of the sick, with every variety of disease, assembled there daily, most anxious to be magnetised, and confident of being cured. Every evening lectures were given with the benevolent design of imparting all his knowledge to his pupils, and of instructing them in his infallible method of distributing health. But after this splendid beginning, and after many thousand patients had submitted to his treatment, as neither the maladies nor the mortality of Paris declined, physic, which for a little time, alas! had been loathed, again came into fashion. On the declension of magnetism, revolutionary principles arose on the Continent, which gave full occupation to all speculators: but since the peace their old pursuits have been renewed, and the metaphysical mines which abound in Germany have been curiously explored. Out of these, and out of Lavater's work on physiognomy, a wondrous system has been wrought, which has excited conviction in Germany, admiration in France, and consideration in England. It is well known that Lavater thought every man's character and capacity might be most accurately ascertained by the length, breadth, and incurvations of his nose, ears, chin, and brows: and as this position was illustrated by engraved portraits of many distinguished men, the work holds a conspicuous place in many libraries. Professor Gall, of Vienna, a learned anatomist, naturalist, and metaphysician, greatly improved upon the above hint. For Lavater could only measure and examine superficially the human features; but Gall could dissect with skill the brains of men and all animals. This he industriously performed, and, by a method invented by himself, which other anatomists acknowledge to be the best, he traced minutely the course of the nerves, and the structure of the medullary substance. In this study his curiosity rose to enthusiasm; he developed, and followed with his knife, the fibres of the brain, even to their source; until at length he fondly imagined that he had discovered the seat and substance of the intellectual powers of man. It had been conceived of old, that the residence of the immaterial soul was somewhere in the brain, probably in some central place, where it occupied an ideal mathematical point. But Gall's conception is of a much more terrestrial nature, and is thus explained by his disciple Spurzheim. He divides the mental faculties into thirty-three organs, each of which is again split into two halves, corresponding with the division of the brain into two hemispheres. Every one of these half-organs, or halfmental faculties, is constituted by a portion of the brain, which is great or small according to the degree of that quality possessed by the individual: and his skull bulges out, or is depressed over every organ, in proportion as the intellectual portion of brain is exuberant, or defective. According to these notions, the physiognomists were in a gross delusion in believing that men's characters were depicted in their faces. For Gall asserts, that it is on the hind head, and under the hair chiefly, that we ought to look for the characteristic marks; which are stamped there unerringly, and may be both seen and felt by whoever has hands and eyes. Never was there a more humiliating conception of man than this: by which love, reason, wit, and all the nobler faculties of the human mind, are framed of a number of masses of flesh conglomerated together, which enlarge and diminish while we live, and rot when we die. The ideas of the divine Plato, if not better founded, were at least more fascinating. His refined fancy imagined the soul to be an immaterial and immortal spirit, a pure ethereal essence emanating from and returning to God. But let us, unseduced by the more flattering system, examine upon what arguments and facts Gall's system is founded. The brain of man being larger than that of animals, is brought forward to account for the superiority of human intelligence, and to identify our mental faculties with solid flesh. But this butcher-like argument is annihilated by the facts that the brains of elephants and whales are greater than those of men and also by this common observation, that large men with large heads have not superior capacities to those of moderate dimensions. There is a physical cause, overlooked by naturalists, which will explain satisfactorily why men have a greater mass of brain, in proportion to their size, than all other animals. The brain is both the receptacle of sensations of every sort, and the machine which fabricates and dispenses to the whole body the nervous influence. Consequently, its size is proportioned to those functions. Many of the more perfect animals possess the senses of seeing, hearing, tasting, and smelling, as acutely as man. But none of the brute creation possess the sense of feeling, by far the principal one, to an extent, or to a degree comparable to man. Quadrupeds, birds, and fish, are covered with hairy hides, feathers, and scales; which, together with their hoofs and claws, render them little susceptible of impressions from the sense of touch. Whereas the whole body of man is covered with a delicate skin, overspread with innumerable nervous filaments, all endowed with great sensibility. The feet and hands, especially, possess the sense of touch in an exquisite degree and the internal parts of the human body are far more sensible than those of brutes. It follows from this that the brain of man, the receptacle of these multiplied impressions on the nerves of feeling, must be proportionably larger. Spurzheimr, however, is persuaded that the human faculties are to be estimated by measurement; and his division of them, he says, into sixtysix medullary organs was discovered by a thousand observations. For example, Gall*, happening one day to see a beggar with a bump on the upper posterior part of his head, inquired of him the cause of his mendicity. The beggar replied, that "Pride was the cause: he considered himself too important to acquire any business, and therefore only spent money, and did not think of earning a livelihood." From this answer, Professor Gall was convinced that the organ of pride had elevated the beggar's skull, as well as all others who imagine themselves emperors, kings, and ministers. And to prevent any doubt of the facts, he adds, "It appears also that certain animals are endowed with this organ, as the turkey-cock, the peacock," &c. Respecting the organ of love, this was first found out by Dr. Gall† in one of his patients who was a widow. He detected it on the lowest part of her hind-head; of course the hair which conceals it might with propriety be called love-locks. This organ, he says, is most prominent among men, but insidiously adds, there are ladies who are exceptions. Indeed he has an easy way of explaining all facts contradictory to his * The Physiognomical System, &c. by J. G. Spurzheim, M.D. page 404, 405. + Ibid. page 344. system: thus he found* some infants, from three to four years old, with the organ of love of extraordinary growth; on which he accuses them directly of having manifested sexual passion. Such an assertion as this may lead some to an unjust suspicion of these professors not believing themselves the doctrine they inculcate : but a perusal of their works will convince every candid mind of their unbounded belief. Their sincerity, indeed, is most clearly shewn in an answer to the following objection fairly stated by Spurzheim. Since the organs of man are alleged to be double, how does it happen that each individual conceives his own conscience to be single? To this Spurzheim boldly replies, "It is not true that consciousness is always single." And to prove this, he quotes from Tudemann the case of a man whose brain on one side was mad, and on the other sane. And Gall himself has seen many persons who heard on one side of their brains angels singing and devils roaring, while the other side was very rational. Notwithstanding these assertions, and a multitude of others equally incomprehensible, as phrenology is a doctrine openly taught by men of learning and ingenuity, and is now spreading both at home and abroad, it merits a serious examination. Shall we begin with what ought to be apparent to all, those protuberances and depressions which are said to be on every head, and which are delineated on paper, and moulded in plaster-of-Paris, as if correct imitations of nature? Now although no two heads are precisely alike, and skulls vary in their shape and magnitude, yet no one will venture to say that he ever saw any thing resembling the sixty-six marks, designated as organs. It is with difficulty two or three impressions can be remarked on any skull; all the rest are non-existent. Gall† meets this objection by saying, it is necessary to exercise the eyes long in order to perceive every difference of form and size. And he confesses, that he has placed busts of individuals together, and looked at them for several weeks, in vain. This acknowledgment does great honour to Professor Gall, and proves that he has not completely lost philosophic doubt. For most enthusiasts see at a glance whatever their favourite hypothesis requires, although invisible to others. Let it be admitted, however, that Gall and Spurzheim have, by long study, acquired this second sight; it is obvious that the marks must be extremely slight, and consequently the increase or decrease of the organs beneath must be as inconsiderable. But how does this accord with the theory, and with human characters. The difference between one man and another is prodigious, and the pretended cause is evanescent. For when the head of a humane man is compared with that of a murderer, and even when their brains are dissected, no distinction can be perceived, except by the adept! and he owns that the difference is hardly discernible. Surely a cause so disproportioned to the effect must be rejected. But neither Gall nor Spurzheim perceived the necessity of admitting the above tenuity: they, on the contrary, describe the increase and decrease of particular organs, and their developement, as manifest and palpable, bulging out the skull, and pushing the neighbouring organs out of their places.‡ *The Physiognomical System, &c. by J. G. Spurzheim, MD. page 108. The disorder produced in the brain by the augmentation of certain organs when childhood is past, would be still greater: for as the cranium is always full, and at that age completely ossified, no external yielding could ensue: consequently, the increase of one set of organs would compress, injure, or destroy the adjoining ones. Now, apply this to the organs delineated on the head by Spurzheim: look at the organ of conscientiousness, which is surrounded by those of hope, cautiousness, approbation, and firmness. Therefore if any man has great hopes, is very cautious, gains the approbation of the world, and is of a firm character, his conscience would be squeezed into a very narrow compass. Observe next the organs of the reasoning and imitative faculties, which, together with those of poetry and music, hem in the organ of wit. The developement of the former would therefore annihilate the latter. Is this found true in man? Did not Shakspeare reason well? Did he not display in the highest perfection the power of imitation? Had he not poetic fire, and the love of harmony? And did not these various faculties, instead of choking, furnish abounding materials for his excelling wit? Indeed in no point of view does this new system present an agreeable aspect. The most celebrated of the ancient philosophers, in order to inspire virtuous deeds, were wont to extol the dignity of human nature: whereas some of the moderns strive to vilify it, by assimilating men to the nature of beasts. But this plan of self-degrądation has been carried by Gall and Spurzheim to the utmost extreme, as they have classed mankind among the carnivorous animals, and given him an organ of destructiveness, which instils the propensity of killing animals, and of tormenting and murdering men. Spurzheim says*, "We are convinced, by a great number of observations, that the seat of this organ is on the side of the head immediately above the ears." He also notices that "a difference in the skulls of carnivorous and herbivorous animals gave the first idea of the existence of this organ. If we place a skull of any carnivorous animal horizontally, and trace a vertical line through the openings of the ear, a great portion of the cerebral mass is situated behind the line. The more an animal is carnivorous, the more considerable is the portion of the cerebral mass situated there." This is certainly as inconclusive an argument as ever was framed. For if it had incidentally happened that the fact above stated was correct, no logician would thence conclude that men possessed the dispositions of tigers. But this rage för forming a system has so blinded these phrenologists, that they could not see numerous contradictory facts which natural history displays. Let any one who is desirous of satisfying himself on this point, examine the numerous skulls of various animals which are preserved in the Hunterian Museum. There are skulls there of an ourang-outang from the island of Borneo, and of another from Africa, animals who never taste flesh, but live on fruit and vegetables: yet a larger proportion of their brain is situated posterior to their ears than in man. The same is the case with some other kinds of monkeys: and how came the elephant to be *The Physiognomical System, &c. by J. G. Spurzheim, M.D. page 390. t Ibid. page 376. The Museum is in Lincoln's-Inn-Fields. VOL. VII. No. 42.-1824. 68 overlooked, who abhors flesh, and whose brain lies chiefly behind? But, on the other hand, the whole of the brain of the shark, an animal sufficiently voracious, is situated anterior to the ears. Consequently the organ of destructiveness is entirely wanting in this gentle fish: but, to compensate him, he has a prominent brow on which the organ of benevolence is most manifest. It is unquestionable that the Professors Gall and Spurzheim are men of great knowledge, of profound research, and possessed of very considerable inventive powers; but they appear to have been too confident in their great capacities. The expectation of discovering men's characters by prominences on their heads, is too like that of discerning their fortunes by the lines on their hands. And an attempt to advance a single step across that gulph which separates mind from matter was too daring. Such paradoxical systems afford to the world transitory amusement, until by a cross wind they are whirled aloft to that limbo large and broad, to which all abortive and visionary schemes tend. LUCERNA. THE MESSENGER-BIRD. [Some of the Brazilians pay great veneration to a certain bird that sings mournfully in the night-time. They say it is a messenger which their deceased friends and relations have sent, and that it brings them news from the other world. Picart's Ceremonies and Religious Customs.] THOU art come from the Spirits' land, thou bird! Through the dark pine-grove let thy voice be heard, We know that the bowers are green and fair In the light of that distant shore, And we know that the friends we have lost are there,- And we know they have quench'd their fever's thirst From the Fountain of Youth ere now, For there must the stream in its gladness burst, Which none may find below! And we know that they will not be lured to earth By the feast, or dance, or song of mirth, Though their hearts were once with ours. Though they sat with us by the night-fire's blaze, And heard the tales of our Fathers' days, Then tell us, thou bird of the solemn strain! Can those who have loved forget? We call, and they answer not again- Doth the warrior think of his brother there, And the father, of his child? And the chief, of those that were wont to share We call them far through the silent night, We know, thou bird! that their land is bright, F. H. |