1. Functional inutility: (1) Offices of the port of Bruges. (2) The forest-courts of England 2. Transference of function: (1) Republican institu- 1. Local administration at the close of the Roman Empire. 2. Degeneration of societies in general PART II. Causes of the persistence of organs or institutions § 1. Unfunctional organs that are not rudimentary Absence of variation (flowers of Ficaria ranuncu- loïdes, Lysimachia Nummularia, Elodea canadensis, stratiotes aloides, cleistogamous flowers, eyes in § 2. Unfunctional organs which persist as rudiments 1. Absence of variation. Insignificance of the rudi- mentary organ (stipules of Tropaeolum majus, § 1. Integral persistence of an institution. (1) Maintenance by compulsion (rotten boroughs in England; the States of Normandy and the Dauphiny in France). (2) Indirect usefulness (English monarchy). (3) Respect for tradition (royal prerogatives exercised by the prætor; institution of sheriffs in England) § 2. Survival of institutions in a reduced condition 1. Insignificance of the institution (jurisdiction at da Martinique; summons quo warranto; Diocese of Cambrai ; marsh-land in Artois; tribute paid to Spain by France). Respect for traditions (survival of the old regime in England; instances of survival in law and religion PREFACE THIS treatise, compiled in connection with a scheme for research work in general sociology, elaborated in June 1894, was presented to the Institute of Sociology at Brussels. In drawing up the programme of the Institute, the founder, M. Ernest Solvay, after having mentioned the questions which especially called for the investigation of his colleagues, added the following statement : "The Institute of Sociology will take part in the labours of the modern school of Sociology, the object of which is to ascertain the normal conditions under which societies exist, and the laws which govern their evolution. But the advances of Natural Science in this century have not yet been sufficiently assimilated by those Sciences most closely related to it, and it is from such assimilation that the most important additions to knowledge may be expected." In stating that the results of Natural Science have not been sufficiently assimilated by Sociology, M. Solvay is only apparently at variance with those who rightly protest against exaggerated and 30 VIMU 6. PREFACE premature comparisons between social organizations and animal or vegetable organisms. The existence of such exaggerations, which have caused a reaction such as recently induced an eminent American economist to declare the bankruptcy of biological sociology, is perhaps due to the fact that, with a few distinguished exceptions, biosociological investigations have hitherto been conducted either by naturalists with a limited knowledge of social questions, or by sociologists whose training in biology was incomplete and superficial. To prevent this danger, our researches in the same subject have been made separately from the social side, and from the biological side, and have now been co-ordinated and combined. This work was commenced in May 1893, with the collaboration of our friend M. Dollo, the curator of the Natural History Museum at Brussels. In June 1894, however, M. Dollo's many occupations no longer permitted of his collaboration. The zoological part was therefore completed by M. Jean Demoor, to whom most of the facts quoted in the first book were given by M. Dollo, whose assistance we most gratefully acknowledge. INTRODUCTION EVER since the application of theories of evolution to social phenomena, there has been a constant interchange in terminology between biology and sociology; societies have been called organisms, and organisms societies of cells. There is an actual division of labour among the organs of a living body, while institutions have been called the organs, or parts of organs, of Society. The interchange of matter effected among the organs of an individual has been called a "physiological contract," while the circulation of money may be compared to the circulation of blood and lymph. . Questions arise as to what extent such comparisons are legitimate, if they should be taken in any other than a metaphorical sense, and if it is possible to set a precise boundary between the provinces of biology and sociology. Much has already been written on such problems as these, and no doubt much more will yet be written. We shall not attempt either to discuss or to solve them in these few introductory pages; they are merely touched upon here, and will only be alluded to when absolutely necessary for the careful investigation of facts bearing upon our work. I. Societies and organisms.-The analogy exist |