The savage can always distinguish between one object and two objects, and it is hardly reasonable to believe that any external aid is needed to arrive at a distinct perception of this difference.

The numerals for 1 and 2 would be the earliest to be formed in any language, and in most, if not all, cases they would be formed long before the need would be felt for terms to describe any higher number.

If this theory be correct, we should expect to find finger names for numerals beginning not lower than 3, and oftener with 5 than with any other number.
The highest authority has ventured the assertion that all numeral words have their origin in the names of the fingers;[69] substantially the same conclusion was reached by Professor Pott, of Halle, whose work on numeral nomenclature led him deeply into the study of the origin of these words.
But we have abundant evidence at hand to show that, universal as finger counting has been, finger origin for numeral words has by no means been universal.

That it is more frequently met with than any other origin is unquestionably true; but in many instances, which will be more fully considered in the following chapter, we find strictly non-digital derivations, especially in the case of the lowest members of the scale.

But in nearly all languages the origin of the words for 1, 2, 3, and 4 are so entirely unknown that speculation respecting them is almost useless.
An excellent illustration of the ordinary method of formation which obtains among number scales is furnished by the Eskimos of Point Barrow,[70] who have pure numeral words up to 5, and then begin a systematic course of word formation from the names of their fingers.