of eight or ten days I had not been able to reinstate myself in his good graces or to induce him to accept anything whatever fromme. At this juncture I resorted to harsher means of bringing him to terms and began to threaten him with arod. At first he resented this, but soon yielded and came down merely from fear. He would place the side of his head on the floor, put out his tongue, and utter a very plaintive sound having a slight interrogative inflection. At first this act quite defied inter- pretation; but during the same period I was visiting a little monkey called Jack. For stran- gers we were quite good friends, and he allowed 12 . THE. SPEECH OF “MONKEYS. me many liberties, which the family assured me he had uniformly refused to others. On one of my visits he displayed his temper and made an attack upon me, because I refused to let go of a saucer from which I was feeding him some milk. I jerked him up by the chain and slapped him sharply, whereupon he instantly laid the side of his head on the floor, put out his tongue, and made just such a sound as Jokes had made a number of times before. It occurred to me that it was a sign of surrender, and many subsequent tests have confirmed this opinion. Mrs. M. French Sheldon, in Her jomsaey through East Africa, shot a small monkey ina forest near Lake Charla. She described to me how the little fellow stood high up in a tree and chattered to her in his sharp, musical voice until at the crack of her gun he fell mortally wounded. When he was laid dying at her feet, he turned his bright little eyes pleadingly upon her as if to ask for pity. Touched by his appeal, she took the little creature in her arms to try to soothe him. Again and again he would touch his tongue to her hand as if kissing it, and seemed to wish in the hour of death to be caressed even by the hand that slew him, and which had taken iiWE, SPEBCH OF MONKEYS. EA from him without reward that life which could be of no value except to spare to the wild forest where his kindred monkeys live. This peculiar mode of expressing submission seems to be very widely used, and from her de- scription of the actions of that monkey his con- duct must have been identical with that of the Cebus, and to my mind may justly be interpreted pemean. Pity me; 1 will net harm you.” I have recently learned that a Scotch naturalist, commenting on my description of this act and its meaning, quite agrees with me, and states that he has observed the same thing in other species of monkeys. CHAPTER wk ‘The Reconciliation.—The Acquaintance of Jennie. —The Salu- tation.—The Words for Food and Drink.—Little Banquo, Dago, McGinty, and others. DURING a period of many weeks I visited Jokes almost daily, but after the lapse of more than two months I had not won him back nor quieted his suspicions against me. On my approach he would manifest great fear and go through the act of humiliation described above. I observed that he entertained an intense hatred for a negro boy on the place, who teased and vexed him on all oc- casions. I had the boy come near the cage, and Jokes fairly raved with anger. I tookastick and pretended to beat the boy, and this delighted Jokes very greatly. I held the boy near enough to the cage to allow the monkey to scratch and pull his clothes, and this would fill his little sim- ian soul with joy. Iwould then release the boy, and to the evident pleasure of Jokes would drive him away by throwing wads of paper at him. I repeated this a number of times, and by such HE, sPEECH OF MONKEYS. 15 means we again became the best of friends. After each encounter with the boy Jokes would come to the bars, touch my hand with his tongue, chatter and play with my fingers, and show every sign of confidence and friendship. He always warned me of the approach of any one, and his conduct toward them was largely governed by my own. He never failed after this to salute me with the sound described in the first chapter. About the same time I paid a few visits to an- other little monkey of the same species, named Jennie. Her master had warned me in advance that she was not well disposed toward strangers. At my request he had her chained in a small side yard, which he forbade any of the family en- tering. When I approached the little lady for the first time I gave her the usual salutation, which she responded to and seemed to under- stand. I unceremoniously sat down by her side and fed her from my hands. She eyed me with evident interest and curiosity, while I studied her every act and expression. During the proc- ess of this mutual investigation, a negro girl who lived with the family, overcome by curi- osity, stealthily entered the yard and came up mica a few feet of us. I determined to sac- 16 THE SPEECH OF MONKEVS rifice this girl upon the altar of science: some arose and placed her between the monkey and myself and vigorously sounded the alarm or menace. Jennie flew into a fury, while I con- tinued to sound the alarm and at the same time pretended to attack the girl withaclub and some paper wads, thus causing the monkey to believe that the girl had uttered the alarm and made the assault. I then drove the girl from the yard with a great show of violence, and for days after- ward she could not feed or approach the little simian. This confirmed my opinion of the meaning of the sound, which can be fairly imi- tated by placing the back of the hand gently on the mouth and kissing it with great force, pro- longing the sound for some seconds. This imi- tation, however, is indifferent and its quality is | especially noticeable when analyzed on the pho- nograph. The pitch corresponds to the highest “FP” sharp on the piano, while the word “drink” is two octaves lower and the word “food”’ three. On one occasion I visited the garden in Cin- cinnati, and found in a cage a small Capuchin, to whom I gave the name Banquo. It was near night and the visitors had left the house, and the little monkey, worried out by the day's an- THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 17 noyance from visitors, sat quietly in the back of his cage, as though he was glad another day was done. I approached the cage and uttered the sound which I have described and translated “drink.” My first effort caught his attention and caused him to turn and look at me. He then arose and answered me with the same word, and came at once to the front of the cage. He looked at me as if in doubt, and I repeated the word. He responded with the same and turned to a small pan in his cage, which he took up and placed near the door through which the keeper usually passed his food, returned to me, and ut- tered the word again. I asked the keeper for some milk, which he did not have. but brought me some water instead. The efforts of my little simian friend to secure the glass were very earnest, and his pleading manner and tone as- sured me of his extreme thirst I allowed him to dip his hand into the glass, and he would then lick the water from his fingers and reach again. I kept the glass out of reach of his hand and he would repeat the sound earnestly and look at me beseechingly as if tosay: “ Please give me some more.” Iwas thus convinced that the word which I had translated “milk’’ must also mean 18 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. “water,” and from this and other tests I at last determined that it meant “drink” in its broad sense,-and possibly “thirst.” It evidently ex- pressed his desire for something with which to allay his thirst. The sound is very difficult to imitate and quite impossible to write exactly. On one of my visits to the Chicago garden I stood with my side to a cage containing a small Capuchin, and gave the sound which I have trans- lated “milk.” It caused him to turn and look at me, and on repeating the sound a few times he answered me very distinctly with the same, pick- ing up the pan from which he usually drank, and as I repeated the word he brought the pan to the front of the cage, set it down and came up to the bars, and uttered the word distinctly. I had not shown him any milk or any kind of food; but the man in charge, at my request, brought me some milk, which I gave to him. He drank it with great delight; then looked at me and held up his pan, repeating the sound. I am quite sure that he used the same sound each time that he wanted milk. During this same visit, I tried many experiments with the word which. I-am. now: convinced. means “food” of “hunger” -..And I was led to the: belief that he THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. i9 used the same word for apple, carrot, bread, and banana; but a few later experiments have led me to modify this view in a measure, since the pho- nograph shows me slight variations of the sound, and I now think it probable that these faint in- flections may possibly indicate a difference in the kinds of food he has in mind. However, they usually recognize this sound, even when poorly imitated. I am impressed with the firm belief that in this word I have found the clew to the great secret of speech; and while I have taken only one short step in the direction of its solution, I have pointed out the way which leads to it. In the fall of 1891 I visited New York for the purpose of experimenting with the monkeys in Central Park. Early one morning I repaired to the monkey-house, and for the first time ap- proached acage containing five brown Capuchins, whom I saluted with the word which I have translated “food,’’ and which seems to be an . open-sesame”’ to the hearts of all monkeys of this species. On delivering this word one of them responded promptly and came to the front ee ane cage. | repeated’ it two or three times and the remaining four came to the front, and as I thrust my fingers through the bars of the cage 20 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS, they took hold of them and began playing with great familiarity and apparent pleasure. They seemed to recognize the sound and to realize that it had been delivered to them by anyeeie Whether they regarded me as a great ape, mon- key, or some other kind of animal speaking their tongue, Ido not know. But they evidently un- derstood the sound, though up to this time I had shown them no food or water. A little later I se- cured some apples and carrots and gave them in small bits in response to their continual requests for food, and this further confirmed my belief that I had translated the word correctly. This was gratifying to me in view of the fact that I was accompanied by two gentlemen who had been permitted to witness the experiment, and it was evident to them that the monkeys understood the sound. I placed the phonograph in order and made a record of the sound, which I preserved for study. After an absence of some days, I returned to the park and went to the mon- key-house. They recognized me as I entered the door, notwithstanding there were many visitors present. They began begging me to come to- their cage, which I did, and gave them my hand to play with. One of them in particular, whose HE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. Zul name is McGinty, showed every sign of pleas- ure at my visit; he would play with my fingers, hug them, and caress them in the most affectionate manner. Another occupant of the same cage had shown a disposition to become friendly with me, and on this occasion came bravely to the bars of the cage and showed a desire to share the pleasure of my visit with his little simian brother. But this was denied him on any terms by Mc- Ginty, who pounced upon him and drove him away, as he also did the other monkeys in the cage in order to monopolize my entire society himself. He refused to allow any other inmate of the cage to receive my caresses or any part of the food that I had brought them. I spent the past winter in Washington and New York, much of the time in company with these little creatures, and have made many novel and curious experiments, some of which have resulted in surprises to myself. Among the facts which I have obtained, I may state that certain monkeys can count three; that they discern values by quantity and by number; that they have favorite colors and are pleased with some musical sounds. I shall explain how I arrived at some of these conclusions, in order that I may not be supposed to have merely guessed at them. CHAPTER III. Monkeys Have Favorite Colors.—Can Distinguish Numbers and Quantity.—Music and Art very Limited. IN order to ascertain whether monkeys have any choice of colors or not, I selected some bright-colored candies, balls, marbles, bits of ribbon, etc. I took a piece of pasteboard, and on it placed a few bright-colored bits of candy, which I offered to a monkey and watched to see whether he would select a certain color or not. In this experiment I generally used two colors at a time, and changed their places from time to time in order to determine whether he selected the color by design or accident. After having determined which of two colors he preferred, I substituted a third color for the one which he cared least for, and continued thus until I ex- hausted the list of bright colors. By changing the arrangement of the objects a great number of times, it could be ascertained with compara- tive certainty whether the color was his prefer- ence or not. I find that all monkeys do not se- THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 23 lect the same color, nor does the same monkey invariably select the same color at different times; but I think that generally bright green is a favor- ite color with the Capuchins, and their second choice is white. In a few cases white seemed to be their preference. I have sometimes used paper wads of various colors, or bits of candy of the same flavor rolled in various-colored papers. They seemed to choose the same colors in select- amo their toys. [I have sometimes used artt- ficial flowers, and find that as a rule they will select a flower having many green leaves about it. It may be that they associate this color with some green food which they are fond of, and consequently that they are influenced by this in selecting other things. I kept a cup for a mon- key to drink milk from, on the sides of which were some brilliant flowers and green leaves, and she would frequently quit drinking the milk to play with the flowers on the cup, and seemed never able to understand why she could not get hold of them. In one test I had a board about two feet long, and laid a few pieces of white and pink candies in four placesonit. The mon- key took the white from each pile before touch- ing the pink; except in one instance it took the sagt THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS, pink piece from one pile.. I repeated this tes: many times. In another test I took a white paper ball in one hand and a pink one in the other, and held out my hands to the monkey, who selected the white one nearly every time, although I changed hands with the balls from time to time. These experiments were. mostly confined to the Cebus monkeys, but a few of them were made with Macaques. They seem to be attracted generally by all brilliant colors, but when reduced to a choice between two, such seems to be their tastes. In my efforts to ascertain their mathematical skill, I would take in one hand a little platter containing one nut, or one small bit of some- thing to eat, such as a piece of apple or carrot cut into a small cube. In the other hand I held a small platter with two or three such articles of the same size and color, and holding them just out of reach of the monkey and changing them from hand to hand, I observed that the monkey would try to reach the one containing the greater number. He readily discerned which platter contained one and which contained two or three pieces. I was long in doubt whether he distin- guished by number or by quantity, and my belief THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 25 was that it was by quantity only. I first deter- mined that he could tell singular from plural, by making the one piece larger and sometimes of a different shape, and from his choice of these I quite satisfied my own mind that he could dis- tinguish by number. I next set out to find how far in numerals his acquirements reached, and Siem a eteat number of indecisive trials I fell upon this simple plan. I took a little square wooden box and madea hole in one side just large enough for the monkey to withdraw his hand with a marble init. I took three marbles of the same size and color and gave them to the monkey to play with. After a time I put the marbles in a box and allowed him to take them out, which he could do by taking out only one at atime. I repeated this several times, so as to impress his mind with the number of marbles in mic box. I then concealed, one of the marbles and returned two to the box. On taking them out he evidently missed the absent one, felt in the box, ‘arose and looked around where he had been sitting. Then he would put his hand into the box again and look at me; but failing to find it, he became reconciled and began to play with the two. When he had become content with 26 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. the two I abstracted one of them, and when he failed to find it he began to search for it and seemed quite unwilling to proceed without it. He would put the one back into the box and take it out again as if in hope that it might find the other. I helped him to look for the missing marbles, and, “of cotirse, soon found (them When he learned that I could find the lost mar- bles he would appeal to me as soon as he would miss them, and in several instances he would take his little black fingers and open my lips to see if I had concealed them in my mouth—the place where all monkeys conceal what they wish to keep in safety from other monkeys, who never venture to put their fingers into one another’s mouths, and when any article is once lodged in a monkey's mouth it is safe from the reach of all the tribe. . I repeated this until I felt quite sure of the ability of my subject to count three, and I then increased the number of marbles to four. When I would abstract one of them, sometimes he seemed to miss it, or at least to be in doubt, but would soon proceed with his play and not worry himself about it; yet he rarely failed to show that he was aware that something was wrong. Whether he missed one from four or THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 27 only acted on general principle, I do not know; but that he missed one from three was quite evident. I may here add that there is a great differ- ence in different specimens, and their tastes vary like those of human beings. The same idea is . much clearer to some monkeys than it is to others, and a choice of colors much more definite; but I think that all of them assign to different num- bers a difference of value. Some are talkative and others taciturn. JI think I may state with safety that the Cebus is the most intelligent and talkative of all the monkeys I have known; that the old-world monkeys, as a group, are more taciturn and less intelligent than the new-world monkeys; but I do not mean to include the an- thropoid apes in this remark. As atest of their taste for music or musical sounds, I took three little bells, which I sus- pended by three strings, one end of which was fea to a button. The bells were all alike ex- cept that from two of them I had removed the elappets. -I dropped the bells through the meshes of the cage about a foot apart and allowed the monkey to play with them. I soon discov- ered that he was attracted by the one which con- tained the clapper. He played with it and soon 26 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. became quite absorbed init. I attracted his at- tention to another part of the cage with some food, and while he was thus diverted I changed the position of the bells by withdrawing and dropping them through other meshes. On his return he would go to the place he had left, and of course get a bell with no clapper im i) aie would drop this and take another, until he found the one with the clapper, which showed clearly that the sound was a part of the attraction, “2 have repeated to monkeys many musical records onthe phonograph; but frequently they show no sign of concern, while at other times they display some interest. It may be, however, that music as we understand it is somewhat too high for — them. Musical sounds seem to attract and afford them pleasure, but they do not appreciate melody or rhythm. “As monkeys readily discera game larger of two pieces of food from the smaller, and by the aid of concrete things can count a limited number, I feel justified in saying that they have the first principles of mathematics as dealae with numbers and quantity in a concrete form. Their ability to distinguish colors and their se- lection thereof would indicate that they possess the first rudiment of art as dealing with color. THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 29 And the fact that they are attracted in a slight degree by musical sounds shows that they pos- sess the germ from which music itself is born. I must not be understood to claim that they possess anything more than the mere germ from which such faculties might have been evolved. Ido not think that they have any names for numbers, colors, or quantities, nor do [ think that they pos- sess an abstract idea of these things, except in pie deeblest degree; but as the conerete must have preceded the abstract idea in the devel- opment of human reason, it impresses me that these creatures are now in a condition such as man has once passed through in the course of his evolution, and it is not difficult to understand how such feeble faculties may develop into the very highest degree of strength and usefulness by constant use and culture. We find in them the rudiments from which all the faculties possessed by man could easily de- velop, including thought, reason, speech, and mae moral and social traits of man. In _ brief, they appear to have at least the raw material out of which is made the most exalted attributes of man; and I shall not contest with them the right of such possession. CHAPTER IV. Pedro’s Speech Recorded.—Delivered to Puck Through the Phonograph.—Little Darwin Learns a New Word. IN the Washington collection there is a Ca- puchin by the name of Pedro. When I first vis- . ited this bright little monkey he occupied a cage in common with several other monkeys of differ- ent kinds. All of them seemed to impose upon little Pedro, and a mischievous young spider- monkey found special delight in catching him by the tail and dragging him around the floor of the cage. lLinterfered on behalf of Pedro and drove the spider-monkey away. On account of this Pedro soon began to look upon me as his bene- factor, and when he would see me he would scream and beg for me: to come to him: ia duced the keeper to place him in a small cage by himself, and this he seemed to appreciate very much. When I would go to record his sounds on the phonograph, I would hold him in one hand while he would take the tube in his tiny black hands, hold it close up to his mouth, and YHE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. eg talk into it just like a good little boy who knew what to do and how to doit.. He would some- times laugh, and always chatter to me as long as he could see me. He would sit on my hand and kiss my cheeks, put his mouth up to my ear and chatter just as though he knew what my ears were for. Hewas quite fond of the head-keeper and also of the director; but he entertained a great dislike for one of the assistant keepers, and he has often told me some very bad things about that man, though I could not understand what he said. I shall long remember how this dear little monkey would cuddle up under my chin and try so hard to make me understand some sad story which seemed cto be the burden of his life. He readily understood the sounds of his own speech which I repeated to him, and I have made some of the best records of his voice that I have ever suc- ceeded in making of any monkey, some of which I have preserved up to this time. They present a wide range of sounds, and I have studied them with special care and pleasure, because I knew that they were addressed to me in person; and being aware that the little creature was uttering these sounds to me with the hope that I would understand them, I was more anxious to learn just 32 THE SPEECH OF .MONKEYS, what he really said to me in this record than if it had contained only some casual remark not ad- dressed to'me. This little simian was born in the Amazon Valley, in Brazil, and was named for the late emperor. | A short time ago I borrowed from a dealer in Washington a little Capuchin called Puck, and had him sent to my apartments, where I kept a phonograph. I placed the cage in front of the machine upon which I had adjusted the horn and had placed the record of my little friend Pedro. I concealed myself in an adjoining room, where I could watch the conduct of my subject through a small hole in the door. Ihad a string attached to the lever of the machine and drawn taut through another hole in the door, so that I could start the machine at any desired moment, and at the same time avoid attracting the attention of the monkey, either by my presence or by allow- ing him to see anything move. After atime when everything was quiet, I set the machine in motion, and treated him to a phonographic re- cital by little Pedro. This speech was distinctly delivered through the horn to Puck, from whose actions it was evident that he recognized it as the voice of one of his tribe. He looked at aie THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. oe horn in surprise and made a sound or two, glanced around the room, and again uttered a couple of sounds as he retired from the horn ap- parently somewhat afraid. Again the horn de- livered some exclamations in a pure Capuchin dialect, which Puck seemed to regard as sounds of some importance. He cautiously advanced and made a feeble response, but a quick, sharp sound from the horn seemed to startle him; and failing to find any trace of a monkey except the sound of a voice, he looked at the horn with evi- dent suspicion, and scarcely ventured to answer any sound it made. When I had delivered to Hum) the contetits of the record I entered: the room again, and this seemed to afford him some relief. A little later I adjusted my apparatus for an- other trial, and this time I hung a small mirror just above the mouth of thehorn. Then retiring again from the room I left him to examine his new surroundings, and he soon discovered the new monkey in the glass and began to caress it and chatter to it. After a while I started the phonograph again by means of the string, and when the horn began to deliver its simian ora- tion, it appeared to disconcert and perplex Puck. 3 34 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. He would look at the image in the glass, then he would look into the horn; he would retire with a feeble grunt and a kind of inquisitive grin, showing his little white teeth, and acting as though in doubt whether to regard the affair as a joke or to treat itas a grim and scientific fact. His voice and actions were exactly like those of a child declaring in words that he was not afraid, but betraying fear in every act, and finally blend- ing his feelings into a genuine cry. Puck did not cry, but the evidence of fear made the grin on his face rather ghostly. Again he would ap- proach the mirror, then listen to the sounds which came from the horn, and it appeared from his conduct that there was a conflict somewhere. It was evident that he did not believe that the monkey which he saw in the glass was making the sounds which came from the horn. He re- peatedly put his mouth to the glass and caressed the image which he saw there, and at the same time showed a grave suspicion and some concern about the one which he heard in the horn, and tried to keep away from it as much as possible. His conduct in this case was a source of surprise to me, as the sounds contained in the record which I had repeated to him were all uttered in THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 35 a mood of anxious, earnest entreaty, which to me seemed to contain no sound of anger, warn- ing, or alarm, but which, on the contrary, I had interpreted as a kind of love-speech, full of music and tenderness. I had not learned the exact meaning of any one of the sounds con- tained in this cylinder, but had ascribed in a collective and general way such a meaning to this speech. But from Puck’s conduct I was led to believe that it was a general complaint of some kind against those monkeys in that other cage who had made life a burden to little Pedro. One thing was clear to my mind, and that is that Puck interpreted the actions of the monkey which he saw in the glass to mean one thing, and the sounds which he heard from the horn to mean quite another. I do not think that their language is capable of shading sentences into narrative or giving any detail in a complaint, for I have never seen any- thing yet among them that would justify one in ascribing to them so high a type of speech; but in terms of general grievance it may have conveyed to Puck the idea of a monkey in dis- tress, and hence his desire to avoid it; while the image in the glass presented to him a picture of 36 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. his own mood, and he therefore had no cause to shun it. I do think, however, that the present form of speech used by monkeys is developed far above a mere series of grunts and groans, and that some species among them have much more copious and expressive forms of speech than others do. From many experiments with the phonograph, I am prepared to say with certainty that some have much higher phonetic types than others do. I have traced some slight inflections which I think beyond a doubt modify the val- ues of their sounds. I find monkeys who do not make certain inflections at all, although the phonation of a species is generally uniform in other respects. In some cases it seems to me that the inflections differ slightly in the same species, but long and constant association seems to unify these dialects in some degree, very much the same as like causes blend and unify the dialects of human speech. I have foumd one instance in which a Capuchin had ac quired two sounds which strictly belonged to the tongue of ‘the white-faced Cebus. 1 was surprised when I heard him utter the sounds, and thought at first that these sounds were com- mon to the speech of both varieties, but on in- THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. ey quiry I found that he had been confined in a cage with the white-face for nearly four years, and hence my belief that he acquired them during that time. The most remarkable case which has come un- der my observation is one in which a young white-face has acquired the sound which means food in the Capuchin tongue. This event oc- curred under my own eyes. I regard this case as so noteworthy, being attended by such con- ditions as to show that the monkey had a motive in learning the sound, that I shall relate it in detail. In the room where the monkeys were kept by a dealer in Washington, there was a cage which contained a young white-faced Cebus of rather more than average intelligence. He wasaquiet, sedate, and thoughtful little monkey, whose gray hair and beard gave him quite a venerable as- pect, and for this reason I called him Darwin. From some cause unknown to me he was afraid of me, and I showed him but little attention. On the same shelf and in an adjacent cage lived the little Capuchin, Puck. The cages were only separated by an open wire partition through which they could easily see and hear each other. 38 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. For some weeks I visited Puck almost daily, and in response to his sound for food I always sup- plied him with some nuts, banana, or other food. I never gave him any of these things to eat un- less he would ask me for them in his own speech. On one of my visits my attention was attracted by little Darwin, who was uttering a strange sound which I had never before heard one of his species utter. I did not recognize the sound at first, but very soon discovered that it was in- tended to imitate the sound of the Capuchin, in response to which I always gave Puck some nice morsel of food. Darwin had undoubtedly ob- served that this sound made by Puck was always rewarded with something good to eat, and his evident motive was to secure a like reward. Af- ter this: i always gave him some food in acknowl, edgment of his efforts, and I observed, from day to day, that he improved in making this sound until at last it could scarcely be detected from the sound made by Puck. This was accom- plished within a period of less than six weeks from my first visit. In this case, at least, I have seen one step taken by a monkey in learning the tongue of another. This was most interesting to me in view of the fact that I had long believed, TELE SPEECH OF MONKEYS: 39 and had announced as my belief that no mon- key ever acquired the sounds made by another species, or, indeed, ever tried todo so. I admit, however, that this one instance alone is suff- cient to cause me to recede from aconclusion thus rendered untenable, and the short time in which this one feat was accomplished woulc indicate that the difficulty was not so great as I had re- garded it. I still regard it as a rule, however, that monkeys do not learn each other’s speech, but the rule is not without exceptions. I have observed and called attention to the fact, that when two monkeys of different species are caged together, each one will learn to under- stand the speech of the other, but as a rule will not try to speak it. When he replies at all, it is always in his own vernacular. I wish to impress the fact that monkeys do not generally carry ona connected conversation. Their speech is usually limited to a single sound or remark, which is replied to in the same manner, and to suppose that their conversations are elaborate or of a highly social character is to go beyond the bounds of reason. This is the respect in which the masses fail to understand the real nature of the speech of monkeys or other animals, CHAPTER WV. live Little Brown Cousins: Mickie, Nemo, Dodo. Nigger, and McGinty. —Nemo Apologizes to Dodo. DURING the past winter there lived in Central Park a bright, fine little monkey by the name of Mickie. He did not belong to the park, but was merely kept as a guest of the city during the absence of his master in Europe. Mickie isa well-built, robust, good-natured monkey of the Capuchin variety. He does not talk much, ex- cept when he wants food or drink, but he and I are the best of friends, and I frequently go into his cage to have a romp with him and his four little cousins. When I first began to visit the park in the fall of 1891 Mickie showed a dis- position to cultivate my acquaintance, and as it ripened into a friendship day. by day, we found great pleasure in each other’s society. As the monkey-house was open to the public at g o'clock in the morning, I had to make my calls at sun- rise or thereabouts in order to avoid the visitors who daily throng this building. THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 41 In this cage was kept another little boarder of the same species which belonged to Mr. G. Hil- fom seripner, of Yonkers. The keeper did not know the name or anything of the past history of this little stranger, and for want of some identity and a name I called him Nemo. He was a timid, taciturn little fellow, quite intelligent, and possessed of an amount of diplomacy equal to that of some human beings. He was the small- est monkey in the cage, on which account he was somewhat shy of the others. He was thought- moe peaceable, but “full of guile.”” He sought on all occasions to keep on the best terms with Mickie, to whom he would toady like a sycophant. He would put his little arms about Mickie’s neck and hang on to himinthe most affectionate man- ner. He would follow him like a shadow and stay by him like a last hope. If anything ever aroused the temper of Mickie it was sure to make Nemo mad too; if Mickie was diverted and would laugh, Nemo would laugh also if he was suffer- ing with a toothache. He was as completely under the control of Mickie as the curl in Mick- ie stail. When I first began to visit them, Nemo would see Mickie bite my fingers while we were playing, and he supposed it was done in anger. 42 THE SPEECH “OF “MONKEYS. Nemo never lost a chance to bite my fingers, which he would always do with all his might; but his little teeth were not strong enough to hurt me very much. He would only do this af- ter seeing Mickie bite me, and he did not evince any anger in the act, but appeared to do so merely as a duty. He would sneak up to my hands and bite me unawares; then he would run to Mickie and put his arm about his neck, just as you have seen some boys do when trying to curry favor with a larger boy. On one occasion, while in the cage with them, he slipped up to me and bit my finger, for which I kindly boxed his little ears. I would then give Mickie my finger and allow him to bite it, after doing which I would slap him gently and then give it to him again. JI would then allow Nemo to bite my fin- ger, and if he bit it too hard I would slap him again; and in this manner soon taught him to understand that Mickie only bit me in fun, and he evidently learned that this was a fact. He did not appear, however, to catch the poem clearly or see any reason therefor, but on all oc- casions thereafter he would take my finger in his mouth and hold it in his teeth, which were scarcely closed upon it. This he would do fora THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 43 minute ata time without having the least apparent motive, except that he had seen Mickie do so. Often while holding my finger in this manner with a look of seriousness worthy a supreme-court judge, he would roll his little eyes at me in the - most inquiring manner, as if to say, “ How is that?” When he once realized that Mickie was so much attached to me, Nemo always showed a desire to be on friendly terms with me, and when I would go into the cage to play with Mickie and McGinty he always wanted to be counted in the game. WhenI had anything for them to eat he always wanted a seat of honor at table, and he would at times want to fight for me when the other monkeys got too friendly. Poor little fel- low, he is now dead; but the image of his cute little face and his original character are deeply imprinted on my mind. I was never able to secure a record of the sounds of his little voice, though I have often heard him talk. He had a soft, musi- cal voice, and great power of facial expression. One of the most remarkable things I have ever observed among monkeys was done by this little fellow. On two separate occasions I have seen him apologize to Dodo in the most humble man- 44 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS: ner for something he had done, and I tried very hard to secure a record of this particular speech, in which I totally failed, as I could not. fore- know when such an act would be done, and there- - fore could not have my phonograph in place to obtain sucharecord. I called the attention of Mr. F.S. Church, the eminent artist, to this act, with the hope that he might be able to make a sketch of Nemo while in this attitude. Ido not know what the offence was, but the pose and expres- sion as well as the speech were very impressive. He satin acrouching position, with the left hand clasping the right wrist, and delivered his speech in a most energetic but humble manner. ‘The expression on his face could not be misunder- stood. After a few moments he paused briefly, and then seemed to repeat the same thing some two or three times. The manner of his delivery was very suggestive, and his demeanor was con- ciliatory. When he had quite finished his speech, Dodo, to whom the apology was being made, and who had listened to it in perfect silence, deliv- ered a sound blow with her right hand on the leffside of the face of the ‘ttle pemitenmams which he responded with a soft cry, while Dodo turned and left him without further debate. I THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 45 also called the attention of the keeper to this act, and he assured me that he had repeatedly wit- nessed thesame. What the subject of his speech was or the cause which brought it about I am not able to say, nor can I say with certainty to what extent he explained; but that it was an apology or explanation of some kind, at least, I have not the slightest doubt. I do not believe, of course, that his speech contained any details concerning the offence; but that it expressed re- egret, penitence, or submission does not, to my mind, admitofadoubt. I have seen a few other cases somewhat similar to this, but none of them comparing, in point of polish and pathos, to that of Nemo in his unique little speech. Nigger was of this same species; he was in poor health most of the winter, being afflicted with some spinal trouble; but notwithstanding his affliction, he was a good talker. His infirm- jue nowever, placed him at the merey of the other inmates of the cage, and as monkeys are naturally cruel and entirely destitute of sym- pathy, the daily life of Nigger could not be ex- pected to be a very happy one. Owing to this state of facts Nigger usually kept to himself and was not intimate with any other monkey in the 46 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. cage. I have frequently given Nigger some choice bits of food while I wasin the cage, and protected him from the other monkeys while he was eating it. This he seemed to fully appreciate, and al- ways located himself at a certain point in the cage where his defence could be effected with the least difficulty. Nigger frequently indulged in the most pathetic and touching appeals to his keeper, and went through many of the gestures, sounds, and contortions which will be described in the next chapter as a part of the speech and conduct of Dodo, some of whose remarkable poses and expressions have been faithfully por- trayed by Mr. Church. Among my personal friends of the simian race there is none more devoted to me than lit- tle McGinty, another winter boarder at Central Park. From the first of my acquaintance with McGinty we have been stanch friends, and when I go to visit him he expresses the most un- bounded delight. He will reach his little arms through the bars of the cage and put his hands on my cheeks, hold his mouth up to the wires, and talk to me at great length. When I go into the cage he will place himself on a perch, where he will sit with his arms around my THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. A7 neck, lick my cheeks affectionately, pull my ears, and chatter to me in a sweet but plaintive tone. When Mickie joins the play, which he invariably does, by climbing or jumping on to my shoulders and interrupting the ¢éte-a-téte between McGinty and myself, poor little McGinty’s jealousy, which is his supreme passion, causes him to retire in dis- gust, and he will sometimes pout for several min- utes without even accepting foodfrom me. After he has pouted fora while, however, he will some- times make overtures of reconciliation and seek by various means to divert my attention. One of his favorite means of renewing favor with me was to whip poor little Nigger. He would look at me and laugh, grin and make grimaces, and then dash off at Nigger and want to eat him up. He did not seem to understand why I objected to his whipping Nigger. Monkeys do not regard it as a breach of honor to whip the helpless and ' feeble members of their tribe. They are not unlike a large per cent of mankind. They al- ways hunt for easy prey, and want to fight some- thing thatiseasily whipped. They are not great cowards, but when once whipped they rarely attempt the second time to contest matters with their victors. 48 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. In this cage, containing five brown Capuchin monkeys, it was not difficult to see that Mickie ran things to suit himself. McGinty was the only one of the four in the cage with him that ever contested any right with Mickie, and for a long time it was a question in my mind who was to win in the end. The next to him in authority was Dodo, who never attempted to control Mickie or McGinty, but always made Nemo and Nigger stand about. Fourth in line of authority was Nemo, who always resented any offence from others by making Nigger take a corner; and the only victims that. Nigger had were the digele white-faces, which never fight anything and are always on the run. When it was finally decided between Mickie and McGinty that Mickie should be captain, McGinty readily accepted the place of first lieutenant, which rank he has continued to hold without challenge. —When once the question is settled among a cage of simians, the debate does not appear to be renewed at any future time. ‘They. never go to court with thei grievances, and rarely appeal a second time to force when the question has once been decided against them. Some human beings might profit by studying this trait of monkeys. & CHAPTER: VI. Dago Talks about the Weather.—Tells me of his Troubles.— Dodo in the ‘‘ Balcony Scene.’’—Her Portrait by a Great Artist. ON one of my visits to Chicago in the autumn of 1890 I went to pay my respects to Dago, the little brown monkey in Lincoln Park. He had been sick fora while and had not fully recovered, although he was able to receive visitors, and his appetite for peanuts was fairly well restored. On the morning of which I speak, it was dark and stormy. A fierce wind and terrible rain prevailed from the northwest. I went to the building just after daylight, in order to be alone with the monkey, and when I entered the house Frenchie, the head-keeper, told me how very sick little Dago had been since I had left him on the day before. I approached the cage and be- gan to caress him, to which he replied in low, whimpering tones, as though he understood the nature of what I was saying to him. Presently 4 > 50 THE SPEECH. OF “MONKEYS. he raised himself erect upon his hind feet, and placing his hands on his side, pressed and rubbed it as though he was in great pain, and uttered some sounds in a low, piping voice. The sound itself was pathetic, and when accented by his gestures it was really very touching. At time juncture a hard gust of wind and rain dashed against the window near his cage, whereupon the little monkey turned away from me, ran to the window and looked out, and uttered a sound quite different from the ones he had just been delivering to me. Still standing erect he ap- peared deeply interested, and stood for a few moments at the window, during which time he would turn his head toward me and utter this sound. That the sound he uttered was addressed to me could not be doubted, and his manner in doing so was very human-like. Then returning to me, still standing erect, he would renew his plaintive speech in the most earnest manner, and continue it until another gust would call him ‘to the window. I observed that each time he went to the window he uttered the same sound, as well as I could detect by ear, and would stand for some time watching out the window, and oc- casionally turn his head and repeat this sound to THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 51 me. When returning to me again he would resume his sad story, whateverit was. Isecured a good record of that part of his speech which was made when near me at the front of the cage, but the remarks made while at the window were not so well recorded, yet they were audible, and I reproduced them on the phonograph at a sub- sequent visit. My opinion was that the sound he uttered while at the window must allude in some way to the state of the weather, and this Opinion was confirmed by the fact that on a later occasion, when I repeated the record to him the weather was fair; but when the machine repeated those sounds which he had uttered at the window on the day of the storm, it would cause him to turn away and look out the window; while at the other part of the record he evinced but little interest, and in fact seemed rather to avoid the phonograph, as though the sounds sug- gested something which he disliked. Iam quite sure that the address which he made to me at the front of the cage was a complaint of some kind, and from its intonation and the manner in which it was delivered I believed that it was an expression of pain. It occurred to me that the state of the weather might have something to do 52 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. with his feelings, and that he was conscious of this fact and desired to inform me of it. | About a year from that time I became quite intimate with a feeble little monkey which is described elsewhere by the name of Pedro, and of whose speech I made a good record. The sounds of his speech so closely resembled those made by Dago that I was not able to see that they differed in any respect except in loudness. Unfortunately the cylinders containing Dago’s record had been broken in shipping, and I was therefore unable to compare the two by analy- sis; but the sounds themselves resembled in a striking degree, and the manner of delivery was not wholly unlike, except that Pedro did not as- sume the same pose nor emphasize them with the same gestures. é During my stay in New York the past winter I have been frequently entertained by a like speech from little Dodo, who was the Juliet of the simian tribe. She belonged to the same species as the others, but her oratory was of a type far superior to that of any other of its kind that I have ever heard. At almost any hour of the day, at the approach of her keeper, she would stand upright and deliver to him the most touch- Lie SkEDeCH, OF MONKEYS, 53 ing and impassioned address. The sounds which she used and the gestures with which she ac- cented them, as far as I could determine, were the same:as those used by Dago and Pedro in their remarks to me as above described, except that Dodo delivered her lines in a much more impressive manner than either of the others. I asked the keeper to go into the cage with me, auceesees it he could take her into his hands. We entered the cage, and after a little coaxing she allowed him to take her into his arms, and after caressing her for a while and assuring her that no harm was meant, she would put her slen- der little arms about his neck and cuddle her head up under his chin like an injured child. She would caress him by licking his cheeks and chattering to him in a voice full of sympathy, with an air of affection worthy of a human being. During most of this time she would continue her pathetic speech without a moment’s pause, and was not willing under any conditions to be sep- arated from him. The only time at which she would ever show any anger at me or threaten me with assault would be when I would attempt to lay hands on her keeper or release him from her warm embrace. At such times, however, 54 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. she would fly at me with great fury and attempt to tear my very clothes off, and on these occa- sions she would not allow any other inmate of the cage to approach him or to receive his atten- tion or caresses. The sounds which she uttered were pitiful at times, and the tale she told must have been full of the deepest woe. I have not been able, up to this time, to translate these sounds literally; but their import cannot be mis- understood. My belief is that her speech was a complaint against the inmates of the cage, and that she was begging her keeper not to leave her alone in that great iron prison with all those big bad monkeys who were so cruel to her. One reason for believing this to be the nature of her speech is that in all cases where I have heard this speech and seen these gestures made, the conditions were such as to indicate that such was its nature. It has, however, every appearance of love-making of the most intense type. It is quite impossible to describe fully and accurately the sounds, and much more so the gestures, made on these occasions, so that the reader would be impressed as with the real act and speech. Dodo would stand erect on her feet, cross her hands on her heart, and in the most touching but ve THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 55 graceful manner go through with the most indescribable contortions. She would sway her body from side to side, turn her head in the most coquettish manner, and move her folded hands dramatically, while her face would be adorned with a simian grin of the first order, and the soft, rich notes of her voice were perfectly mu- sical. She would bend her body into every grace- ful curve that can be imagined, move her feet with the grace of the minuet, and continue her fervent speech as long as the object of her ado- ration appeared to be touched by her appeals. Her voice would range from pitch to pitch and from key to key, and with her arms folded she would glide across the floor of her cage with meee stace of a ballet-girl; and 1 have seen her stand with her eyes fixed upon her keeper, and hold her face in such a position as not to lose sight of him for a moment, and at the same time turn her body entirely around in her tracks with such skill as no contortionist has ever attained. During these orations I have observed the little tears standing in the corners of her eyes, which indicated that she herself must have felt what her speech was intended to convey. These lit- tle creatures do not shed tears in such abundance 56 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. as human beings do; but they are real tears, and are doubtless the result of the same causes that move the human eyes to tears. It has been my experience that these sounds appeal directly to our better feelings, ) Waa there is in the sound itself I cannot say; but it touches some chord in the human heart which vibrates in response to it. It has impressed me with the thought that all our senses are like the strings of some great harp; each one having a certain tension, so that any sound produced through an emotion would find response in that chord which is in unison with it. Indeed, I have thought that our emotions and sensations may be like the diatonic scale in music, and that the organs through which they act may respond in tones and semi-tones, and that each multiple of any fundamental tone will affect the chord in unison with it like the strings upon a musical instrument. The logical deduction, then, would be that our sympathies and affections are the chords, and our aversions and contempt the dis- cords, of that great harp of passion. CHAPTER: VII. Interpretation of Words.—Specific Words and Signs.—The Negative Sign and Sounds.—Affirmative Expressions.— Possible Origin of Negative and Positive Signs. IN my intercourse with these little creatures, I cannot forget how often I have caught the spirit of their tones when no ray of meaning as mere words of speech had dawned upon me, and it is partly through such means that I have been g@ie-to interpret them. -Asa rule each act of a monkey is attended by some sound, and each sound by some act, which to another monkey of the same species always means a certain thing. There are many cases perhaps, in which acquired words or shades of dialect are not quite clear to them, just as we often find in human speech; but monkeys appear to meet this difficulty and overcome it just as men do. ‘They talk with one another on a limited number of subjects, but in very few words, which they frequently re- peat if necessary. Their language is purely one of sounds, and while those sounds are ac- companied by signs, generally, I think, they are 58 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. quite able to get along better with the sounds alone than with the signs alone. The rules by which we may interpret the sounds of simian speech are the same as those by which we would interpret human speech. If you should be cast away upon an island inhabited by some strange race of people whose speech was so unlike your own that you could not understand a single word of it, you would watch the actions of those people, and see what act they did in connection with any sound they made; and in this way you would gradually learn to associate a certain sound with a certain act, until at last you would be able to understand the sound without see- ing the act at all; and such is the simple line I have pursued in the study of the speech of this little race—only I have been compelled to resort to some very novel means of doing my part of the talking. Since I have been so long assocti- ated with them, I have learned to know in many cases what act they will perform in response to certain sounds; and as I grow more and more familiar with these sounds, I become better able to distinguish them, just as we do with human speech. Until recently I have believed that their sounds THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 59 were so limited in number as to preclude any specific terms in their vocabulary; but now I am inclined to modify this opinion somewhat, as I have reason to believe that they have some spe- cific terms, such as a word for “ monkey,” another word for “fruit,” andsoon. They do not specify, perhaps, the various kinds of monkeys, but mon- keys in general, in contradistinction to birds or dogs. Their word for fruit does not specify the kind, but only means fruit in a collective sense, and only as akind of food. 1am not pos- itive as yet that their specific terms may even go so far as this; but I infer that such may be the case from one fact which I have observed in my experiments. When I show a monkey his image in a mirror, he utters a sound on seeing it—especially if he has been kept away from other monkeys for a long time; and all monkeys of the Same species, so far as I have observed, under like conditions use the same sound and address itin the same way to the image in the glass. In a few instances I have seen strange monkeys brought in contact with each other, and have ob- served that they use this same sound on their first meeting. The sound is always uttered in a low, soft tone, and appears to have the value of 60 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. a salutation. When kept in a cage with other monkeys they do not appear to salute the image in the glass, but chatter to it, and show less sur- prise at seeing it than in cases where they have been kept alone for some time. In cases where monkeys have been fed for a long time on bread and milk or on any one kind of food, when a banana is shown him he uses a sound which the phonograph shows to differ slightly from the ordinary food-sound. I have recently had reason to suspect that this differ- ence of inflection somewhat qualifies the sound, and has a tendency to make it more specific. The rapidity with which these creatures utter their speech is so great that only such ears as theirs can detect these very slight inflections. I am now directing my observations and experi- ments to this end, with the hope that I may be able - to determine with certainty in what degree they qualify their sounds, by inflections or otherwise. ' I have observed that in the phonograph the sounds which formerly appeared to me to be the ~ same are easily distinguished when treated in the manner described in the second part of this work, where I have given at length some of my experiments with this wonderful machine. THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. OI One of the most certain of my discoveries in the simian speech is the negative sign and the word. no,” The sign is made by shaking the head from side to side in a fashion almost ex- actly like that used by man to express the same idea. I have no longer any doubt of the intent and meaning of this sign, and the many tests to which I have subjected it compel me to accept the result as final. A little more than a year ago my attention was called to this sign by the children who own the hile Capuchin, Jack, in Charleston. A number of times they said to him, in my presence: “ Jack, you must go to bed.” At which he would shake his little black head, asif he really did not wish to comply. I watched this with great interest; but it was my belief at that time that he had been trained to do this, and that the sign did not really signify to him anything at all. The chil- dren, however, declared to me that he really meant “no.” To believe that he meant this would presuppose that he understood the combination of words quoted, and this was beyond the limits of my faith, although it was certain that a repe- tition of the sentence always elicited from him the same sign, which indicated that he recog- 62 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. nized it as the same sentence or combination of sounds, and gave it the same reply each time. I concluded that he had been taught to associate this sign with some sound—for instance, “ bed”’ or “go;” but since that time I have feundiame sign to be almost universal with this species of monkey, and they use the sign to express ne- gation. I have seen them use the sign in re- sponse to certain things which were wholly new to them, but where the idea was clear to them and they desired to express dissent. Tine 7taer that this sign is common to both man and sim- ian I regard as more than a mere coincidence, and I believe that in this sign I have found the psycho-physical basis of expression. I have made scores of experiments on’ tiie subject, and I find this sign a fixed factor of ex- pression. In one case where I tried to induce a monkey to allow me to take him into my hands from the hand of his master, he would shake his head each time, and make a peculiar sound some- what like a suppressed cluck. I would try to coax him with nuts, in response to which he would make the same sound and sign each time, and his actions showed beyond all controversy his intention. I had taught a monkey to drink THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 63 milk from a bottle by sucking it through a rub- ber nipple, and after he had satisfied his thirst, when I would try to force the bottle to his lips he would invariably respond by a shake of the head in the manner described, and at the same , time utter a clucking sound. I tried many sim- ilar experiments with three or four other mon- keys, and secured the same result in each case. In another instance, where a monkey was con- fined in a small cage, so that I could easily catch him in order to tame him by handling, when I would put my hand. into the cage to catch him he would shake his head in this manner and ac- company the act by a plaintive sound, which was so touching that I could not obtain my own con- sent to persecute the little prisoner by compelling him to submit tomycaresses. I have found that the little rogue McGinty, in Central Park, does the same thing at times when I go into the cage and attempt to put my hands on him, and espe- cially when he has taken refuge in a corner to nurse his jealousy. While I remain outside the cage he is so devoted to me that he will scarcely leave me to get something to eat; but when I enter the cage and reach out my hand toward him, he will shake his little head and utter that 64 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. peculiar clucking sound. Many of these tests I have repeated over and over with the same re- sults, and noting the conditions at the time, I am thoroughly convinced that the sign and sound ¢ ’ mean “no.” I] have observed that this jciemas always madein the same manner; but sometimes it is accompanied by a clucking sound, while at other times it is a soft, whimpering sound, al- most like a low, plaintive whistle. The sign is frequently used without the sound at all; and I must impress it upon my reader that these re- sults do not always present themselves in every experiment, as much depends upon the mood and surroundings of the subject. I have found that one advantage is to have the monkey con- fined in a very small cage, as otherwise he will turn away and get out of your reach when you press anything upon him that he does not want. I have also found much better results by having the monkey alone, and where he can neither see nor hear other monkeys. Having discovered the sign of negation among the simians, I began an investigation to ascer- tain how far it could be found among the races of mankind. I have carried my search far be- yond the limits of local inquiry, and up to this THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 65 time I have found only a few trifling exceptions in the use of this sign among all the races of men, and those few exceptions are found among the Caucasian race, and appear to be confined to Southern Europe. I have heard that among certain island tribes of Polynesia these signs are reversed; but I have been assured by two officers of the English navy and two of the United States navy, who have visited the islands in question, that such is not the case. Among the Indians, Mongolians, and Negroes I have found no note- worthy exceptions. [I have inquired among mothers who have raised families to ascertain where they first observed this sign as an expres- sion among their children; and from the con- sensus of opinion it appears that this is about the first sign used by infants to express nega- tion. I have not found the positive sign, or sign of affirmation by a nod of the head, to be so general; yet it hasa wide range within the human family, and appears to be used to some extent among the lower primates. Seeking a source from which these signs may have originated, I have concluded that they may arise from two circumstances: The negative 5 66 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. sign, doubtless, comes from an effort to turn the head away from something which is not desired, and that, with such an intent, it has gradually crystallized into an instinctive expression of nega- tion or refusal; while the nod of affirmation or approval may have grown out of the intuitive lowering of the head as an act of submission or acquiescence, or from reaching the head forward to receive something desired, or it may Name come from these two causes conjointly. This is only one of a great many points in which the speech of simians coincides with that of man. It is true we have no letters Gagne alphabet with which to represent the sounds of their speech, nor have we the phonetic equiva- lence of their speech in our lanouage; bie. also true that our alphabet does not fully repre- sent or correctly express the entire plomere range of our own speech; but the fact that our speech is not founded upon the same phonetic basis, or built up into the same phonetic struct- ures, is no reason that their speech is not as truly speech as our Own. That theré are mo temens in any alphabet which represent the phonetic elements of simian speech is doubtless due to the fact that there has never been any demand THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 67 ioe suen; but the same genius that invented an alphabet for human speech, actuated by the same motives and led by the same incentives, could as easily invent an alphabet for simian Speeen. It is not only true that the phonetic ele- ments of our language are not represented by the characters of our alphabet, but the same is true to some extent of our words which do not quite keep pace with human thought. In the higher types of human speech there are thou- sands of words and ideas which cannot be trans- lated into or expressed by any savage tongue, because no savage ever had use for them and no savage tongue contains their equivalence. The growth of speech is always measured by the growth of mind. They are not always of the same extent, but always bear a common ratio. It is a mental product, and must be equal to the task of coining thoughtsinto words. It is essen- tial to all social order, and no community could long survive as such without it. It is as much the product of mind and matter as salt is the product of chlorine and sodium. VEAP TER evi: Meeting with Nellie.—Nellie was my Guest.—Her Speech and Manners —The Little Blind Girl.—One of Nellie’s | Friends. —Her Sight and Hearing.—Her Toys and how she ; Played with them. ONE of the most intelligent of all the brown Capuchins that I have ever seen was Nellie, who belonged to a dealer in Washington. When she arrived there I was invited to call and see her. I introduced myself in my usual way, by giving her the sound for food, to which she promptly replied. She was rather informal, and we were soon engaged in a chat on that subject—the one above all others that would interest a monkey. On my second visit she was like an old acquaint- ance, and we had a fine time. On my third visit she allowed me to put my hands into her cage and.handle her with impunity. On my mex visit I took her out of the cage and we had a real romp. This continued for some days, during which time she would answer me on all occasions when I used the word for food or drink. She’ had grown quite fond of me, and always recog- THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 69 nized me as I entered thedoor. About thistime there came to Washington a little girl who was deaf, dumb, and blind. She was accompanied by her teacher, who acted as her interpreter. One of the greatest desires of this little girl’s life was to see a live monkey—that is, to see it with herfingers. The dealer who owned the monkey sent for me to come down and show it to her, as © eould handle the monkey for her. I took Nel- lie from the cage, and when any one except my- self would put hands upon her she would growl and scold and show her temper; and when the little blind girl first attempted to put her hands on her, Nellie did not like itatall. I stroked the child’s hair and cheeks with my own hand first, and then with Nellie’s. She looked up at me in an inquiring manner, and uttered one of those soft, flute-like sounds a few times, and then be- gan to pull at the cheeks and ears of the child. Within afew moments they were like old friends and playmates, and for nearly an hour they afforded each other great pleasure, at the end of which time they separated with reluctance. ‘The little simian acted as if she was conscious of the sad affliction of the child, but seemed at per- fect ease with her, although she would decline 7O FHE SPEECH (OF MONKEYS; the tenderest approach of others. She would look at the child’s eyes, which were not disfig- ured, but lacked expression, and then at me, as if to indicate that she was aware that the child was blind, and the little girl appeared not to be aware that monkeys could bite at all. It was a beautiful and touching scene, and one in which the lamp of instinct shed its feeble light on all around. On the following day, by an accident in which Ireally had no part except that of being present, Nellie escaped from her cage and climbed up on a shelf occupied by some bird-cages. As she attempted to climb up, of course the light wicker cages, with their little yellow occupants, fell to the floor by the dozen. I tried to inducewherts return or to come to me; but the falling eages the cry of the birds, the talking of parrots, and the scream of other monkeys frightened poor Nellie almost out of her wits. Thinking that I was the cause of her trouble, because I was pres- ent, she would scream with fright at my ap- proach. She was not an exception to the gen- eral rule that governs monkeydom, which is to suspect every one of doing wrong except itself. I had her removed to my apartments, where | THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 71 supplied her with bells and toys and fed her on the fat of the land; and by this means we slowly knitted together the broken bones of our friend- ship once more. But when once a monkey has grown suspicious of you they never recover en- rely eitom it, it Seems, for in every act there- after, however slight, you can readily see that they suspect you of it; but with great care and caution you can make them almost forget the trouble. While I kept Nellie at my rooms I made some good records of her speech on the phonograph, and studied her with special care; but as the prov- ince of this work is the speech of that little race, I must forego the pleasure of telling some in- tensely funny things with which she entertained me, except in so far as they are relevant to speech. A frequent and welcome visitor to my study was a bright little boy about six years old, for whom Nellie entertained a great fondness, as she aise did for my wife. At the sight of the boy Nellie would go into perfect raptures, and when he would leave her she would call him so ear- nestly and whine so pitifully that one could not femam from sympathy. On his. return she would laugh audibly and give every sign of ex- 72 THE ‘SPEECH’ OF MONKEYS. treme joy. She never tired of his company, nor gave any part of her attention to others when he was present. Some children living next door to me found great delight in calling to see Nel- lie, and she always evinced great pleasure at their visits. On’ these occasions Nellie made aa] point to entertain them, and showed herself to the best advantage. When I wished to makea good record of her sounds, and especially of her laughter, I would always bring the little boy to my aid. ‘The boy would conceal himself in the room, and after Nellie would call him a few times he would jump out from his place of con- cealment and surprise her, whereupon she would laugh till she could be heard through the whole house; and in this manner I secured some of the best records I have ever made of the laughter of amonkey. Then when the boy would conceal himself again, I secured the peculiar ‘sound with which she would try to attract his attention. The sound which she used in calling him or my wife was unlike that which she made for any other purpose; and while it is difficult to say whether the grammatical value of this sound is that of a noun or of a verb, it is evident that it was used for the special purpose of calling or THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 73 attracting attention. If its value is that of a noun, it has not in my opinion any specific char- acter, but a term which would be applied alike to boys, monkeys, horses, birds, or any other thing which she might desire to call. If in its @ature 1f is a verb, it is equivalent to the name of the act and combines the force of the imper- ative and infinitive moods. The uniform expression of the emotions of man and simian is such as to suggest that if thought was developed from emotion and speech was developed from thought, the expressions of emo- tion were the rudiments from which speech is developed. A striking point of resemblance between hu- man speech and that of the simian is found in a word which Nellie used to warn me of approach- ing danger. It is not that sound which I have elsewhere described as the alarm-sound, and which is used only in case of imminent and awful danger, but a sound used in case of re- mote danger or in announcing something un- usual. As nearly as I] can represent the sound by letters it would be “e-c-g-k,” and with this word I have been warned by these little friends many times since I first heard it from Nellie, 74. THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. In the following experiment this sound was used with great effect. Nellie’s cage occupied a place in my study near my desk. She would stay awake at night as long as the light was kept burning, 2nd as I have always kept late hours, I did not violate. the rule ot my life im orders give her a good night’s rest. About two o'clock one morning, when I was about to retire, I found Nellie wide awake. I drew my chair up to her cage, and sat watching her pranks as she tried to entertain me with bells and toys: trea long thread to a glove, which I placed in the corner of the room at a distance of several feet from me, but without letting her see it. I held one end of the string in my hand and drew the glove obliquely across the floor toward the cage. When I first tightened the string, which I had drawn across one knee and under the other, the glove moved very slightly, and this her quick eye caught at the first motion. Standing almost on tip-toe, her mouth half-open, she would peep cautiously at the glove, and then in a low whis- per would say “e-c-g-k!”’ and every second or so would repeat it, at the same time watching me to see whether I was aware of the approach of this goblin. Her actions were almost human, —_ THE, SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 75 while her movements were as stealthy as those of acat. As the glove came closer and closer she became more and more demonstrative, and when at last she saw the monster climbing up pae lex of my trousers she uttered the sound aloud and very rapidly, and tried to get to the object, which she evidently thought was some living thing. She detected the thread with which I drew the glove across the floor, but seemed in doubt as to what part it played in this act. I saw her eyes several times follow the thread from my knee to the glove, but I do not think she discovered what caused the glove to move. Having done this for a few times, how- ever, with about the same result each time, I re- lieved her anxiety and fright by allowing her to examine the glove, which she did with marked interest for a moment, and then turned away. I tried the same thing over again, but failed to elicit from her the slightest interest after she had examined the glove. It will be observed that when Nellie first discovered the glove moving on the floor she attempted to call my attention in a low whis- per; that as the object approached me she be- eame more earnest, uttered the sound somewhat Pe 76 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. louder, and when she discovered the monster, as she regarded it, climbing up my leg she uttered her warning in a loud voice—not a scream ora yell, but in a tone sufficiently loud for the dis- tance over which the warning was conveyed. The fact of her whispering indicates that her idea of sound was well defined. Her purpose was to warn me of the approaching danger with- out alarming the object against which her warn- ing was intended to prepare me, and as the dan- ger approached me her warning became more urgent, and when she saw the danger was at hand, her warning was no longer concealed or restrained. Another sound which these little creatures use in a somewhat similar manner is a word which may be represented by the letters “c-h-i.” The “ch” is guttural, like the final “ch” in Gerniaay and “1” short, like the sound ofiin™ hit.” Bia sound is used to give warning of the approach of something which the monkey does not fear, such as approaching footsteps or the sound of voices, and Nellie always used this sound to warn my wife of my approach when I was com- ing up the stairway. The rooms which I occu- pied while I kept Nellie were located on the sec- THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. Ta ond floor, and the dining-room was on the ground- floor, and hence there were two flights of stairs between, both of which were carpeted. So acute was her sense of hearing that she would detect my footsteps on the lower stairway and warn my wife of-my approach. She manifested no inter- est, as arule, in the sounds made by other per- sons passing up and down the stairway, which indicated that she not only heard the sounds of may footsteps, but recognized them. The first intimation she would give of my coming was always in a whisper. She would first make the sound “c-h-i" and then stop and listen. She would repeat the sound and listen again; as I approached the door in the hall she would iti der voice to its natural pitch and utter this sound three or four times in quick suc- cession; when I turned the door-knob she would Ebowrsome excitement. and when I entered _,the room she would always express her satis. faction with a little chuckle. This sound she did not use except to announce something of which she was not afraid. but when she ap. prehended danger from the cause of the sound she would use the word “e-c-g-k,” and when greatly alarmed she would use the sound which 78 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. I have described elsewhere as that of intense alarm or assault. Nellie was an affectionate little creature, and could not bear to be left alone even when sup- plied with toys and everything she wanted to eat. When she saw me put on my overcoat or get my hat and cane she knew what it meant, and when she saw my wife, to whom she was much devoted, put on her cloak and bonnet she at once foresaw that she would be left alone. Then she would plead and beg and chatter until she would sometimes dissuade my wife, and she seemed aware that she had ac- complished her purpose. I have watched her by the hour through a small hole in the door, and when quite alone she would play with her toys in perfect silence, and sometimes for hours to- gether she would not utter a single word. She was not an exception to the rule which I have mentioned heretofore, that monkeys do not talk when alone or when it is not necessary to their comfort or pleasure; and while I am aware that their speech is far inferior to human speech, yet in it there is an eloquence that soothes and a meaning that appeals to the human heart. CHAPTER IX. Nellie’s Affections.—A Little Flirtation.—Some of my Per- sonal Friends. NELLIE had spent much of her life in captiv- ity, and had been used to the society of children, for whom she showed the greatest fondness. She rarely ever betrayed the slightest aversion to any of them. She delighted to pattheir cheeks, pull pacit ears, and tangle their hair. One of her favorite pastimes was to pull the hairpins out of my wife’s hair so that she could get hold of it the better to play with it, and my wife has often remarked that Nellie would make an excellent lady’s maid.. She would clean one’s finger-nails with the skill of a manicure. She would pick every shred, ravelling, or speck from one’s cloth- ing. Her aversions and her attachments were equally strong. She was not selfish in selecting her friends, nor did she seem to be influenced by age or beauty. lie let her out of her cage and give her some- thing to play with was happiness enough for her, 80 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS, and I almost think she preferred such a life to the freedom of her Amazon forests. But you cannot afford to turn one out of the cage in a room where there is anything that can be torn or broken, as they enjoy such mischief in the highest degree. Nellie would beg me so pite- ously to be taken from her little iron prison that I could not have the cruelty to refuse her, even at the cost of some trouble in preparing the room for her; and as we retain these little cap- tives against their will and treat them worse than slaves by keeping them in close confinement, I think we should at least try to amuse them. It is true they do not. have to toil, but I tama would be more humane to make them work in the open air than to confine them so closely and then deprive them of every source of pleasure. As an act of humanity and simple justice, I would impress upon those who have such little pets how important a thing it is to keep them sup- plied with toys. They are just like children in this respect, and for a trifle one can Tumaiog them with all-the toys ‘they need. 7 It is sdeR absolutely ‘cruel, to keep these little creatures confined in solitude and deny them the simple pleasure they find in playing with a bell, ball, or THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. SI marbles, and besides, a trifling outlay in this way will very much prolong their lives. A mon- key is always happy if he has something to play _with and plenty toeat. I do not know of any investment of mine which ever yielded sucha great return in pleasure as one little pocket match- — safe, which cost me twenty-five cents and which I gave to Nellie one evening to play with. I had put into it a small key to make it rattle, and also some bits of candy. She rattled the box, and found some pleasure in the noise it made. I showed hera few times how to press the spring in order to open it, but her little black fingers were not strong enough to release the spring aude take the lid fly open. However, she caught the idea, and knew that the spring was the secret which held it, and when she found that she could not open it with her fingers, she EMead, it with her teeth. ‘Failing in this she turned to-the wall, and standing upright on the top of her cage, she took the box in both hands and struck the spring against the wall until the lid flew open. She was perfectly delighted at the result, and for the hundredth time at least I closed the box for her to open again. On the following day, when some friends came in to 6 $ 82 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. visit her, I gave her the match-box to opeii again. On this occasion, however, she was in her cage, and could not reach the wall through its meshes, and hence had nothing against which to strike the spring to ‘force it open. Aiter@ loomime around her in all directions and striking the box against the wires of her cage a few times, she discovered a block of wood about six inches in length and breadth by an inch thick; this she took and mounted her perch. Balancing the block on the perch, she held it with the left foot while with her right foot she held on to the perch, and with her tail wound through the meshes of her cage to steady herself, she carefully adjusted the match-box in her hands in such a manner as to protect her fingers from the blow. Then strik- ing the spring against the block of wood the lid flew open, and she fairly screamed with delight and held the box up with pride, wanting me to close the lid again, in order that she might — open it. Finding that the late hours which I kept were beginning to tell on Nellie, and that during the day from time to time I would catch her taking a little nap, I concluded to use some curtains around her cage to avoid disturbing her rest. I THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 88. drew them around the cage, lapped them over, and pinned them down in front. Then I turned down the light and kept quiet for a while to al- low her to go to sleep. After the lapse of a few minutes I slowly turned up the light and re- sumed my writing. In an intstant I heard the curtains rustle and looked around, and there I saw her little brown eyes peeping through the folds of the curtains, which she held apart with her little black hands. When she saw what it was that caused all this disturbance she chattered to me in her soft, rich tones, and tried so hard to pull the curtains apart that I removed them from her cage, sothat she could look around the room. To see her holding the curtains apart in that graceful manner, turning her head from side to side, peeping and smiling at me and talking in such low tones, was so much like a real flirtation that one who has not seen the like cannot fully appreciate it. And only those who have experi- enced the warm and unselfish friendship of these little creatures can realize how strong the attach- ment becomes. When once you enjoy the con- fidence of a monkey nothing can shake it ex- cept some act of your own or one at least which Mey autibute to you. Their little ears are 84. THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. proof against gossip and their tongues are free Trenme die Among the little captives of the simian race who spend their life in iron prisons to gratify the cruelty of man, and not to expiate Seme crime committed or inherent, I have many little friends to whom I am attached, and whose de- votion to me is aS warm and sincere, so far as I can see, as that of any human being. I must confess that I cannot discern in what intrinsic way the love they have for me differs from my own for them. I cannot see in what respect their love is less divine than is my own. I can- not see in what respect the affections of a dog for a kind master differ from those of a child for a kind parent; nor can I see in what respect the sense of fear for a cruel master differs from that of a child for a cruel parent.: It/is mere seme ment that ascribes to those of a child a higher source than the same passions in the dog; the dog could have loved or feared another master just as well; and filial love or fear would have reached out its tendrils just as far with all the ties of kindred blood removed. It has been said that one is able to assign a definite reason why and that the other is a vague impulse; but I am THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 85 too obtuse to understand how reason actuates to love and instinct toa mere attachment. Il cannot believe that in the essential and ultimate nature of these passions there can be shown any real difference. Whether it be reason or instinct in man, the affections of the lower animals are actuated by the same motives, governed by the same conditions, and guided by the same reasons as those of man. I shall not soon forget some of.my monkey friends, and I am sure they will not forget me; for I see them sometimes after months of absence, and they usually recognize me at sight and show every sign of pleasure at my return. CHAPTER 2X: The Capuchin Vocabulary.—What I Have Found.—What I Foresee in it. UP to this time I have been-able to determine, with a fair degree of certainty, nine words or sounds belonging to Capuchins, some of which sounds are so inflected as to have two or three different meanings, I think. The sound which I have translated food, and found to have amuch wider meaning, long perplexed me, because I found it used under so many conditions, and had not been able to detect any difference of mod- ulation. I find one form of this sound used for food in general, but when modulated in a certain ~ way seems to specify the kind of food. I ob- served that this sound seemed to be a salutation or peace-making term with them, which I attrib- uted to the fact that food was the central thought of every monkey’s life, and that consequently that word would naturally be the most important of his whole speech. During the past winter I found that another modulation of this word ex- 86 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 87 pressed a wish to obtain a thing, and appeared to me to be almost equivalent to the verb “ give,” when used in the imperative mood; something fie this: “Give me that.” Ihave succeeded a great number of times, by the use of this word, in inducing McGinty to give me a part of his food, and on many occasions to hand me from > his cage a ball, a club, or some such thing that I had given him to play with. Under suitable conditions I could soon determine to what ex- tent these inflections control their actions, but with the surroundings of a zodlogical garden the task is very difficult. However, I am quite sat- isfied that the sound which I have translated food is shaded by them into several kindred meanings. The word “drink” appears to be more fixed, both in its form and meaning. I have not yet been able to detect any difference in the sound whether water, milk, or other liquids be desired; but this is quite natural, since they have but lht- tle variety in the things they drink. I am not sure how far the sound which I had thought meant “weather,” or in some way allud- ed to the state of the weather, may be relied upon as a separate word. It was so closely connected to the speech of discontent or pain 88 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYs. when made by little Dago that I have not been able since to separate the sounds, and I finally abandoned it as a separate word; but reviewing my work, and recalling the peculiar conduct of this mankey and the conditions attending it, I believe it is safe to say that he had in mind the state of the weather. The sound which I have translated “love” is only in the sense of firm and ardent friendship. The expressions of love between sexes I have not been able, as yet, to find with certainty. jee few sounds, however, made under certain con- ditions I have reason to believe bear upon this subject; but Iam not yet ready to announce my opinions thereon. The “alarm” sound, as I have translated it, has been described; but among the Capuchins I find three kindred words, quite unlike as mere sounds, but closely allied in meaning. The one just mentioned is used under the stress of great fear or in case of assault. It is a shrill, piercing sound, very loud and very high in pitch. The second word, “e-c-g-k,’’ is used only to express apprehension or as a warning of the approach of a thing they fear or do not like, and the last of these, whichis a guttural whisper, is used merely THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 89 to call attention to the approach of something which the monkey does not fear or dislike, which I have spelled “c-h-i.” I have referred elsewhere, without describing it, to the sound which Nellie used for calling, and which she employed when attempting to dis- suade my wife from going out and leaving her alone. Itisa peculiar sound, something like a whine, but very plaintive and suggestive. I cannot represent it in letters. There are many sounds about which I am yet in doubt, and some shades of meaning are not clear; but these sounds described include the greater part of my knowledge of the Capuchin tongue, and I shall now proceed to the sounds of some of the other monkeys. Standing on this frail bridge of speech, I see into that broad field of life and thought which lies beyond the confines of our care, and into which, through the gates that I have now un- locked, may soon be borne the sunshine of human intellect. What prophet nowcan foretell the re- lations which may yet obtain between the human race and those inferior forms which fill some place in the design and execute some function in the economy of nature? gO THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. A knowledge of their language cannot injure man, and may conduce to the good of others, be- cause it would lessen man's selfishness, widen his. mercy, and restrain his cruelty. _ 1p would not place man more remote from his divinity nor change the state of facts which nowexist. Their speech is the only gateway to their minds, and through it we must pass if we would learn their secret thoughts and measure the distance from mind to mind. CHAPTER -XI. The Word for Food in the Rhesus Dialect.— The Rhesus Sound of Alarm.—The Dialect of the White-Face.— Dolly Varden, Uncle Remus and others. FROM a number of sounds uttered by the Rhesus monkeys, I finally selected the word which, for many reasons, I believed meant food, and was the equivalent in meaning to that word in the Capuchin tongue. The phonetic character of the words differs very widely. The sound ut- tered by the Rhesus, as nearly as I can represent ’ fey letters, is “nqu-u-w." The “w’’ sound is about the same asin the Capuchin word, but on close examination with the phonograph, it ap-- pears to be uttered in five syllables very slightly separated, while the ear only detects two. One of the most unique of my experiments I made in Central Park in the autumn of 1891. I secured a very fine phonograph record of the food-sound of the Rhesus monkeys belonging to the park. During the following night there ar- rived at the park a shipment of Rhesus monkeys gi 92 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. just from their home in the eastof Asia. There were seven of these new monkeys, three adult females and four babies, one of whom was left an orphan by the death of its mother in her pas- sage across the ocean. At my request the super- intendent had these monkeys stored in the vacant room in the upper story of the old armory build- ing. They had never seen the monkeys in Cen- tral Park, nor had they ever been brought near enough to the monkey-house for them to learn by any means that any other monkeys were there. About.sunrise I repaired to this room where I had my phonograph placed in order, and I enjoined those who were present by special permission not to do anything to attract the at- tention of the monkeys, nor under any condition to show them any food or anything to drink. Hav- ing arranged my phonograph, I delivered to them the sounds contained on my cylinder which I had. recorded on the day preceding. Upite this time not a sound had been uttered by any inmate of the shipping-cage. The instant my phonograph began to reproduce the record, the seven new monkeys began to answer vociferously. After having delivered this record to them, I gave them time to become quiet again. I showed THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 93 them some carrots and apples, on seeing which they began to utter the same sounds which they had uttered before, and this time I secured a good record of their sounds to compare with the others. The alarm-sound as given by the Rhesus is very energetic, but not so shrill nor sharp as that Giviiae Capuchin, nor have 1 discovered more than one such sound. As they are not of a high order of intelligence, nor kindly disposed unless epi in fear, | have not given them a great amount of study, but their sounds come more closely to the range of the human voice than do the sounds of the Cebus, which I regard as the Caucasian of monkeys. The Rhesus is not very intelligent, but when reared in captivity appears to be capable of some degree of domestication. The adult reared ina wild state shows many phases of vicious and un- congenial temper. When well cared for they are rather hardy and undergo training quite well. They are not a handsome animal, being of a faded tan color on the back, merged into a yel- lowish-white on the less exposed parts. They have large cheek-pouches, which, when not filled with food, allow the skin on the neck and jaws Q4 THE SPEECH OF “MONKEYS. to hang in folds, which give them an appearance of extreme ‘emaciation, and when full of food they are so distended as to present rather an un- pleasant aspect. The sounds which the Rhesus utters in anger are harsh and unmusical, while their sound for food is soft and sympathetic, and I have made a machine which imitates it quite well. The Rhe- sus belongs to the genus Macacus, one of the oldest and largest of all simian genera. I have found the word in the dialect of the white-faced Cebus which corresponds in value to those sounds described in the dialects of the Capuchin and Rhesus monkeys meaning food; but I cannot give the faintest idea of the sound by any combination of letters, nor have I as yet devised any means by which I can imitate it. I recorded this sound on the phonograph more than a year ago, but only within the last few months have I been able to tell its meaning. Another sound which is made by this species to express apprehension of remote danger, such as an approaching footstep or some unusual sound, I have also learned. It is very much the same phonetically as that sound which he utters in case of great and sudden alarm, but CHES Ol BEECH - Or. MONKEYS: 95 with much less energy. It resembles slightly the alarm-sound of the Capuchin, but up to this time I have not been able to make a good record of it. Another sound which is peculiar to this species, I think, is used as a kind of salutation or expres- sion of friendship, which phonetically is quite unlike the corresponding sound in any other dia- lect that I have studied. I must mention Dolly Varden, who belongs to this species and with whom I was at one time on very warm terms of friendship. Dolly was very fond of me and would laugh and play with me by the hour. Her laughter was very human- like, except that it was silent, and in all our play during the lapse of some weeks she never ut- tered a sound—not even so much asa growl, al-. though I tried by every possible means to in- aigee mer to talk. It has occurred to me since that time that she may have been deaf and dumb, but I did not think of testing her on these points while I had an opportunity. It is not usual for monkeys to laugh in silence, although they fre- quently laugh aloud like human beings; but it is not a common thing for them to remain silent at all times and under all conditions. Dolly was 96 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. good-natured, playful, and always showed every sign of pleasure at my visits. In Central Park there is a monkey of this spe- cies which [ call Uncle Remus.: He is qaite fond of me, and for my amusement he always wants to whip a little baby-monkey in the same cage with him whenever I go to visit them. This species belongs to the same genus as the Capuchin, though they differ in mental calibre as widely as the Caucasian differs from the negro; but in this case the colors are reversed. I have seen a few fairly intelligent white-faces and a great many very stupid Capuchins; but to strike an average from a great number of each kind, they will be found very widely separated in brain-power. : The white-faced Cebus always has a languid expression, and looks like some poor, decrepit old man who has borne a great burden of care through a long hfe, and finds his toil and pa- tience ill-requited and is now awaiting his last call. He always has a sad face and looks as if his friends were false. His type of speech is very far inferior to that of the Capuchin, and I do not regard him as a good subject for my work. I have learned the food-sound in the dialect THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 97 of the sooty Mangaby, but I have not been able Mmonceord it sufficiently well to study. It is one of the most peculiar sounds in the whole range of simian speech. The phonetic elements are nearly hike “wuh-uh-uh,” but the manner in which it is delivered is very singular. It appears to be intermixed with a peculiar clucking sound, and each sound seems independent of the other, although so closely joined in their utterance as to sound almost like they were uttered simul- taneously by separate means. It is a deep gut- tural below the middle pitch of the human voice, while the clucking element appears much higher in pitch, and the whole sound is marked with a strong tremolo effect. The syllables are uttered in rapid succession, and this peculiar sound un- der different conditions is uttered in at least three different degrees of pitch at least an oc- tave apart; but the contour appears to me the same in each. This species talks but little, is very shy, makes few friends, and is afraid of the phonograph; hence I have never been able to make a good record of its voice. I was cultivat- ing the friendship of Jim, who recently died in Central Park, and we were getting on the best of terms; but the little Mangaby that survives 7 98 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. him is very shy and suspicious. Immediately after Jim’s death, however, when I would visit the garden, she would always jump on the perch and take the same position that Jim had occupied whenever I would feed him. During his life- time she always kept her distance, and never would take anything out of my hand, because she was afraid of him. but as soon as he was out © of the way she assumed his place and would ut- ter the same sound that he had uttered at my approach. She evidently was aware of the fact that Jim and I were friends, that I always gave him something good to eat at that particular place in the cage, and that he always sat in a certain position when I gave it to him. I do not regard this species as very intelligent nor their language as being of a high type; but they have a very human-like face, almost without hair, and very large and expressive eyes. They abound in West Africa, and have been colonized with success in the Island of Mauritius; they are not. very common in captivity, but much more so than some other species of less interest. CHAP Reni: Attelles or Spider-Monkeys —The Common Macaque.—Java Monkeys and what They Say.—A Happy Family. I HAVE caught one sound from the spider-mon- key by which I have been able to attract the at- tention of others of the same species, though Iam as yet uncertain about its meaning. I do not belicwe that it has any reference to food, but 1 fimi< perhaps it is a term of friendship or a sound of endearment. One reason for this belief is that I have heard it used on several occasions when a monkey of this kind would see its image ina mirror. Ihave used the sound in Washing- ton, Philadelphia, and Atlanta, and induced the monkey addressed to respond to it and come to me. I almost concluded at one time that this species was nearly dumb, until lsaw one enraged by a green monkey that occupied an adjoining cage. On this occasion she raised her voice to an extremely high pitch, and uttered a sound having great volume and significance. ‘This she repeated several times, and it was the first time 99 100 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. I had ever seen a spider-monkey show any sign of resentment. On another occasion, when this same specimen saw a brilliant peacock near the window by her cage, the sounds which she made at that strange object were loud, clear, and varied. I have read with surprise an account of a spider- monkey which Dr. Gardner had with him in his travels through South America. He describes it as the most intelligent of all monkeys, but I cannot believe that his experience with monkeys is sufficient to rank him as an authority on that subject. I do not pretend, however, to know all that there is to be known concerning this species; but so far as my study of them goes they scarcely laugh, cry, or show any sign of emotion. They do not usually resent anything; they are harm- less and timid. Their long, lean, half-clad limbs look like the ghost of poverty, and their slow, cautious movements like decrepitude begging alms. They would be objects of pity if they only had sense enough to know how nature has slighted them. _I have recently received a letter from igwee E. McCall, of Bath, New York, inclosing a pho- tograph of a monkey of this kind by the name of Jess. The gentleman tells me that he has DEE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. IOI been giving some time to the study of the actions and language of this monkey, and assures me that it is very docile and follows him like a dog; and kindly offers to make such experiments with it as I may suggest by which to aid me in the pursuit of my own researches, and I shall take advantage of his kind offer. ° I am aware that there are exceptions to all rules, and 1 am not disposed to deprive the spider- monkey of the place he may deserve in the scale Gesimian life by reason of his intellect or speech; but as this book is a record of what I know, and not what I have heard, I shall for the present be compelled to place the spider- monkey very far down in the scale of intellect ame speech. | The common Macaque is a strong, well-built monkey of a dark-gray color, with a short, stubby tail. He has but few friends, and at times ap- pears to regret having any at all. He is quite active, energetic, and aggressive. He endures captivity well, but as a rule never becomes quite tame or trustworthy. His speech is of a low type, but he has a very singular expression of the mouth, which seems to indicate friendship. In fact, there are several different species of the [Oz THE SPEECH, OF “MONKE Ws: genus Macacus that use this peculiar movement of the lips. They thrust the head forward and lower it slightly, and in this position work their lips as if talking with the greatest possible en- ergy, but without uttering asound. They do not do this for food, but I have seen them do it to their image in the glass, and have had them do so with me a great number of times: Ioave been told by some that this is meant as a sign of anger or assault, but my own observations tend to attribute to it exactly the reverse’ of this meaning. Occasionally, when I have offered them food, I have observed them do this; but I do not think it referred to the food unless it was intended as a vote of thanks. The first monkey whose voice I ever captured on the phonograph belonged to this tribe; heisstillin the Washing- ton collection and bears the name of Prince, under which name he may go-down to history as tne first monkey whose speech was ever recorded. But whatever his fame may become on that ac- — count, I do not think he will ever justly obtain the reputation of being an amiable monkey. Among the Java monkeys are several varieties which make very good pets. They show a fair degree of intelligence and docility and are not DEY Se REC OR MONICEYS:. 103 generally very vicious. I have not succeeded in making any very good records of these monkeys, although I have observed, without the aid of the phonograph, that they have one or two very dis- tinct and well-marked sounds. I have not up to this time attempted to differentiate their sounds, but in a general way have interpreted the mean- ings of one or two groups of them, especially those of a friendly character. I may with pro- peer, ftemark here that in all the different tongues of monkeys there appear to be certain words which are much more significant—that is, of a much better phonetic type than the others, and which occur much more frequently among eieie counds, This appears to be true of the speech or sounds of all the lower animals. In a former chapter I have described the happy little family in Central Park, which consisted of the five little brown cousins only a few months ago; but death has reduced their number to two. In this connection I shall mention a very im- portant fact concerning the use of the natural senses of these animals. I have several times been assured that monkeys depended more upon their sense of smell than upon that of sight as a means of recognition; and that in this respect 104 THE SPEECH. OF »MONKEYS. they were very much like the canines. I have made frequent tests of the power of their senses, and am prepared to say with certainty that such is not the case. When I visit the park I frequently enter at Sixty-fourth Street and Fifth Avenue, at which place there is a flight of stairs leading from the street down to a large plaza in front of the old armory; and something more than a hundred feet from the foot of the stairway, and nearly at right angles to it, is a window opening into the monkey-house near the cage occupied by these particular monkeys. When I descend the stairway and come within view of this window, they frequently see me as I reach the plaza, and the keeper always knows of my approach by the conduct of the monkeys, who recognize me the instant I come in sight at that distance. At other times I have approached the house from another direction and come within a few feet of their cage, where I have stood for some time in order to ascertain whether they were aware of my presence, and on a few occasions have slipped into the house with the crowd, and they did not detect my presence except by sight. It is evi- dent, if they depended upon the sense of smell, that they would have discovered my presence THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 105 when so near them, although they could not see me. But no matter what the condition of the weather or how many people are present, the in- stant one of them sees me he spreads the news, and every inmate of the cage rushes to the win- dow and begins to scream at the top of his voice. If their sense of smell was such as to enable them Poridetect imy presence as a dog would, it is reasonable also that the monkey which possessed the most sensitive organs would have been the first to detect it in each case; whereas some- times one monkey and sometimes another made peemaiscovery. It is my belief, however, that their sense of smell is much more acute than beac or man, but far less so than that of most other animals, especially the dog. ‘The sense of hearing in these animals is very delicate, as may be seen from the account of Nellie dis- covering my footsteps on the lower stairway, and as I have witnessed in scores of other cases. The same is true also of their sight, and their eyes are like a photo-camera; nothing ever Escapes them. I think their organs of taste are also quite sensitive, as I have made some tests from time to time and find them very hard to deceive. The sense of touch, which is rather 106 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. obtuse in most animals, is much more acute in these. I have frequently interlaced my fingers with those of some person whom they dislike, and extending the hands toward them, they rarely make a mistake by getting hold of the wrong finger; and yet it has frequently occurred that they could not see the hands at all, and had to depend alone upon the sense of touch. In cases where the hands were very nearly the same size they were not able to select the fingers so readily; but where a lady’s hand was used, or that of a boy, the selection was made without hesitancy and without error. I have tried this experiment a great many times with a view to ascertaining, tosome extent, the delicacy of their sense of touch. Another fact that I may men- tion is that they do not habitually smell articles of food or other things given to them, but they depend chiefly upon their sight for finding and their taste for choosing their food. My opinion is that the sense of smell does not play an im- portant part in these affairs. I may add, tae that in the Cebus the tail is perhaps the most sensitive organ of touch, although it is not used in this capacity to any great extent. He is gen- THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 107 erally very watchful over this useful member, because it serves him in so many ways, and I think perhaps it is safe to say that the tail is the last part of the monkey that ever becomes tame. CHAPTER, XTi: The Extent of my Experiments.—Apes and Baboons.—Miscel- laneous Records of Sounds.—The Vocal Index. In quest of the great secret of speech, I have pursued my investigations chiefly in the direction of learning one tongue, but incidentally I have made many détours, and I have recorded the sounds of many other forms of the animal king- dom besides primates. I have examined the phonation of lions, tigers, leopards, cats, dogs, birds of many kinds, and the human voice in speech, music, and laughter. Besides these I have examined various musical sounds, especially of the pipe and whistle kinds. More than a year ago I made some splendid records of the sounds of the two chimpanzees in the Cincinnati collection. I have not had the opportunity to study these apes themselves, as I desired to do, since they are kept so closely con- fined in a glass house, and forever under the eye of their keeper, which conditions are not favor- able to the best results. Iam not prepared, there- 108 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 109 fore, to give much detail concerning their speech, but from a careful study of one cylinder contain- ing a record of their sounds, I was able to dis- cern as many as seven different phones, all of which come within the scope of the human vocal organs. I learned oneof these sounds, and ona subsequent visit to Cincinnati I succeeded in at- tracting the attention of the female and eliciting from her a response. She would come to the lattice door of the inner cage by which I was standing, and when I would give utterance to the sound she would press her face against the door and answer it with a like sound. The male, how- ever, did not appear to notice it with any degree ernconcermm. I have no idea what the sound meant, and my opportunities have not been such that I could translate it with the remotest degree of certainty. These apes will be one of the chief objects of my studies in tropical Africa, as I be- lieve them to possess a higher type of speech even than the gorilla. In this opinion, which I reached from the study of other sounds and the types of skull to which they belonged, I am not alone. Mr. Paul Du Chaillu, Mr. E. J. Glave, and others who have seen both of these apes in their native habitat agree with me on this point. I 110 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. am aware that this view is not in strict accord with that of Professor Huxley, who assigns the gorilla the highest place next to man in the order of nature, and the chimpanzee next below him. I shall not here attempt to discuss the question with so high an authority, and I must confess that the vocal index is not yet so well defined that it may be relied upon in classifying apes. One aim I have in view is to study the gorilla and chimpanzee side by side in their native wilds, and to record if possible the sounds of their voices in a wild state. From the sstmdy. I have made of the sounds, I feel confident that all the vocal sounds made by these apes may be uttered by the human vocal organs. Some months ago I made a record of the voice of the great Anubis baboon, in Philadelphia. I did not expect to find in him an elevated tpye of speech, but my purpose was to compare it with | other simian sounds, to see if I could not estab- lish a series of steps in the quality of vocal sounds that would coincide with certain other characters. I had found, by the study of certain cranial forms, that certain vocal types conformed to certain skulls, and were as much a conforma- tion thereof as are the cerebral hemispheres. I PELE ASePEECH OF MONKEYS. Eta then formed the belief,and have had no cause since to recede from it, that the vocal powers were cor- rectly measured by the gnathic index, that the mind and voice were commensurate, and that as the cranio-facial angle widens the voice degrades in quality and scope. In man I find the highest vocal type, and just as we descend in the cranial scale, the vocal type descends into sounds less flexible, less capable, and less musical. These deductions apply only tomammals; among birds, insects, etc., a different order may prevail. The records of the lions show some strange features in the construction of sound, and when analyzed on the phonograph present some novel effects. The sound as a whole appears to be broken into broad waves or pulsations, but on analyzing it the fundamental tones somewhat resemble the sounds produced by drawing a mal- let rapidly across the keyboard of a xylophone, and are characterized by a peculiar resonance, something like the tremulous vibrations of a thin glass containing a small quantity of water. Each of these separate fundamental sounds or sound-units, as they appear to be, can be further reduced to still smaller vibrations; and the re- sult suggests that the fundamental sounds them- i 2.2 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS: selves are an aggregation of smaller vibrations. I have not as yet been able to compare the notes one by one with the scale of the xylophone in order to ascertain whether or not they obey the laws of sound upon which is founded the chro- matic scale of music. The lion makes only a small number of different sounds, nearly of the same pitch. I have not analyzed the vocal sounds of the other felines to ascertain to what extent they coincide with those of the lion, but his appears to be somewhat unlike any other sounds which I have examined. Among the few sounds of birds which I have analyzed I may mention the trumpeter crane. I have made one record of this bird, which was sufficiently loud to enable me to obtain some idea of the character of the ‘sound. ‘jamaiia doubt as to what the real mode of producing this soundis. The volume of sound evidently comes from the mouth of the bird, but while in the act of making it he appears to bring the whole body into use; even the feathers appear to take some part in its production, and the whole frame of the bird vibrates in the act. . Thejireecard which I have shows some resemblance, on analy- sis, to the sound made by the lion, but it is not ree SPEECH OF MONKEYS. | a ie sufficiently strong to admit of analyzing the sound-units or fundamental sounds. From the many sounds that I have analyzed, it appears to me that there is a difference in the phones of all different genera, and that the pho- netic basis of human speech more closely resem- bles that of the simian than any other sounds; ‘ but I wish to be understood distinctly not to offer this in evidence to establish any physical, mental, or phonetic affinity between mankind and simians. I merely state the facts, from which all theorists may deduce their own con- clusions. 8 CHAPTER XIV. Monkeys and the Mirror.—Some of their Antics.—Baby Ma- caque and her Papa.—Some other Monkeys. I HAVE incidentally mentioned elsewhere the use of the mirror in some of my experiments, but I have not described in detail how it affected various monkeys. Of course, it does not always affect the-same monkey in the same way at all times, nor does it affect all monkeys: of-the same species, in exactly thewsame way, and therefore I cannot deduce a rule from my expe- riments by which the species can be determined by its conduct before the glass. When Puck saw himself in the mirror he un- doubtedly mistook the image for another monkey, to which he would talk more freely than me would to the sounds made by the phonograph. He would frequently caress the image and show signs of friendship; at the same time he was very timid and retiring. Nellie would chatter to herself in the mirror, and seemed never to tire of looking at the beau- 114 :; THE SPEECH OF MONEEYS. I15 tiful monkey she saw there, and I do not think the propensity could be accounted for merely by her sex. I donot think she ever quite under- stood where that monkey was concealed, and the scores of times in a day that she would turn the glass around was evidence that she never fully despaired of finding it. I accidentally dropped a small mirror one day near the cage in which there was a green monkey. The glass was broken into many small pieces. Quick as thought the monkey thrust her arm through the bars, grabbed the largest piece, and got it into her cage before I was fully aware of what she was trying to do. The fragment was about an inch wide by an inch and a half long. She caught a glimpse of herself in the glass, and her conduct was more like that of a crazy monkey than anything I can compare it to. She peeped into the fragment of the mirror, which she seemed to regard as a hole in something which separated her from another monkey. She held it up over her head at arm’s-length, laid it down on the floor, held it against the wall, and twisted herself into every pose to get a bet- ter peep at that mysterious monkey on the other side of something, she could not tell what. 116 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. When the glass was reversed she seemed much perplexed, and would sometimes jump high off the floor, and turn herself entirely around as if to untangle the mystery. Then again she would discover the right side of the glass and would go through these antics again. Several times, while holding it against the wall, she would put her eyes close up against the glass, just as she would to a knot-hole in the wall. I tried in vain for some time to get the glass away from her lest she might injure herself with it, but only succeeded after considerable labor and through the help of her keeper. McGinty always tries to find the image behind the glass. He reaches his little black hand as far as he can around behind it, peeps over and under it, pecks on the glass with his fingers, kisses and caresses it, and grins at it with infinite delight. He often tries to turn the glass around to look on the back of it, and when he finds no monkey there he works his eyebrows as if per- plexed, and utters a sound which reminds me of a child under similar circumstances saying “Gone,” when in play something is concealed from it to make the -child believe 1 16 ose Then he will suddenly turn the glass around al THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 117 again as if the thought had just occurred to him, and when he again discovers the image he will laugh, chatter, peep, and peck at the glass as if peecoy: Phere it is! there it is!’’ But like all other monkeys, he does not quite understand where that monkey conceals itself when he peeps over the glass. Mickie does not appear to enjoy the sight of himself in the glass. He always looks at it earnestly but doubtfully, and utters a low sound in a kind of undertone, frowns and scowls as though he regarded the new monkey as an in- truder. He rarely talks to the image only with this low, muttering sound, and never tries to find it by reaching his hand behind the glass or making any other investigation. Mickie, how- ever, has been very much petted, in consequence of which he is very selfish, just as children be- come under like treatment. Little Nemo always looked at himself in the glass in the most inquisitive and respectful man- ner without ever winkng an eye or betraying any sign of emotion, except that he would caress the image in the glass over and over again by press- ing his lips to it in perfect silence. Indeed, his conduct would suggest to you that he regarded 118 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. the image as a portrait of some dear departed one which awoke the tender memories of the past and filled the heart too full for utterance. His sedate manners were very becoming. Dodo always appeared to be afraid of the im- age. She would merely take a peep and turn away. She would sometimes utter a single sound, but rarely touched her mouth to the glass and never felt behind it for the other monkey. This, perhaps, was due to the fact that she was afraid of some of the other inmates of the cage, and I do not think that she desired the colony increased. Nigger always showed great interest in the mirror when left alone, but when the other monkeys would crowd around to peep into the glass, he would always leave to avoid trouble with them. Uncle Remus, the white-face, always goes through a series of facial contortions with the. gravity of a rural judge. He will look into the glass and then at me, as if to say, “ Where did you get that monkey?”’ The little baby Macaque who was born in Central Park tries to engage the image mame romp, reaches for it in the glass, clucks, jumps THE SPEECH OF’ MONKEYS. II9Q playfully to her perch, and looks back to see if the image follows; then she will return to the glass and try again to induce the little ghost to join herin her play. Again, she will spring to her perch, looking back, but does not understand why it will not join her. During all this the baby’s father, a sedate old Macaque, looks on with suspicion and a scowl, and on a few occasions has pulled the baby away from the glass, as if he knew that there was something wrong, and expressed his opinion in a low, ominous growl. He reminds me at times of some people whom I[ have seen that look very wise and intimate by their conduct that they know something. Another little Macaque makes the most in- describable faces, and works her lips in that pe- culiar fashion which I have elsewhere described, but she does not utter one sound. She merely looks in silence, and never tries to find the mon- key concealed behind the glass. The spider-monkey is a study worthy of great minds. When shown her image in the glass she takes her seat on the floor, crosses her legs, and fixes herself as if she expected to spend the day. She will then look into the glass and utter a low sound, and begin to reach out her long I20 THE. SPEECH “OF >MONKENWS: arms in search of the other monkey. It is sur- prising to see how she will adjust her reach as you change positions with the glass. Of course, as you remove the mirror from her the image is removed accordingly, and she extends or con- tracts her reach to suit that distance. | This is not, however, an evidence of her math- ematical skill, since to her mind the image is doubtless a real thing, and she is governed by the same instinct or judgment in reaching for it as she would be if it were real. More than any other, the spider-monkey seems to admire herself in the glass; notwithstanding she is about the homeliest of all the simian tribes, yet she will sit for hours in almost perfect silence and gaze upon her image. CHAPTER (XV. Man and Ape.—Their Physical Relations.—Their Mental Re- lations. —Evolution was the Means.—Who was the Pro- genitor of the Ape?—The Scale of Life. IF we could free our hands from the manacles of tradition and stand aloof from our prejudices and look the stern facts in the face, we should be compelled to admit that between man and ape there is such a unity of design, structure, and function that we dare not, in the light of reason, deny to the ape that rank in nature to which he is assigned by virtue of these facts. Physiolog- ically there is no hiatus between man and ape which may not be spanned by such evidence as would be admitted under the strictest rules of interpretation. We may briefly compare these two creatures in a broad and general way, so that the unscientific and casual reader may com- prehend. The skeleton of man is only the polished struct- ure of which that of the ape is the rough model. The identity of the two, part by part, is as much I21I [22 THE, “SPEECH OF MONKEYS. the same as the light sulky is the outgrowth of the massive framework of the old-time cart. Whether man and ape are related by any ties of blood or not, it is evident that they were mod- elled on the same plan, provided with the same means, and designed for like purposes, whatever they may be. The organs of sensation and the’ functions which they discharge are the same in both, and the same external forces addressing themselves thereto produce the same results. I do not mean to say that the same organ in each is developed in the same degree as that imjihe other; for this is not the case even im diterem: individuals of the same kind. In the muscular system of the one is found an exact duplicate of the other, except in such slight changes of model as will better adapt the parts to those conditions of life under which the animal having them may be placed, and through the whole physical structure of both we find that unity of part and purpose in structure and function, in bone, mus- cle, nerve, and brain. It has been shown, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the brain in the higher races of mankind has reached its present form through a series of changes which are constant and definite, and this organ in the lower types THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 123 of man resembles more that of the ape than does the same organ in the higher types of man; and by a method of deduction, such as we use to de- termine the height of a tree or the width of a _ stream by the length of a shadow, we find that the fiducial lines which bound the planes in the perspective of man’s cerebral growth likewise embrace those of the ape. While it is a fact that the mind of man so far transcends that of the ape, it is also a fact that in reaching this condi- tion it has passed through such planes as those now occupied by the ape. The physical changes of man’s brain do not appear to keep pace with the growth of his mind. This may bea paradox, but the evidence upon which it rests is ample to sustain it. I do not pretend to know whether man was evolved from ape or ape from man; whether they are congenetic products of a common au- thorship or the master-pieces of two rival au- thors; but I cannot see in what respect man’s identity would be affected, whatever may be the case. If it be shown that man descended from the ape, it does not change the facts which have existed from the beginning, nor does it change the destiny towhich he is assigned. If it can be 124 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. shown that apes descended from man, it does not leave upon man the censure for this degeneracy. If man has risen from the low plane of brute- hood which the ape now occupies, has scaled the barriers which now separate him from apes, and has climbed to the divine heights of mental and moral manhood, the ape deserves no praise for this.. On the other hand, if apes have fallen from the state of man, have strayed so far from the gates‘of light, and are now wandering in the twilight of intellect and degradation, it is no re- proach to man; and while I shall not sit in judg- ment in the cause nor testify on either side, I am willing to accept whatever verdict may be founded on the real facts, and I shall not appeal therefrom. But I shall not allow my prejudice to conceal the truth when shown to me; truth is always acceptable to my mind, and, stripped of | all sophistry and oblique conditions, it would appear the same to every mind. That evolution is the mode by which the world was peopled, there is little doubt; but there are many details yet unsettled as to the manner in which this was effected. I cannot regard the matter as proven beyond appeal that man has come from any antecedent type that was not THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 125 man, nor yet do I deny that such may be the case; but I do deny that the broad chasm which separates man from other primates cannot be crossed on the bridge of speech, and while this does not prove their identity or common origin, it does show that Nature did not intend that either one should monopolize any gift which she had to bestow. It is as reasonable to believe that man has always occupied a sphere of life apart from that of apes as to believe that apes have occupied a sphere of life apart from birds, except that the distance from centre to centre is greater between birds and apes than that distance be- tween apes and man. So far as any fossil proofs contribute to our knowledge, we find no point at which the line is crossed in either case, and the earliest traces of n.an’s physiological history finds him distinctly man, and this history reaches back, on meagre evidence, many, many centuries be- fore historic time. Among these earlier remains of man we find no fossils of the simian type to show that he existed at that time, but at a some- what later period we find some remnants of the simian in deposits of Southern Europe; these, however, are of the smaller tribes, and have been assigned to the MJacacus. We cannot trace the 126 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. history of this genus from that to the present time to ascertain whether they were the progenitors of apes or not, but between this type and that of apes the hiatus is as broad as that which inter- _venes between the ape and man. That somewhere in the lapse of time all genera began, admits of no debate; and, by inversion, it is plain that all generic outlines must focus at the point from which they first diverged, and such an operation does not indicate that man and simian have ever been more closely allied than they are at the present time; but the evidence is clear that man has been evolved from a lower plane than he now occupies. The inference may be safely applied to apes, as progress is the uni- versal law of life. The question has been asked, “ Who qs tae progenitor of man?” ‘The solution of this prob- lem has engaged the most profound minds of modern times. If it be said in reply that apes were the progenitors of man, the question then arises, “ Who was the progenitor of theape?” If it be said that man and ape had a common pro- genitor, a like question arises, and it becomes necessary to connect all types allied to each other as these two types are physically allied. If man THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 127 is the climax of a great scheme in nature, by which one type is gradually transformed into another, we must descend the scale of hfe by crossing the chasm which lies between mankind and apes, another lying between the apes and monkeys, another between the monkeys and baboons, another between the baboons and le- murs, and yet another between the lemurs and the lemuroids, and thus from form to form like islands in the great sea of life. From man to in- finity the question constantly recurs, and over each hiatus must be built a separate bridge. Darwin has given to the world the most pro- found and conscientious work, and from the chaos and confusion of human ignorance and bigotry has erected the most sublime monuments Omtnoueht and truth. It does not detract from his character and honesty nor lessen the value of his labors to admit that he may have been mis- taken in some conclusions which he deduced from the great store of facts at his command. It is not the purpose of this work, however, to enter into a discussion of any theory aside from speech and its possible origin and growth; butall subjects pertaining to life, thought, and the modes of living and thinking must contribute in some 128 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. degree to a clear understanding of the subject in hand. | It has been a matter of surprise to me that so careful and observant a man as Mr. Darwin should have so nearly omitted the question of speech from a work of such ample scope, such minute detail, and such infinite care as character- ’ izes the “ Descent of Man” and such like works. But science will cheerfully forgive an error and pardon the sin of omission in one who has given to the world so much good. CHAPTER XVI. The Faculty of Thought.—Emotion and Thought.—Instinct and Reason.—Monkeys Reason.—Some Examples. THE study of biology has revealed many facts which conspire to show that the incipient forms of animal and vegetable life are the same in those two great kingdoms; and parallel with this fact I think it can be shown that the faculty of ex- pression goes hand in hand with life. And why should not this be the case? From the stand- point of religion, I cannot see why the bounty of God should not be equal to such a gift, nor can I conceive of a more sublime act of univer- sal justice than that all things endowed with thought, however feeble, should be endowed with the power of expressing it. From the stand- point of evolution, I cannot understand by what rule Nature would have worked to develop the emotions, sensations, and faculties alike in all these various forms, and make this one excep- tion in the case of speech. It does not seem in keeping with her laws. From the stand-point of 9 129 130 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. chance, I cannot see why such an accident might not have occurred at some other point in the scale of life, or why such anomalies are not more frequent. Man appears to be the only eae: From any point of view we take it does not seem consistent with other facts. All other primates think and feel, and live and die, under like con- ditions and on like terms with man; then why should he alone possess the gift of speech? I confess that such an inference is not evi- dence, however logical; but I have many facts to offer in proof that speech is not possessed by man alone. Itis quite difficult to draw the line at any given point between the procesaiien thought and those phenomena we call emotions. They emerge into and blend with each other like the colors in light; and in like manner the faculty of speech, receding through the various modes of expression, is forever lost in the haze and distance of desire. ‘The faculty of reason blends into thought as the water of a bay blends into the open sea; there is nowhere a positive line dividing them. When we are in the midst of one we point to the other and say, “There it is;” but we cannot say at what exact point we pass out of one into the other. THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 131 To reason is to think methodically and to judge from attending facts. When a monkey examines the situation and acts in accordance with the facts, doing a certain thing with the evident purpose of accomplishing a certain end, in what respect is this not reason? When a monkey remembers a thing which has passed and anticipates a thing which is to come; when he has learned a thing by experience, which he avoids through memory and the apprehension of its reoccurrence, is it instinct that guides his conduct? When a monkey shows clearly by his actions that he is aware of the relation between cause and effect, and acts in accordance there- with, is it instinct orreason that guides him? If there be a point in the order of nature where reason became an acquired faculty, it is some- where far below the plane occupied by monkeys. Their power of reasoning is far inferior to that of man, but not more so than their power of thinking and expression; but a faculty does not lose its identity by reason of its feebleness. When the same causes under the same conditions prompt man and ape alike to do the same act in the same way, looking forward to the same re- sults, I cannot understand why the motive of the 132 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS; one should be called reason and that of the other called instinct. Scholars have tried so hard to. keep the peace between theology and themselves that they have explained things in accordance with accepted belief, in order that they might not incur the charge of heresy. To this endothe.) have reconciled the two extremes by ignoring = the means, and making a distinction without a difference on which to found it. Whatever may be the intrinsic difference be- tween reason and instinct, it is evident to my mind that the same motives actuate both man and ape in the same way, but not to the same ex- tent. I am aware that many acts performed by simians are meaningless to them, and done with- out a well-defined motive. The strong physical resemblance between man and ape often causes one to attach more importance to an act than it really justifies. Inmany cases the same act per- formed by some other animal less like man would scarcely be noticed. Toteach an ape or monkey ~ to eat with knife, fork, cup, and spoon, to use a napkin and chair, or such like feats does not in- dicate to my mind a high order of reason; nor is it safe to judge the mental status of these creat- ures from such data. When he is placed under THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 133 new conditions and committed to his own re- sources, we are then better able to judge by his conduct whether he is actuated by reason or not. In any simple act where a monkey can see the cause connected with and closely followed by the effect, he is actuated by reason; and while he may not be able to explain to his own minda remote or complex cause, but simply accepts the fact, it does not make the act any less rational in a monkey than the same act would be in man where he fails to grasp the ultimate cause. The difference is that man is able to trace the connect- ing causes and effects through a longer series than a monkey can. Man can assign a more definite reason for his acts than a monkey can; but it is also true that one man can assign a more definite reason for his acts than another man can for his, when prompted by the same motives to the same act. The processes, motives, acts, and results are the same with man and ape; the degree to which they reason differs, but the kind of reason in both cases is the same. I shall here relate some instances in my expe- rience, and leave the reader to judge whether reason or instinct guided the acts of the monkeys 134 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYs. as I shall detail them in the next few paragraphs. It will be remembered that these were new con- ditions under which the monkeys acted. I taught Nellie to drink milk from a bottle with a rubber nipple. While I would hold the bottle it was easy for her to secure the milk, but when she undertook it alone she utterly failed. The thing which puzzled her was how to get the milk to come up to her ender bottle. She turned it in every way and held it in every position that she could think of; but the milk always kept at the other end of the bottle. She would throw the bottle down in despair, and when she would see the milk flow tothe end hav- ing the nipple, she would go back and pick it up and try it again. Poor Nellie would worry her little head over this, and again abandon it in despair. While trying to solve the mystery, she discovered a new trick. While the bottle was partly inverted she caught hold of the nipple and Squeezed it. By this means she accidentally spurted the milk into the faces of some ladies who were watching her. This afforded her so much fun that she could scarcely be restrained, and while she remained with me she remembered this funny trick and never failed to perform it DHE SPEECH) OF (MONKEYS. 135 when she was allowed to do so. It was no trouble for her to connect the immediate effect to the immediate cause. But she could not for a long time understand that the position of the bottle or the location of the milk in it had anything to do Mmaemane trick. In the course of time, however, she learned to hold the bottle so that she could drink the milk; and she also discovered that it had to be held ina certain position in order to play her amusing trick. Another instance was in the case of a little monkey heretofore described by the name of Jennie. When you would throw a nut just out of her reach, she would take a stick which had ppaciiin the end and rake the nut to her. She never took the wrong end of the stick, and never placed the nail on the wrong side of the nut. Her master assured me that she had not been taught this, but had found the stick and applied it to this use. When she would not want any one to play with her or handle her, she would coil her chain up and sit down on it to keep any one from taking hold of it. It is not an uncommon thing for monkeys to discover the means by which their cage is kept fastened, and they have frequently been known 136 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. to untie a knot-in a rope or chain, and thus re- | lease themselves. I have known a monkey that learned to reach its hand through the meshes of the cage and withdraw the pin which fastened the hasp, and thus open the door and get out. The keeper substituted a small wire, which he twisted three or four times in order that it could not be released. The monkey realized that the wire performed the duties of the pin and pre- vented the door from opening. He also knew that the wire was twisted, and that this was the reason he could not remove it. I have seen him put his hand through the meshes of the cage, catch the loose end of the wire, and turn it as though he was turning a crank. He evidently knew that the twist in the wire was made by such a motion, and his purpose was to untwist it; but, so far as I know, he never succeeded in doing so. I have frequently seen a monkey gather up his chain and measure the distance from where he stood to the point at which he expected to alight with the skill and accuracy of an engineer. A gentleman of my acquaintance recently assured me that during his sojourn of two years in the Island of Sumatra he had in his service a large orang. This ape did numerous THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. n37 chores about the place and performed many simple duties as well as the domestics did. On one occasion he was induced to go on board a steamer which lay in the harbor. The purpose was to kidnap him and carry him to Eu- rope. Either through fear, instinct, reason, or some other cause, he jumped overboard and swam ashore, although he was naturally afraid of water. From that time on to the end of the gentleman’s residence there, he assured me that whenever a steamer would make its appearance in the harbor the ape would take flight to the forest, where he would stay as long as the vessel remained in sight. Hewould be seen from time to time, but could not be induced to return to the house until the vessel had departed. A few years ago I saw, on board the United States receiving ship franklin, a bright little monkey, which was kept chained in a temporary workshop built on the gun-deck. Her chain was just long enough to allow her to reach the stove. The day was pleasant outside, but in the shade a trifle chilly. The little monkey descended from the sill on which she usually sat, and care- fully felt the top of the stove with her hands. Finding it slightly warm, although the fire had 138 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. died out, she mounted the stove and laid the side of her head on the warm surface. She would turn first one cheek and then the other, and con- tinued rubbing the stove with her hands. Not finding it warm enough she jumped down on the floor, opened the stove door with her hand, and slammed it two or three times. She then picked up a stick of wood lying within reach and tried to lift it to the stove. The stick was too heavy for her to handle, so she would lift up one end of it and drop it heavily on the floor, with the evident purpose of attracting the attention of her master. Again she would open and slam the door, lift up the end of the stick and drop it, and utter a peculiar sound, showing in every possible way that she wanted a fire. She finally picked up a small stick and stuck the end of it into the ashes in the front of the stove. She knew that it was necessary to put the wood into the stove; she knew where to put it in, and while she could not do it herself, she knew who could put it in. Her master told me that she would gather up the shavings from the floor when they came within her reach and pile them up by the stove. He also told me that he frequently gave simone lighted match when he had prepared the fuel for THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 139 building a fire, and that she would touch the match to the shavings and start the fire. She never ventured to get on the stove without first examining it to ascertain how hot it was. Another feat which she performed was totry to remove some tar from the cup in which he gave her water and milk. The cup had been lined with tar as a sanitary measure to prevent con- sumption, and she was aware that the tar im- parted an unpleasant taste and odor, hence she tried very hard to remove it from the cup. Was this instinct? deeslied off. fk THERORY OF SPEECH. mt, CHAPTER, 1: Speech Defined.—The True Nature of Speech.—The Use of Speech.—The Limitations of Speech. WHAT is speech? I shall endeavor to define it in such terms as will relieve it of ambiguity, and deal with it as a known quantity in the prob- lems of mental commerce. Speech is that form of materialized thought confined to oral sounds when they are designed to convey a definite idea mouriind to mind. lt is, therefore, only one mode of expressing thought; and to come within the limits of speech the sounds must be volun- tary, have fixed values, and be intended to sug- gest to another mind accrtain idea or group of ideas more or less complex. The idea is one fac- ’ tor and sound the other, and the two conjointly constitute speech. The empty sounds alone, how- ever modulated, having no integral value, cannot be speech; nor can the concept, unexpressed, be speech. Separately, the one would be noise and the other would be thought; and they only be- come speech when the thought is expressed in 143 144 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. oral sounds. Sounds which only express emotion are not speech,as emotion is not thought, although itis frequently attended by thought, and is a cause of which thought is the effect. Music expresses emotion by means of sounds, but they are not speech, and even though the sounds which ex- press them may impart a like emotion to the hearer, they are not speech. The sounds which express crying, sighing, or laughter may indeed be a faint suggestion of speech, since we infer from them the state of the mind attending the emotions which produce them; yet they are not truly speech. To be regarded as speech the ex- pression must be preceded by consciousness and the desire to make known to another the sensa- tion by which the expression is actuated. As the impulse can only come from within, it ap- pears that emotion is one source from which thought is evolved, and speech is the natural issue of thought. Desire gives rise to a class of thoughts having reference to the sensations which produce them, and such thoughts find ex- pression in such sounds as may suggest supplying the want. As the wants of man have increased with his changing modes of life and thought, his speech has drawn upon the resources of THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 145 sound to meet those increased demands for ex- pression. It appears only reasonable to me that thought must precede, in point of time and order, any expression of thought; for thought is the mo- tive of expression, and the expression of thought in oral sounds is speech. Speech is not an in- vention, and therefore is not symbolic in its radical nature. True, that much that is symbolic has been added to it, and its bounds have been widened as man has risen in the scale of civil life, until our higher types of modern speech have departed so far from the natural modes of speech and first forms of expression that we can rarely trace a single word to its ultimate source. And viewing it as we do from our present stand- point, it appears to be purely symbolic; but if that be so, then we must deny the first law of progress, and assign the origin of this faculty to that class of phenomena known as miracles, which once explained, by increasing the mystery, what we could not understand, and served at the same time to conceal the exact magnitude of our ignorance; but as we added little by little to our stock of knowledge, such phenomena were brought within the realm of our understanding, and to-day our children are familiar with the Io ‘ ‘ é 146, THE SPEECH. OF MONKEYS: causes of many simple effects which our fore- fathers dared not attempt to solve, but reverently ascribed to the immediate influence of divinity. If speech in its ultimate nature is symbolic, what must have been the condition of man before its invention, and how did he arrive at the first term or sound of speech? He did not invent sound nor the means of making it. He did not invent thought, the thing which speech expresses; and it is no more reasonable to believe that he in- vented speech than to believe that he invented the faculties of sight and hearing, which are cer- tainly the natural product of his organic nature and environments. So far as I can find through the whole range of animal life, all forms of land mammals possess vocal organs, which are devel- oped in a degree corresponding to the condition of the brain, and seem to be in every instance as capable of producing and controlling sounds as the ‘brain is of thinking; in other words) ae power of expression is in perfect keeping with the power of thinking. From my acquaintance with the animal kingdom, it is my firm belief that all mammals possess the faculty of speech in a degree commensurate with their experience and needs, and that domestic animals have a HE SPEECH (OF .MONKEYS. 147 somewhat higher type of speech than do their wild progenitors. Why are all forms of mam- mals endowed with vocal organs? Why should nature bestow on them these organs if not de- signed for use? One or the other of two conclu- sions seems inevitable. As a law of evolution and progress, all organs are imparted to animals for use and not for ornament. It seems consistent, from what we know of nature, to suppose that the vocal organs of these lower forms are being de- veloped to meet a new requirement in the animal economy, or, having once discharged some func- tion necessary to the being and comfort of the animal, they are now lapsing into disuse and be- coming atrophied. If they are in the course of development, it argues that the creature which possesses them must possess a rudimentary speech which is developing at a like rate into a higher type of speech. If they are in a state of decay or atrophy, it argues that the animal must have been able to speak at some former period, and that now, in losing the power of speech, it is gradually losing the organ. In either case, the organs themselves would be in a state of devel- opment in harmony with the condition of the speech of the animal. The function which 148 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. speech discharges is the communication of ideas, and its growth must depend upon the extent of those ideas; and in all conditions of life and in all forms of the animal kingdom the uses of speech are confined to and limited by the desires, thoughts, and concepts of those using it. Its ex- tent is commensurate with requirement. To be- lieve that there was a time in the history of the human race when man could not speak is to de- stroy his identity as man, and the romance of the alalus could be justified from a scientific stand- point only as acompromise between the giants of science and superstition. Among the tribes of men whose modes of life are simple, whose wants are few, and whose knowledge is confined to their primitive condition, the number of words mecessary t -comvey their thoughts is very limited. Among some savage races are lan- guages consisting of only a few hundred words at most, while as we rise in the scale of civil and domestic culture languages become more copious and expressive as the wants become more numer- ous and the conditions of life more complex. As we descend from man to the lower animals, we find the types of speech degenerate just in proportion as we descend in the mental and moral DAE SPEECH OF «MONKEYS. 149 plane; but it does not lose its identity as speech. Through the whole animal kingdom from man to protozoa, types of speech differ as do the phys- ical types to which they belong. But as the same vital processes are found throughout the whole circle of life, so the same phonetic basis is found through the whole range of speech. CHA PT Ea wee The Motives of Speech.—Expression.—The Beginning of Hu- man Speech.—The Present Condition of Speech. IN vital economy the search-light of science has found the protoplasm which, from our present state of knowledge, seems to be the first point of contact between elemental matter and the vital force. Whatsecrets of biology remain unknown within the realm of life only those who live in the future mayeverknow. Inthe first condition of vitalized matter we find the evidence of au- tonomy. Whatever may be the ultimate force which actuates this monad, the manifestations of its presence and the result of its energy are seen externally. Whatever may be the nature of that force which imparts motion to matter, the first impulse of the biod is to secure food or to asso- ciate itself with a unit of its own kind. This is perhaps the first act of volition within the sphere of life, the first expression of some internal want, and is the first faint suggestion of a conscious- ness, however feeble; and I may add with pro- 150 THE SPEECH ‘OF MONKEYS. IS] priety that it is my opinion that the vital and psychic forces operate in a manner not unlike the electric and chemical forces. They appear to polarize, and in this condition act on matter in harmony with that great law of nature under which positive repels positive and attracts neg- ative, and vice versa. We shall not attempt to fol- low the tedious steps of progress from inanimate matter to man, but begin with those intermediate forms which are so far developed as to utter sounds and understand the sounds of others. We will deal only with tangible facts as we find them. From whatever source expression may arise or at whatever point it may appear, it is prompted by desire or some kindred emotion, either positive or negative. At the point where we begin to discuss this question there are two distinct modes of expres- sion, either one of which can be used without the other. But I may mention here a cogent fact— that in the lower forms of life the normal mode of expression is by signs with supplemental sounds. In the higher forms expression is by sounds, and signs are supplemental; and from the lower to the higher forms this transition is in harmony with the development of physica! 152 THE. SPEECH OF MONKEYS. types. It occurs to me that signs were the first form of expression, and that sounds were first used to call attention to the signs made; and by an association of ideas the sounds became a fac- tor of expression and were used to emphasize signs. As we ascend the scale of life sounds become more abundant and signs less significant ; and in the middle types they appear to be of nearly equal value, while in the higher tribes of man sounds are the normal mode of expression, and signs or gestures are used to emphasize them; and thus we see that signs and sounds in the development of the faculty of expression have quite changed places. This is consistent with the observed facts within the limits of human speech. There are tribes of mankind whose language is scarcely intelligible among themselves unless accompanied by signs, and it is said of some of the African tribes that their gestures are more eloquent than their speeem: It appears to me consistent to believe that speech appears in the animal organism simultaneously with the vocal organs, and that the desire of ex- pression must have preceded this. ‘The ¢cen- dition of the vocal organs depends upon the type of speech which they are used to utter, and the THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 153 speech depends upon the quality of thought it is intended to express. That type of speech used by the Caucasian race within the space of a few centuries has developed from a vocabulary lim- ited to a few thousand words into the polished languages of modern Europe, comprising new types and tens of thousands of new words, until to-day our own language contains more than two hundred and twenty thousand words—very few of which, however, if any, are entirely new. The phonetic elements on which is built up this huge vocabulary do not very greatly exceed in num- ber those found in the lowest types of human speech in the world. The total number of these sounds does not much exceed two score in the highest forms of human speech; and about half this number can be shown as the vocal products of some species of the lower animals. Some philologists claim that the blending of consonant and vowel sounds is the mark which distinguishes human speech from the sounds uttered by the lower animals. ‘To show how poorly this gigan- tic superstructure of fossilized science is sup- ported by the facts, I have developed such effects in the phonograph from a basis of sounds purely mechanical, and without the aid of any part of 154 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. the vocal apparatus of man or animal. The sounds from which I have developed such results were neither vowel nor consonant as those sounds are defined, but simply prolonged musical notes. In another chapter will be found some of the experiments which I have performed with the phonograph in the investigation of sounds of va- rious kinds. If I am allowed to think for myself at all, Iam not ready to accept as final some of the dogmas on the theory of sound which have long been held and taught, and many of which remain orthodox for no other reason than that no one has denied them: I am not ready ae tame point to spring upon the world any new theory of sound, but I am quite ready to refuse to be- lieve some of the tenets set forth in the creeds of philology. Heresy is the author of progress, and I confess myself a heretic on many of the current doctrines of the science of sounds. CHAPTER IH, Language Embraces Speech.—Speech, Words, Grammar, and Rhetoric. A DEFINITION of the word speech, as used in this particular work, is given elsewhere; and by this definition the word is used only in that sense which limits it tothe sphere of oral sounds. It is that form of language which addresses itself only to the ear. The sounds which constitute it may be supplemented by signs or gestures, but such signs are only adjuncts, and are not to be regarded as an integral part of speech im its true sense. Speech cannot be acquired by those forms of life which occupy the lowest horizons of the animal kingdom and have no organs with which to produce sound. In the light of modern use and acceptation, language broadly interpreted includes all modes and means of communication between mind and mind. It therefore includes speech as one form, while signs or gestures constitute another form. Writing in all its various modes is another form oS) 156 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. of language. It may be substituted for either speech or gestures, but it does not thereby be- come speech in a literal sense; but within itself it constitutes another form of language. There seems to be some vague and subtle method of communication found in certain spheres of life which is called telepathy. While it is a mere ghost of language, so to speak, it has an identity which cannot be denied. This may, perhaps, be called another form of language. By some eminent men of letters it is claimed that speech was invented and therefore cannot be universally the same; and this is proven by the fact that different tribes of men have different tongues. They do not appear to realize that to the first cardinal sounds of speech so much has been added age by age, by slow accretions, that the radix of speech is but a mere drop in the great ocean of sounds. ‘The mobility of speech is such as to make it more susceptible to change than matter is; and yet we find that by the laws of change man has been evolved from a less com- plex state of matter, and that in these latter years he can only be identified as the descendant of his prototype by the most scrutinizing care and by picking up the dropped stitches in the great ‘THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 157 fabric of nature. To illustrate the slow and im- perceptible yet never-ceasing, never-failing proc- ess of evolution, we may imagine a man picking up a single grain of sand at a certain point and carrying it a distance of a thousand feet, where he deposits it at another certain point; return- ing, takes a second grain from the place where he secured the first and carries it to the point at which he deposited the first, and thus contin- ues through his life. At his death his son suc- ceeds him in the task and continues through his life, and at the death of this man his son suc- ceeds, and thus in turn each one succeeds the other through a million generations. Supposing the wind and rain left these grains of sand un- molested during this long lapse of time, it is evi- dent that at the place from which the sand was _ taken there would be a hole, and where it was deposited there would be a hill. It is by such slight changes that Nature does her work, and thus it is that speech, as well as matter, has been transformed from what it was into what it is. The physical basis of life retains its identity through all those varied forms from protozoa to the highest type, and so the phonetic basis of speech adheres through all the changing modes 158 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS: of thought and expression. Speech is the high- est type of language and the most accurate mode of expression, and belongs only to the higher forms of the animal kingdom. It has passed through all inferior horizons coinciding with the mental, moral, and social planes through which man has passed in the course of his evolution. Words are the factors of speech and the high- est development of that faculty. A word may be composed of one or more sounds, so articulated as to preclude any interval of time between the utterance of any two of them—as “tune,” in which the sounds appear to overlap and blend into each other. A single word may signify more than a single thing, and sometimes will suggest to the mind a category or group of connected thoughts, as “eat” or “telegraph,” and’such is the waluew: many of our words. This is especially true of words which combine two roots; but such a com- bination is usually found only in the higher types of human speech. But in these higher types words bear such relations to each other that we cannot well convey a complete idea with a single word, and hence it is that in the modes of ex- pression used by man each separate statement consists of two or more words bearing certain re- tHE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 159 lations to each other, and these are often qualified by other words of less importance. This redun- dancy is due to the higher and more complex modes of thought used by man, and it is on such a state of facts that we have founded that branch , of science called grammar, which would be of little use among those forms which occupy the planes of life inferior to man; and it is found of little use among the lower tribes of man, where it does not exist in any written form. Grammar does not make language, but serves as a kind of anchor by which the dialects of human speech are somewhat unified and made more stable, and to this is due in some measure the fact that sav- age tongues and dialects are more susceptible to change in their structure, while the phonetic basis upon which they rest remains the same. In the more refined tongues of human speech we go beyond that code of laws called grammar and amplify them into rhetoric. This branch of the science of speech could find no place among the lower tvpes, as the words are few from which they may select, and so exact and arbitrary is the meaning of each one and so uniform the rela- tions that no great variety of expression can be made with such a limited vocabulary. Their 160 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. eloquence is in their brevity of speech. But while the types of speech used by the lower pri- mates occupy a plane so low in the scale, they ar2 as truly speech as the vocal organs that pro- duce the sounds are truly vocal organs. Life is life, in what form soever itis found. It is not less real in the mollusk than inthe man. The same is true of emotion, of thought, of expres- sion, and of speech. Life, emotion, thought, ex- pression, and speech began in embryo, and have developed co-ordinately with all the faculties pos- sessed by man. They are as dependent upon each other as matter is on force, and as insepa- rable as light from energy. Speech is the phys- ical manifestation of which thought is the ulti- mate force; it is a spoke in the chariot-wheels of consciousness; it is the body of which thought is the soul. CHAPTER TV. Life and Consciousness.—Consciousness and Emotion.—Emo- tion and Thought.—Thought and Expression. Expression and Speech.—The Vocal Organs and Sound.—Speech in City and Country.—Music, Passions, and Taste.—Life and Reason. AT the beginning of life there is a conscious- ness which is not more feeble than is the life with which it is associated, and as that spark of life kindles into a flame, so that spark of con- 66 sciousness kindles into the “ego,’’ and nowhere can a line be drawn at which it may be said, “Here consciousness first intercepted life.” But as the living form develops organs and mem- bers through the agency of the vital force, what- ever that may be, so consciousness develops into desires, emotion, and thought. Where shall the line be drawn which separates these attributes? Standing in the centre, we look around and see the horizon touching the plain on every side, and this appears to us as a great circle, the centre of which is always occupied by the observer, and from our standpoint we imagine that everything II 161 162 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. between us and that horizon must be that distance from the centre; but as we move our point of view from place to place we move the circle with us, and yet we cannot find the boundary-line which marks this circle atany time. Ina manner not unlike this we pass from centre to centre of the circles of life, and carry with us the circle, so that at no one point do we ever appear to be much closer to the horizon than we were at any other point. The classification of genera and: species is in a great degree arbitrary, but much less so than are these abstract characters of lifeand mind. There is nowhere a line at which emotion stops and thought begins; there is nowhere a line at which thought stops and expression begins; there is no- where a line at which expression stops and speech begins. These blend into each other so that only by comparing the extremes can we discern a dif- ference. The tenets of metaphysics have heretofore been made to harmonize with the tenets of theol- ogy, and hence it is that we have learned to fol- low the laws laid down by others, and not to think for ourselves. It has been as much a her- esy to gainsay the dogmas of science as those of THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 163 religion until recently; and even now the ten- der-footed doctors guard their theories with a vigilance and jealousy worthy of.the angel that guarded the gates of Eden. Why should it be thought strange that mon- keys talk? They see, hear, love, hate, think, and act by the same means and to the same end as man does. They experience pain and pleas- ure, to express which they cry and laugh just as man does. If the voluntary sounds they make do not mean something, why may those creatures not as well be dumb? If they do mean some- thing, why may we not determine what that meaning is? It is true that their language is quite meagre and suited only to a low plane of life; but it may be the cytula from which all human speech proceeds, or it may be the inferior fruit borne upon the same great tree of speech. The organs of sensation in these creatures are modelled by the same design as those of man, are adapted to the same uses, and discharge the same functions. Then why should the vocal powers alone be abnormal except in a degree measured by the difference of place which they occupy in the scale of nature? Social intercourse among men has been the 164 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. chief means of developing human speech, and- we find a true index to its condition in the social status of the different races of mankind, and by coming closer home we find that even in differ- ent communities of the same race, and within the limits of the same nation, a difference in the accuracy and volume of speech, which is measured by the difference of social) ealmure: We find in rural districts sparsely peopled and remote from the great centres of population that speech is less polished, and the number of words used greatly reduced in comparison to the same language used in the great cities and more pop- ulous communities, where, by reason of contact with each other and the constant use of speech, the vocal powers are much more developed and the command of language very much improved. This same law of development inversely applied would lead us in a direct line down through nat- ure, rank by rank, and we would find it a reli- able unit of measure throughout the whole per- ° spective of development. The faculties of music, taste, and reason are measured byalikeunit. It is difficult to trace the musical powers of animals, since music does not contribute to the comfort or development of types, and only affords pleasure THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 165 to the intellectual being, and hence is only an accomplishment, obeying no rule of normal growth. As the use of the natural sense of taste makes possible the choice of nourishment, and all forms of life are thus sustained, the natural taste be- comes an important factor of their comfort, and upon this physical basis rests, perhaps, the whole superstructure of ethics. The first idea of owner- ship is doubtless found in the possession of food, and this right of property is protected by the unwritten laws of incipient life. The faculty of reason which man has arrogated to himself is only limited by that dim line which bounds the vital sphere and sheds its rays through all the kingdom of life, from that point where the vital spark first lights the monad, through all the laby- rinths of change, to man in the full pride of his divinity, standing upon the threshold of the an- gelic state. It is not by the exercise of reason that water flows down hill or that matter obeys the law of gravity; but in the exercise of auton- omy, however feeble may be the motive, reason pHides the act, The power ofthis faculty is measured by the development of others, and there is no point between the two extremes at 166 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. which reason intercepts life. The degree in which all the powers of sense and faculty are developed determines the horizon of the thing which possesses them. The aggregation of powers to act constitutes life, and the aggrega- tion of powers to guide the action constitutes reason. Leaving the realm of metaphysics and returning to the order of primates, to which we shall con- fine our present work, I shall resume by repeat- ing that not only do primates have the faculty of speech, but the whole family of mammals have some form of speech which is in keeping with their conditions of life. In addition to iis declaration, I assert that all mammals reason by the same means and to the same ends, but not to the same degree. ‘The reason which controls the conduct of a man is just the same in kind as that which prompts the ape. The latter cannot carry the process to such a great extent, but mzcrosophic pedants have not shown in what respect the methods differ, only in degree. That same fac- ulty which guided man to tame the winds of commerce taught the nautilus to lift its tentacles and embrace the passing breeze. - Yet wesare told that reason guides the man and instinct THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 107 guides the nautilus. These are but two names ioerliont: the one is dawn, the other noon, but both are light. I cannot see in what respect the light of a lamp differs from that of a bonfire Execpr in volume; they are the products of the same forces in nature, acting through the same media, and, becoming causes, produce the same effects. That psychic spark which dimly glows in the animal bursts into a blaze of effulgence in maaan ie one differs from the other just asa single ray of sunlight differs from the glaring light of noon. If man could disabuse his mind of that contempt for things below his plane of life and hush the siren voice of self-conceit, his better senses might be touched by the eloquence of truth. But while the vassals of his empty pride control his mind, the plainest facts appeal to him in vain and all the cogency of proof is lost. He is unwilling to forego that vain belief that he is nature’s idol and that he is a duplicate of Wome Held im check by the strong reins of theology and tradition, he has not dared to con- trovert those dogmas which bear the stamp of error on their face; he dares not turn away from the idols of his own conceit and read the rubrics written in the fossil rocks; he dares not take 168 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. those proofs which none can counterfeit and whose authority is not gainsaid; he dares not lay aside the yoke which galls the neck of pa- tience, or breathe the air unblest by some mys- terious rite performed in fear. By such restraints his ears are closed against those voices which appeal to him from without the temple gates of his belief. In what respect would man be less God-like if it be shown that monkeys talk? To elevate the humbler ranks could not degrade mankind. Whether man is the work of Deity or was evolved by laws of change from primal matter; whether he was made in one specific act or is the last amendment to a million prior types; whether he is the creature of design or accident—the authorship of his being and that of all the forms which roam the broad empire of life must be the same. We are all the effects of one Great Cause, whatever that may be, and that which gave to man the power of speech imparted it to apes; and I can see no reason why nature should have drawn a line about this faculty and made the rest a common heritage. CHAPTER...V. Certain Marks which Characterize the Sounds of Monkeys as Speech.—Sounds Accompanied by Gestures.—Cer- tain Acts Follow Certain Sounds.—They Acquire New Sounds.—Their Speech Addressed to Certain Individ- uals. —Deliberation and Premeditation.—They Remember and Anticipate Results.—Thought and Reason. As aresult of my experience with monkeys, I shall here sum up the chief points in which their speech is found to coincide with that of man, and note those features which distinctly char- acterize the sounds as a form of speech. The sounds which monkeys make are volun- tary, deliberate, and articulate. They are always addressed to some certain individual with the evident purpose of having them understood. The monkey indicates by his own acts and the manner of delivery that he is conscious of the meaning which he desires to convey through the medium of the sounds. They wait for and ex- pect an answer, and if they do not receive one they frequently repeat the sounds. They usually look at the person addressed, and do not utter 169 170 THE SPEBCEH OF - MONKEYS; these souxds when alone or as a mere pastime, but only at such times as some one is present to hear them, either some person or another mon- key. They understand the sounds made by other monkeys of their own kind, and usually respond to them with a like sound. They understand these sounds when imitated by a human being, by a whistle, a phonograph, or other mechanical devices, and this indicates that they are guided by the sounds alone, and not by any signs, gest- ures, or psychic influence. The same sound is interpreted to mean the same thing and obeyed in the same manner by different monkeys of the same species. Different sounds are accom- panied by different gestures, and produce differ- ent results under the same conditions. They make their sounds with the vocal organs and modulate them with the teeth, tongue, and lips, in the same manner that man controls his vocal sounds. The fundamental sounds appear to be pure vowels, but faint traces of consonants are found in many words, especially those of low pitch, and since I have been able to develop cer- tain consonant sounds from a vowel basis, the conclusion forces itself upon me that the conso- nant elements of human speech are developed PoE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. E71 from a vowel basis. This opinion is further con- firmed by the fact that the sounds produced by the types of the animal kingdom lower than the monkey appear to be more like the sounds of pipe instruments, and as we rise in the scale the vocal organs appear to become somewhat more complex and capable of varying their sounds so as to give the effect of consonants, which very mage extends the vocal scope. The present state of the speech of monkeys appears to have been reached by development from alower form. Each race or kind of monkey has its own peculiar tongue, slightly shaded into dialects, and the radical sounds do not appear to have the same meaning in different tongues. The phonetic character of their speech is equally as high as that of children in a like state of mental development, and seems to obey the same laws of phonetic growth, change, and decay as human speech. It appears to me that their speech is capable of , communicating the ideas that they are capable of conceiving, and measured by their mental, moral, and social status, is as well developed as the speech of man measured by the same unit. Strange monkeys of the same species seem to understand each other at sight, whereas two 72 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. monkeys of different species do not understand each until they have been together for some time. Each one learns to understand the speech of the other, but as a rule he does not try te speak it. When he deigns an answer it is usu- ally in hisown tongue. The more fixed and pro- nounced the social and gregarious instincts are in any species, the higher the type of its speech. They often utter certain sounds under certain conditions in a whisper, which indicates that they are conscious of the effect which will result from the use of speech. Monkeys reason from cause to effect, communicate to others the conclusion de- duced therefrom, and act in accordance there- with. If their sounds convey a fixed idea ona given subject from one mind to another, what more does human speech accomplish? If one sound communicates that idea clearly, what more could volumes do? If their sounds discharge all the functions of speech, in what respect are they not speech? It is as reasonable to attribute meaning to their sounds as to attribute motives to their actions, and the fact that they ascribe a meaning to the sounds of human speech would show that they THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 173 are aware that ideas can be conveyed by sounds. If they can interpret certain sounds of human speech, they can ascribe a meaning to their own. They think, and speech is but the natural ex- ponent of thought; it is the audible expression of thought as signs are the visible expression of the saame—born of the same cause, acts to the same end, and discharges the same functions in the economy of life. To reason is to think me- thodically; and if it be true that man cannot think without words, the same must be true of monkeys. Ido not mean, however, to claim that such is a fact with regard to man thinking; but if such can be shown to be a fact, it will decide the question as to the invention of human speech, as it was necessary for man to think in order to invent, and by the rule he could not think a word which did not exist, and therefore could not have invented it. But I beg to be allowed to stand aside and let Prof. Max Miiller and Pro- fessor Whitney, the great giants of comparative philology, settle this question between them- selves, and I shall abide by the verdict which may be finally reached. But theories are useless things when the facts 174 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS.- are known; and since I have actually learned from a monkey a certain sound having a certain value and meaning a certain thing, and by re- peating that sound to a monkey of the same species have met with uniform results, have un- derstood him and been understood by him, no argument could be so potent as to cause me to believe that this was accident. JI am aware that coincidents occur, but when they become the rule instead of the exception, they are no longer mere coincidents, but are the normal state of things. In conclusion, I would say that since the sounds uttered by monkeys perform all that speech performs, is made of the same material, produced by the same means, acts to the same ends and through the same media, it is as near an approach to speech as the mental operations by which it is produced are an approach to. thought. If it can be shown that these mental feats are not thought, the same process of reason- ing could show that these sounds are not speech. If man derived his other faculties from such an ancestry, may not his speech have been acquired from suchasource? If the prototype of man has THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 175 survived through all the vicissitudes of time, may not his speech likewise have survived? If the races of mankind are the progeny of the simian stock, may not their languages be the progeny of the simian tongue? CILLA PT Rik: wa. The Phonograph as an Aid to Science.—Vowels the Basis of Phonation.—Consonants Developed from a Vowel Basis.— Vowels are Compound.—The Analysis of Vowels by the Phonograph.—Current Theories of Sound.—Augmenta- tion of Sounds.—Sound-Waves and Sound-Units.—Con- sonants among the Lower Races. THE application of the phonograph to my special work is really the discovery of a new field of usefulness for that wonderful instrument, which up to this time has held the place of a toy more than that of a scientific apparatus of the very highest importance in the study of acous- tics and philology. In many ways the use of this machine is so hampered by the avarice of men as to lessen its value as an aid to scicnmtimne ae- search, and the letters patent under which it is protected preclude all competition and prevent improvements. However, I have been able, even with the poor machines in general use, to dis- cover some of the most important facts upon which are based the laws of phonation. I shall here attempt to give in detail but a few of these 176 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 177 experiments, as they are yet crude and, in some cases, the deductions therefrom not positively certain. From the various records that I have made of the voices of men and monkeys, I am prepared to say that the difference is not so great as is commonly supposed, and that I have con- _ verted each into the other. I would not be un- | derstood to say that I have done this with all their sounds, nor that the monkeys’ sounds were converted into human speech, but the funda- mental sounds of each were changed into those of the other. I find that human laughter coin- cides in nearly every point with that of monkeys. It differs in volume and pitch. By the aid of the phonograph I have been able to analyze the _ vowel sounds of human speech, which I find to be compound, and some of them contain as many as three distinct syllables of unlike sounds. From the vowel basis I have succeeded in developing certain consonant elements, both initial and final. from which I have deduced the belief that the most complex sounds of consonants are developed from the simple vowel basis, somewhat like chem- ical compounds result from the union of simple elements. Without describing in detail the re- sults, I shall mention some simple experiments I2 ——— Ms THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. which have given me some very strange phe- nomena. I dictate to the phonograph a vowelin different keys while the cylinder rotates at a given rate of speed. I then adjust the speed to a certain higher or lower rate and follow the re- sults. By reversing the motion of the eylimeder the sounds are reduced to their fundamental state. By this means we eliminate all familiar intonation and disassociate it from any meaning which will sway the mind, and in this way it can be studied to advantage. At a given rate of speed I have taken the record of certain sounds made by a monkey, and by reducing the rate of speed from two hundred revolutions per minute to forty, it can be seen that I increased the in- tervals between what are called the sound-waves and magnified the wave itself five-fold, at the same time reducing the pitch in like degree, and by this means I could detect the slightest shades of “ modulation. I may remind the reader here that in this process all parts of the sound are magnified alike in all directions, so that instead of obtain- ing five times the length, as it were, of the sound- unit or interval, we obtain the cube of five times the normal length of every unit of the sound. The slightest variation of tension in the vocal THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 179 chords may be detected, and every part of the sound compared to every other part. Having thus augmented the quantity of sound by increasing alike the sound-unit and interval, it can be recorded on another cylinder and mul- tiplied again as long as the vibrations can pro- duce sound. From the constant relation of parts and their uniform augmentation under this treat- ment, it has suggested to my mind the idea that all sounds have definite geometrical outlines, and as we change the magnitude without changing the form of the sound, I shall describe this con- stancy of form by the term contour. In a few instances I have been able, by reduc- ing the record of certain sounds from a high pitch to a lower one, to imitate the sound thus reduced with my own vocal organs; then by re- storing this record of my voice to its normal speed, I have obtained almost a perfect imitation of the sound. This effect, however, does not always follow, and in many instances my best imitations have not developed the original at all. But this presents a new problem in acoustics. I must here take occasion to say that the difference of pitch, quality, etc., in sounds does not appear to me to depend alone upon the length of the sound- 180 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. unit, but there seems to be a difference of ulti- mate form and mode of propagation which has much: to do with the contour of the developed sound. | By mode of propagation 1 mean the conduct of the organs used for the purpose of producing the sound, the apertures through which the sound- force passes, and the auxiliaries by which it is moulded into certain shapes. By ultimate form I mean the geometrical shape of the sound-force when first converted into sound. That there is such a thing as form has been clearly demon- strated by the phoneidoscope. Prof. John B. De Mott has very kindly aided me in reducing cer- tain sounds to a visible condition. I had con- ceived an idea before this that if the @aaem described by the energy which produced sound . could be made visible it would, be found te have the form of a convolute spiral; that these spirals recede from the centre or point of prop- agation in every direction like the radii of a sphere, and that that aspect of sound which we call waves is simply the point at which these spirals intercept each other, which of necessity would be of uniform distance from the centre, increasing at each successive point throughout THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. ISI the entire sound-sphere, or space through which the sound passes in all directions from the centre to infinity. I shall refrain from discussing this point till such time as I can show at greater length my reasons for this belief. I may add here that I have made records of the human voice with which I have deceived the monkeys, and I have made records of the monkey’s voice with which I have deceived the very elect of linguists and musicians. some critic once remarked to me that the sound made by a monkey was not really laughter, but only a kind of good-natured growl- imese-his may be correct, but the same is true of human laughter, as the one may be converted into the other, and a good-natured growl ex- presses the emotion which is felt by man as well as monkey. The phonograph shows that they are identical in sound and form, besides the fact that they are the outburst of the same passion, actuated by the same cause and executed by the same muscles, so that their identity mentally, physically, and me- chanically is the same. Among the sounds of the simian voice, I have bE a a et not found the English vowels “a, i Oro w 182 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 6e except, perhaps, “1”? shert as. Sounded iagjie +9 word “it. The vowel “u,”’ as sounded like “oo” “ in “shoot,’’ seems to be the chief sound of their speech. Oneimportant point which I discovered from the phonograph is that sounds or tones which are purely musical are reproduced alike with the cylinder turning either way, while all speech sounds are slightly changed when the cylinder is reversed, which shows the sounds to becompound. Ifind that “w” may be developed from any consonant by manipulating the cylin- der of the phonograph, and it is a fact also that the initial consonant imparted to any vowel does not continue through the vowel. This I have shown by making a vowel sound which I prolong for some seconds with the cylinder revolving at a given rate of speed. While reproducing this at a normal speed I intercept it at any point and develop the sound “w” as heard in “woe.” The instant I have blended this into the vowel, I lift the diaphragm until the normal speed is re- stored, when I replace the reproducing tooth, showing the sound without the consonant. In like manner I dictate to the phonograph any vowel sound preceded by a consonant. The consonant I utter in a natural way, the vowel I THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 183 prolong for some seconds, and in the act of re- producing this I cut the sound in two and find the vowel element is not modified by the conso- nant which preceded it; hence I observe that the consonant merely suggests to the mind a cer- tain form of sound which does not change the fundamental vowel. In fact, it aids the voice somewhat in uttering the vowel. If human speech were composed of none but vowel sounds, the human voice could scarcely utter them in a continued conversation; their monotony would not so much offend the ear as it would try the vocal powers, and man would soon acquire consonants to aid the voice, if for no other use. Among the simians the better types of speech show this tendency, and in the lower types of human speech we find all the vowel elements, while consonants are not by any means so nu- merous. Another fact is that among the lower races of mankind double consonants are rare and treble more so. Of course their tongues consist of fewer words, as has been shown before, which paucity arises from their few wants and simple modes of life, and hence the scope of vocal growth is much contracted. Beginning with the 184 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. lowest tribes of men, we find the consonants in- crease in number and complexity as we ascend the scale of speech. To this, perhaps, isydme the fact that the negroes now found mies United States, after a sojourn of two hundred years with the white race on this continent, are unable to utter the sounds of “th,” “thay wage other double consonants. The former of these they pronounce “d” if breathing and” £7 aq ae. 9 pirate. The latter they pronounte like) a cam ” or “tww.” The sound of “v” they usually pro- nounce “b,” while “r’’ resembles “w” or “rw” when initial, but as a final sound is usually sup- pressed. They have a marked tendency to omit auxiliary and final sounds, and in all departures from the higher types of speech tend back to ancestral forms. I believe that if we could apply the rule of per- spectives and throw our vanishing-point far back beyond the chasm that separates man from his simian prototype, we would find one unbroken outline tangent to every circle of life from man to protozoa, in language, mind, and matter. oN me CHAPTER OVIE The Human Voice. —Human Bag-Pipe. — Human Piccolo, Flute, and Fife.—The Voice as a Whistle.—Music and Noise.—Dr. Bell and his Visible Speech. ONE of the very curious feats which I have per- formed with the phonograph is the conversion of the human voice into the sounds of various in- struments. I had my wife sing the familiar scotch ballad “Comin’ Through the Rye” to the phonograph while the cylinder was rotating at the rate of about forty revolutions per minute. Each word in the song was distinctly pronounced and the music rendered in a plain, smooth tone. P taen increased the speed of the machine to about one hundred and twenty per minute, at which rate I reproduced the song. It was a very perfect imitation of the bag-pipe with no sign whatever of articulation. The melody was pre- served with only a change of time. The speech character was so completely destroyed that I 1e- peated this record to a large audience in which were several eminent musicians, not one of whom 185 186 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. suspected that it was not a real bag-pipe solo. In like manner I have converted the sounds of the voice into a very perfect piccolo, flute, fife, and into a fairly good imitation of a whistle sound. To produce the whistling effect andthe iic sound the rate of speed must be necessarily very high, and some notes will not be perfectly con- verted for some reason which I have not yet fully understood. Some voices are much more easily converted into the flute effect than othems:ja ma get the best flute sounds a full, smooth, mezzo-so- prano. gives the best effect. In reversime jaa operation the sounds of these instruments can be made to imitate the human voice somewhat, but not exactly. Not only in the fact thar eae modulation is wanting and there is no semblance to consonant sounds, but the tone itself differs in quality from that of the voice. Among other respects in which the vocal sounds of man and simian resemble is in the contour of the sounds, which I have defined else- where. I have called attention to the fact that by reversing the cylinder of the phonograph and repeating the sound recorded thereon, a musical note or sound would repeat alike each way. Most of the sounds made by other animals THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 187 do this, but those made by man and simian alike show modulation, not, however, equally distinct. The notes of birds repeat alike both ways except Prattoeit order is reversed. Again, to magnify the sounds as I have shown it can be done allows you to inspect them, as it were, under the micro- scope, and this examination shows the contour of the sounds of these two genera to resemble. Dr. Alexander Melville Bell has shown in his work on “ Visible Speech” that the organs brought into use in the production and modification of sounds must work in harmony with each other; hence it is that by a study of the external forms of the mouth the movements of all the organs used in making any sound can be determined with such certainty that deaf mutes can be and have been successfully taught to distinguish these sounds by the eye alone. And it was by sucha method that I set out to read the temple in- scriptions from the ruins of Palenque some years ago, at which time I had not heard of Dr. Bell's learned and excellent work. The main feature of those glyphs by which I was guided was the outline of the mouth, which the artist had sought to preserve and emphasize at the cost of every other feature, and by this process I found, to my 188 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS: satisfaction, some ten or twelve sounds or pho- netic elements of the speech used by those peo- ple; but not knowing the meaning of the sounds in that lost tongue, I did not attempt to verify them. When I find the time to devote to them, I believe I can accomplish that. It is a part of my purpose in my trip to Africa to try to secure photographs of the mouths of the great apes while they are in the act of talk- ing, and to this end I am having constructed an electric trigger with which to operate my photo- camera at long range; and I shall try to furnish to the eminent author of “ Visible Speech”’ some new and novel subjects for study. Char TER, NV Tt. Some Curious Facts in Vocal Growth.—Children and Conso- nants.—Single, Double, and Treble Consonants.—Sounds of Birds.—Fishes and their Language.—Insects and their Language. I SHALL take occasion here to mention some curious experiments which have suggested them- selves to me in my work with the phonograph. For lack of time and opportunity I have not car- ried them far enough to give exact and final re- sults, but it has occurred to me that philology may be aided by taking a record of the sounds made by a number of children daily through a pemed.or two. or three years from birth. The few experiments which I have tried in this par- ticular line are sufficient to show that the growth of speech obeys certain laws in the development of vocal power. It is apparent to me that the first sounds uttered by children have no conso- nants, and that certain consonants always appear in a regular succession and always single. The double consonants develop later, and the triple consonants appear to be the last acquirement. I 189 eye) THEY SPEECH OF “MONKEViss have not the space to go to great length on this subject, and my expériments ‘have toty ecm sufficient to enable me to formulate with certainty any set of rules by which the development of this faculty is uniformly governed. It is my purpose on my return from Africa to set on foot a series of such experiments, with the hope of ascertaining the facts connected there- with. And while in Africa I shall aim to make such records of the -natives. as to aseertaim whether their speech conforms to the same laws of development or not. It is my earnest hope to be able to do the same thing with the great apes which I am going chiefly to study. I think if I can record on a phonograph cylinder the sounds uttered by a young chimpanzee under ceriaim conditions once each day for a year or so, I can determine whether there is a like growth in their : speech and to what extent the same laws control it. I have already observed that the quality of voice in a given species of monkey changes with his age, very much in the same manner as the human voice; but I have not been able to follow the changes through one individual specimen by which to ascertain the exact manner of such change. THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS, Ig] The sounds of birds have been studied, per- haps, more than any others except those of men, but they have not been studied as speech nor to ascertain their meanings. Their musical char- acter has attracted attention and has been the subject of some discussion. My opinion is that much that has been said on that subject belongs more properly to the realm of poetry than of sci- ence. I think the sounds of birds are chiefly intended for speech, but they may supply the place of music in their esthetic being; but so far as I have observed, I confess that I cannot find that they obey the laws of harmony, melody, or time, and it is my opinion that most of the efforts to write the sounds of birds on a musical staff are not to be relied upon as accurate records of the sounds. There is no doubt that each sound ut- tered by a bird is in unison with some note in the chromatic scale of music, but the intervals between the tones of the same bird do not coin- cide with those of the human voice. It is quite evident that birds possess an acute sense and ready faculty for music, and many of them sho~ great aptitude in imitating the sounds of music! instruments; some varieties of birds, such as the Southern mocking-bird, the thrush, and others, Ig2 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. imitate with great success the sounds of other birds. They often do this so perfectly as to de- ceive the species to which the sounds belong. The songs of birds, as they are called, appear to afford them great pleasure, and they often indulge in them, I think, as a pastime; the effect is pleas- ing to the ear because of its cheerfulness, and it is not discordant or wanting in richness of tone in most birds. From the little study I have given them, I think it safe to say that the range of sounds possessed by any one bird is quite lim- ited and their notes are strictly monophones. This last remark does not apply to the sounds made by parrots and birds of that kind. The parrot is perhaps possessed of the greatest vocal power of any other bird. He imitates al- most the entire range of sounds that are uttered by all other birds combined, and can also imitate the sounds of human speech from the highest to the lowest pitch of the human voice. In ad- dition to all this, he imitates many noises, such as the sounds of sawing wood, the slam of a door, and the whistling of the wind. The vocal range of the parrot is perhaps the most marvellous of all the vocal products of the animal kingdom. One strange thing, however, that I observed THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 193 among them is that the range of sounds that they use among themselves is very small. I have made some records of parrots, macaws, cockatoos, etc., and I find their natural vocal sounds usually wanting in quality: most of their sounds are hoarse and guttural. Among the gallinaceous birds there does not appeartobe much music. There isa great same- ness of sounds in the different species, and they seem to be confined to the economic use of speech. In my early life I devoted much time to gun- ning, and I observed then and called attention to the fact that when a covey of birds became scat- tered I could tell at what point they would hud- dle. I could tell this by the call of one bird and the reply of the others. The call-bird, which was always the leader of the covey, would sound his call from a certain point near which the other birds would usually assemble, and during this time they would answer him from various other points. The sound used by the call-bird is un- like that used by the rest of the flock, but the sounds with which they reply to him are all alike, and by observing this I could always find the covey again by allowing them time to come to- gether, especially if it was late in the afternoon. 13 194 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. Mr. Wood, of Washington, D.C., has given such attention to the sounds of birds that he can interpret and imitate nearly all the sounds made by domestic birds and many of those made by wild birds. He has twice confused and arrested the flight of an army of crows by imitating the calls of their leader. His feats have been wit- nessed with astonishment by many men of sci- ence. Among fishes I have found but few sounds, and most of these I have never heard Jemecmp when the fish was taken out of the water. The carp and high-fin, however, I have frequently heard while in the water. It has occurred to me that the sound is not the medium of communica- tion, but it is the result of an action by which they do communicate even when the sound is not audible. I have observed, while holding the fish in my hand, that when he makes this sound it produces a jarring sensation which is very per- ceptible. It is quite possible that in his natural element these powerful vibrations are imparted to the surrounding water, and through it com- municated to another fish, who feels it in his sen- sitive body instead of hearing it as sound. It may be accompanied by the sound merely re- THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 195 sulting from the force applied, but not in itself constituting any part of the means of communi- cation. Itis not unlike what. we call sound in the fact that it is generated in the same way, trans- mitted in the same way, and received in the same way as sound. When I have time and op- - portunity I shall carry my studies of the lan- guage of fishes much farther. Their means of communication are very contracted, but it is superfluous for me to say that they have such means. Many observations have already been made on the language of insects, and much diversity of opinion prevails. Very little has been said about the details of their intercourse, but the consen- sus of opinion is that they must in some way communicate among themselves. To me they seem to live within a world of their own, as other classes of the animal kingdom do. The means of communication used by mammals could not be available among aquatic forms, any more than could their modes of locomotion. Each different class of the animal kingdom is endowed with such characters and faculties as best adapt them to the sphere in which they live, and the mode of communication best fitted to the conditions of 190 THE. SPEECH OF MONKEYS, insect life would be as little suited to mammals, perhaps, as the feathers of a bird would be for locomotion in the realm of fishes. I am aware that some high authorities have claimed that insects communicate by sounds. My own opinion is that they employ a system of grating or scratching by means of their sigmata, but that the sound created thus performs no function in the act of communicating, but is only a by-product, so to speak, and that the jarring sensation transmitted through the air is the real means by which they understand each other, pos- sibly somewhat like telegraphy, in which the sounds are not modulated, but are distinguished by their duration and the interval between them. I do not announce this as conclusive, but merely suggest it as a possible key to their mode of in- tercourse. : I have observed that signs prevail to a great extent among ants. Some years ago I had an opportunity of studying a colony of ants, and I watched them almost daily for several weeks. I had seen it stated that they found their way by the sense of smell, but these observations con- firmed my doubts on that point, and I feel justi- fied in saying that they are guided almost if not THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. 197 entirely by landmarks. On the bark of a tree from which they were gathering their winter stores I observed that there were certain little knots or protuberances by which they directed their course, and which they always passed ina certain order. Between these landmarks they did not confine themselves to any exact path, and the concourse would sometimes widen out over the space of more than an inch; but as they ap- proached a landmark every ant fell into line and went in the exact path of the others, which rarely exceeded in any case more than an eighth of an inch in width. Whenever an ant would lose its way it would lift its head high into the air, look around, and then turn almost at right angles from the course it was pursuing toward the path of the others. In scores of cases I observed that the outward-bound ant, when it had been lost and returned to the path, always came on the home- ward side of the landmark and passed out. On the other hand, if a homeward-bound ant was lost, it would approach from the outward side of the landmark and passin. About five feet from the ground were two small round knots about one- eighth of an inch in height, and a space between them of about the same width. This appeared cad 198 THE SPEECH OF MONKEYS. to be one of their most conspicuous and reliable landmarks, and every ant that I saw pass in or out during the lapse of weeks passed between these two points. The burdened ant always ap- peared to have the right of way, and when meet- ing another without a burden there was no ques- tion of this right. In sucha case the burden was usually held aloft and the right of way conceded without debate.