COMIM. r:\rrv oi Tin; ric;irn\(, 89 



dominant but continue throughout the breeding 

 season ; bearing in mind th:it in at least our 

 form of this promiscuous warfare the influencr 

 of the female can be definitely excluded, and 

 that, in the remaining forms, the evidenee which 

 is required to link them up with the biological 

 end of securing mates is lacking can it be 

 denied that the complexity of the strife makes 

 against the view that the possession of a female 

 is the proximate end for which the males are 

 fighting ? 



We started with the most simple aspect of 

 the whole problem, the fighting of two males in 

 the presence of one female the aspect upon 

 which attention has usually been fixed. And if 

 it remained at that, if observation failed to 

 disclose any further development in the situa- 

 tion, then there would be no need to probe the 

 matter deeper, there would be no reason to 

 doubt the assertion that the quarrel had direct 

 reference to the female. But assuredly no one 

 can ponder over the diversity of battle and 

 still believe that the possession of a mate 

 furnishes an adequate solution of the mystery. 

 Clearly such an hypothesis cannot cover all 

 the known facts ; there are conflicts between 

 separate pairs, and there are conflicts between 

 males when females are known to be absent and 

 when their mates are even engaged in the work 

 of incubation these cannot be due to an 

 impulse in a member of one sex to gain or keep 

 possession of one of the other sex. So that 

 taking all these facts into consideration, we are 



