590 SCIENCE PROGRESS 



be instituted by observers in the field. Hardly anything im- 

 pairs the value of observations of a particular people so much as 

 the interpolation of comparisons with other peoples, especially 

 with the Jews, and next to them with the Greeks and Romans, 

 these being the races who have suffered most at the hands of 

 half-educated travellers. Every observer of a savage or bar- 

 barous people should describe it exactly as if no other people 

 existed on the face of the earth. The business of comparison is 

 not for him, at least not for him in the capacity of observer ; 

 if he desires to draw comparisons with other peoples, as he is of 

 course at liberty to do, he should keep his comparisons strictly 

 apart from his observations : the mixture of the two is, if not 

 absolutely fatal, at least a great impediment to the utility of both. 



But while the work of comparison is entirely different from 

 the work of observation and should always be kept separate, 

 it is itself of high importance and is indeed essential to anthro- 

 pology ; without it there could be no true science of man, and the 

 accumulated observations, gained at the cost of great personal 

 risks and sacrifices, would remain an undigested and disorderly 

 heap. It is the application of the comparative method to the 

 heap which evolves order out of chaos by eliciting the general 

 principles or laws which underlie the mass of particulars. It is 

 true that simple comparison is not sufficient for the discovery 

 of the underlying law, but it is the first step towards it. If 

 only our comparisons are just, in other words, if we have 

 correctly sorted out the facts into their proper compartments 

 according to their real similarities, the colligation of the similars 

 in a general truth or law follows almost automatically. Thus 

 everything hinges on the work of comparison. Only with its 

 help can we rise to those generalisations which are the goal of 

 science. 



But indispensable as is the application of the comparative 

 method to the raw materials of anthropology, it is not necessary, 

 though it is certainly desirable, that the application should be 

 made at once. If only the materials are collected and safely 

 stored, the work of comparison can be done at any time here- 

 after ; it may even be reserved for future ages. But no doubt 

 much might be lost by thus postponing indefinitely the examina- 

 tion of the facts accumulated by observers in the field. For a 

 comparison of facts observed in different, sometimes in widely 

 sundered, parts of the world often reveals a striking similarity 

 between them which probably escaped the observer, because his 

 attention was rightly concentrated on one particular part of the 

 field, and he had neither the leisure nor the opportunity to 

 notice similar facts elsewhere. The detection of these similarities 

 usually suggests a question which it is desirable to put to workers 

 in the field ; and the question in turn may direct the attention 



