Phrenological bust by LN FowlerPhrenological bust by LN FowlerThe History of Phrenology on the Web

by John van Wyhe

George Combe, A System of Phrenology, 5th edn, 2 vols. 1853.

Vol. 1: [front matter], Intro, Nervous system, Principles of Phrenology, Anatomy of the brain, Division of the faculties 1.Amativeness 2.Philoprogenitiveness 3.Concentrativeness 4.Adhesiveness 5.Combativeness 6.Destructiveness, Alimentiveness, Love of Life 7.Secretiveness 8.Acquisitiveness 9.Constructiveness 10.Self-Esteem 11.Love of Approbation 12.Cautiousness 13.Benevolence 14.Veneration 15.Firmness 16.Conscientiousness 17.Hope 18.Wonder 19.Ideality 20.Wit or Mirthfulness 21.Imitation.
Vol. 2: [front matter], external senses, 22.Individuality 23.Form 24.Size 25.Weight 26.Colouring 27.Locality 28.Number 29.Order 30.Eventuality 31.Time 32.Tune 33.Language 34.Comparison, General observations on the Perceptive Faculties, 35.Causality, Modes of actions of the faculties, National character & development of brain, On the importance of including development of brain as an element in statistical inquiries, Into the manifestations of the animal, moral, and intellectual faculties of man, Statistics of Insanity, Statistics of Crime, Comparative phrenology, Mesmeric phrenology, Objections to phrenology considered, Materialism, Effects of injuries of the brain, Conclusion, Appendices: No. I, II, III, IV, V, [Index], [Works of Combe].




Since the Fifth Edition of this work was printed, some advances have been made by Physiologists in their researches into the structure of the Brain ; and to present a popular view of these to the reader, the anatomical portion of the work has been revised, and in part rewritten, by James Coxe, M.D., who is known as editor of the works of the late Dr A. Combe. The portions reprinted extend from p. 81 to p. 96, both inclusive; from p. 113 to p. 144, both inclusive ; and from p. *141 to p. *144, both inclusive; the numbers of these last four pages being repeated with an asterisk to adapt them to page 145. The rest of the First and Second Volumes continues unaltered, no changes requiring notice having, as far as I am aware, taken place in Phrenology since they were printed.

The present stationary condition of the science


appears to me to arise from the circumstance that the individuals who first introduced it to the world, and also their coadjutors in elucidating, extending, and diffusing it, are either dead or so far advanced in life as to be no longer capable of new investigations ; while the body of facts and deductions which they have published have been, and still are, not only far "in advance of public opinion, but so imperfectly known to and appreciated by the class which labours to extend the boundaries of science, that fewer motives are presented to young men to cultivate this particular field, than to prosecute other more popular departments of investigation. The only advance which, in these circumstances, could be expected, has actually occurred, namely, a wider diffusion of a knowledge of Phrenology, and a juster estimate of its merits among the people at large. Its influence is now discernible in general literature, and in educational and other reforms.





THE following are the circumstances which led to the publication of the present Work.

My first information concerning the system of Drs Gall and Spurzheim, was derived from No. 49. of the Edinburgh Review. Led away by the boldness of that piece of criticism, I regarded the doctrines as contemptibly absurd, and their authors as the most disingenuous of men. In 1816, however, shortly after the publication of the Review, my friend Mr Brownlee invited me to attend a private dissection of a recent brain, to be performed in his house by Dr Spurzheim. The subject was not altogether new, as I had previously attended a course of demonstrative lectures on Anatomy by Dr Barclay. Dr Spurzheim exhibited the structure of the brain


to all present (among whom were several gentlemen of the medical profession), and contrasted it with the bold averments of the Reviewer. The result was a complete conviction in the minds of the observers, that the assertions of the Reviewer were refuted by physical demonstration.

The faith placed in the Review being thus shaken, I attended the next course of Dr Spurzheim's lectures, for the purpose of hearing from himself a correct account of his doctrines. The lectures satisfied me, that the system was widely different from the representations given of it by the Reviewer, and that, if true, it would prove highly important ; but the evidence was not conclusive. I therefore appealed to Nature by observation ; and at last arrived at complete conviction of the truth of Phrenology.

In 1818, the Editor of the " Literary and Statistical Magazine for Scotland," invited me to a free discussion of the merits of the system in his work, and I was induced to offer him some essays on the subject. The notice which these attracted led to their publication in 1810, in a separate volume, under the title of " Essays on Phrenology." A second edition of these Essays has since been called for, and the present volume is offered in compliance with that demand. In the present work, I have adopted the title of " A System of Phrenology," on account of


the wider scope, and closer connexion, of its parts ; but pretend to no novelty in principle, and to no rivalry with .the great founder of the science.

The controversial portions of the first edition are here almost entirely omitted. As the opponents have quitted the field, these appeared no longer necessary, and their place is supplied by what I trust will be found more interesting matter. Some readers may think that retributive justice required the continued republication of the answers to the attacks of the opponents, that the public mind, when properly enlightened, might express a just disapprobation of the conduct of those who so egregiously misled it : but Phrenology teaches us forbearance ; and, besides, it will be misfortune enough to the individuals who have distinguished themselves in the work of misrepresentation, to have their names handed down to posterity, as the enemies of one of the most important discoveries ever communicated to mankind.

In this work, the talents of several living characters are adverted to, and compared with the development of their mental organs,-which is a new feature in philosophical discussion, and might, without explanation, appear to some readers to be improper : But I have founded such observations on the printed works, and published lusts or casts, of the


individuals alluded to ; and both of these being public property, there appeared no impropriety in adverting to them. In instances in which reference is made to the cerebral development of persons whose busts or casts are not published, I have ascertained that the observations will not give offence.





A STRIKING change has taken place in public opinion in regard to Phrenology since October 1819, when the first edition of this work appeared. Then, Phrenology and Phrenologists were assailed with every species of ridicule, and held in such contempt that few opponents considered it necessary to meet their statements either by adverse facts or by arguments. Now, a general impression prevails that there is more or less of truth in the doctrines, and that they merit a serious investigation. This opinion has been partly formed, and certainly is strongly supported, by the advocacy of the new views by three of the most influential Medical Journals of Great Britain. From an early date, Phrenology has been fully expounded, and its leading principles defended, in the Medico-Chirurgical Review and the London Lancet ; and more recently by the British


and Foreign Medical Review.* With such aids, its eventual triumph over the still lingering prejudices of a part of the British public may be safely predicted. Nor has its progress in foreign countries been less satisfactory. In France, in the United States of America, and in Italy, the press affords evidence of the steady advance of the science; while in Germany also, where it was supposed to be extinct (but where, in point of fact, it scarcely had an existence beyond the persons of Drs Gall and Spurzheim, who left that country more than thirty years ago), it has at last taken root, and is diffused through the medium of a recently instituted German Phrenological Journal, and by a variety of individual treatises on its doctrines and applications. The fifth edition of this work, therefore, is presented to the public with less anxiety regarding the spirit in which it will be received than were any of its predecessors; but there is one preliminary point on which I consider it necessary to offer a few remarks.

I define Science to be a correct statement, methodically arranged, of facts in nature accurately observed, and of inferences from them logically deduced ; and add, that there is a difference between

* Vol. IX. No. 17, and Vol. XIV. p. 65.


science and established science. When Newton published his discoveries regarding the composition of light, he recorded scientific truth; but his statements were at first denied and opposed ; next they were discussed and tested ; and it was only after a number of individuals, commanding public confidence by their talents and attainments, had concurred in testifying to their truth, that they were admitted as established. From the first, they were established in nature, but not in human opinion. The more difficult of proof a science is, the longer will be the time which will elapse before it is admitted as established.

Phrenology is not an exact, but an estimative science. It does not resemble mathematics, or even chemistry, in which measures of weight and number can be applied to facts ; but, being a branch of physiology, it, like medical science, rests on evidence which can be observed and estimated only. We possess no means of ascertaining, in cubic inches, or in ounces, the exact quantity of cerebral matter which each organ contains, or of computing the precise degree of energy with which each faculty is manifested ; we are able only to estimate through the eye and the hand the one, and by means of the intellect the other. It is true that when cases of large size and extreme deficiency in particular or-


gans are selected as the tests of the truth of Phrenology, the differences are so palpable, that no observer, of ordinary acuteness, can fail to perceive them, nor can he, in such instances, easily mistake the degree of power with which the corresponding faculties are manifested. But still this evidence, palpable as it is, can be obtained by means only of observation and reflection, and cannot be substantiated by measurements of quantity and number.

This circumstance renders the value attached by inquirers to the reported evidence in favour of Phrenology dependent on their estimate of the talents of the reporter for accurate observation, for correct inference, and for faithful relation. Hence, although Phrenology may be a correct representation of truths existing in nature, and in this respect may actually be a science ; yet, from prejudice in the public mind, as well as from difficulties attending the evidence, it may be regarded by many as not yet an established science.

The history of science, indeed, shews that important discoveries have been rejected, and the discoverers opposed and ridiculed by their contemporaries, even in instances in which the truth of the new propositions was susceptible of ocular or mathema-


tical demonstration. We cannot, therefore, reasonably be surprised that some individuals object to the evidence in favour of Phrenology, recorded in this and other works, as not being sufficient to produce in their minds conviction of its truth. To such persons I respectfully suggest, that, if the recorded evidence be not to them satisfactory, they should appeal to nature. Phrenologists do not rest the truth of the science solely on reported cases ; they do not affirm that the existing recorded evidence is sufficient to force the assent of all minds ; but state, that, in order to obtain philosophical conviction, the inquirer who doubts should resort to personal observations. Dr Spurzheim (in his Outlines, p. 222) very early said, " I again repeat, that I could here speak only of the results of the immense number of facts which we have collected. Several may complain of my not mentioning a greater number of those facts ; but in reply, I need only answer, that, were I to write as many books of cases as there are special organs, still no one could, on this subject, attain personal or individual conviction, before he had practically made the same observations. I may further remark, that the detailed narrative of a thousand cases, would not improve the science, more than that of a few characteristic ones, which state our meaning, and shew


what is to be observed, and how we are to observe. Self-conviction can be founded only on self-observation ; and this cannot be supplied by continually reading similar descriptions of configuration. Such a proceeding may produce confidence, but not conviction. This requires the actual observation of nature."

In regard to the means of proof, Phrenology does not differ materially from some of the other sciences. The testimony of its supporters to points of fact must be either received or rejected by the student : If he reject it as insufficient, he is entitled to suspend his belief, but not to deny the truth of what is asserted. If he wish to obtain positive conviction that it is true or false, no course is open to him except to resort to personal observation.

I confess that I was one of those who regarded the cases reported by Dr Spurzheim as not furnishing sufficient evidence of the truth of Phrenology ; but I acted according to his suggestion, and used them as guides to direct my own investigations. To obtain conviction, I made a direct appeal to nature. At first I found it difficult to discriminate the situations of the different organs, to estimate their relative proportions, to distinguish the manifestations


of particular faculties, and to judge of the degrees of their energy; but I perceived that difficulties of the same kind beset the student of medicine, and that no man had ever learned to distinguish diseases, to form accurate diagnosis and prognosis of them, by merely reading descriptions and reported cases of their treatment and cure. As the medical student learns anatomy only by the patient and direct application of his eye and hand to the structure of the body, and acquires skill in practical medicine only by resorting to the sick-beds of public hospitals and private families, so I saw that it was only by applying the hand and the eye to distinguish the situations and relative magnitudes of the cerebral organs, and by observing, in active life, the mental manifestations, that I could hope to become really skilled in Phrenology ; and I followed this course accordingly. The result, after falling into many errors, and surmounting numerous difficulties, was the attainment of a deep conviction of the truth and importance of the doctrines, and it was only after reaching this point, that I became acquainted with the writings of Dr Gall.

But, as I had regarded in this light the facts reported by Dr Spurzheim, I could not, in consistency with reason, wish or expect that future inquirers


should view the cases reported by me as sufficient to supply the desideratum. I, therefore, mentioned them in the same spirit, and with the same objects, as those avowed by Dr Spurzheim in the foregoing quotation. This, however, in several instances has not been understood : While some individuals have, without hesitation, embraced Phrenology on the faith of the reported cases ; others, also actuated by a sincere desire to arrive at truth, have complained of the insufficiency of this evidence to produce a scientific conviction in their minds, and they have in consequence objected to the statement as unwarranted, that certain of the organs are " regarded as established." I beg leave to explain, that by this expression I mean, that the evidence which I have met with has produced the conviction in my own mind that the organs are established in nature ; but I do not intend to affirm, that the facts and arguments adduced in this work, are of themselves sufficient to establish the reality of the organs to the satisfaction of every reader. In these circumstances, no better means of advancing the cause occurs to me, than to request every one in whom the recorded evidence fails to produce conviction, to resort to actual observation in the great field of nature.

I am aware of the unfavourable reception which


this request will meet with from the inquirer whose practice it is to sit in his library and read reports of scientific experiments and observations, to submit them to the searching analysis of a critical logic, and to admit or reject them, and the conclusions deduced from them, according to the results of this investigation. Such a person shrinks from examining heads, as a vulgar and ludicrous occupation; and from mingling in the din of busy life, as annoying to his habits of retirement, and distracting to his attention. He insists not only on trying Phrenology solely by the reported cases, but on including all who call themselves Phrenologists in the list of the witnesses on whose testimony he is entitled to decide. Nay, further, he considers himself authorized, on the result of this scrutiny, not only to suspend his belief, but positively to deny the truth of the whole, or of a greater or smaller portion of the doctrines. As reasonably might a scientific inquirer pass sentence on the value of Medical Science after merely reading the works of physicians, and studying cases reported by the most cautious practitioners and the most ignorant and unprincipled quacks, and assigning to them all an equal value.

Again, other inquirers, who have proceeded a cer -


tain length in making direct observations, have admitted, as ascertained,-some of them, the three great divisions of the brain into the organs of the animal propensities, the moral sentiments, and the intellectual faculties ;-others of them, not only these, but the functions of several of the larger individual organs ;-while they have dogmatically rejected all the other subdivisions, as unsupported by sufficient evidence. There are individuals, also, who deny the adequacy of the evidence to prove particular organs, which in their own brains are so small, that they experience great difficulty in comprehending the functions assigned to them. To such objectors I can reply only, in the words of Dugald Stewart, that the point reached by the end of their own sounding-line is not necessarily the bottom of the ocean. In 1819, the public, by almost universal acclamation, denounced the whole doctrines of Phrenology as sheer quackery and nonsense ; seven years afterwards, some influential individuals and public Journals admitted that there was some truth in the principles on which Phrenology was based ; after other seven years, the same authorities acknowledged that the division of the brain into the three great regions before mentioned, seemed to be supported by considerable evidence ; and at the close of a third period of seven


years, many competent judges admit that there are satisfactory proofs for several of the larger organs. During all this time, there has been no restriction of the limits, and no important variation in the doctrines, of Phrenology : The change that has taken place has been in public opinion ; and it has arisen from the greater degree of attention with which the public, or the individuals whom it recognises as its guides, have devoted themselves to the study of the principles, and to the observation of the facts, on which the doctrines are founded. Nor will this onward progress stop at its present point : I rest confident, that, at the end of the next seven years, still more of the details will be admitted to be true. Indeed, it appears to me, that the great facts and inductions of Phrenology, like those of many other sciences, will be ultimately received into the category of established truths, not in consequence of any rigidly scientific demonstration presented in the form of recorded evidence, but by general acquiescence, founded on the testimony of men on whose talents, judgment, and opportunities of observation, public reliance will be placed.

Far from either denying or undervaluing the importance of accurately reported evidence as a means of advancing the doctrines to the rank of an ES-


TABLISHED science, I desire to see this testimony increased ; but in the mean time I respectfully maintain, that Phrenology does contain a goodly array of correctly observed facts, and justly drawn conclusions, and that in this sense it is actually a science. I do not, however, condemn those who affirm that, from the paucity of well-qualified observers and reporters, it is not yet established in their opinion : all I urge is, that such persons are not entitled to deny the truth of the phrenological facts and inferences, but only to suspend their own judgment until they shall have resorted to personal observations.

Although I am far from asserting, for Phrenologists or myself, freedom from inaccuracy in observation and from error in induction, and farther still from deprecating the most rigid scrutiny into the cases which I have reported ; yet I do venture to say, that any inquirer, who will proceed, patiently and without bias, to interrogate Nature, and to observe cases of great size and marked deficiency in the development of individual organs (which afford the most certain and unequivocal proofs), will find the phrenological conclusions to be drawn with a degree of accuracy equal at least to that which is presented by other sciences that have been culti-


vated only for the same length of time, and which depend for their advancement on the observation and estimation of complicated natural phenomena*

Large additions have been made to the present edition ; some new plates and cuts are given ; and, in treating of topics of interest, I have added references to other phrenological works in which they are discussed or illustrated, so as to render this -edition an index, as far as possible, to the general literature of the science. The Appendix contains Testimonials in favour of the truth of Phrenology, and of its utility in the classification and treatment of criminals, presented in February 1836 by Sir George S. Mackenzie, one of the earliest and most zealous advocates of the science, to Lord Glenelg, Secretary for the Colonies. His Lordship subsequently transmitted the documents to Lord John Russell, Secretary for the Home Department, who promised to Sir George to bestow on them due consideration ; but up to the present time no movement has taken place on the subject. As truth cannot

* See an article on " The Nature of the Evidence by which the Functions of different parts of the Brain may be established," in the Phrenological Journal, vol. x. p. 556 ; and in " Gall on the Cerebellum," p. 181 ; also, the Phren. Journ,, vol. xii. p. 150, 346-7 ; vol. xiii. p. 97, 339 ; and vol. xiv. p. 4, 343.


xviii PREFACE.

die, I have been requested to continue the circulation of these documents along with the present edition, in the expectation that sooner or later they will lead to practical results.

Dr Spurzheim, in the American Edition of his " Phrenology," published at Boston in 1832, adopted a new arrangement of the organs, different from any which he had previously followed. It will be impossible, however, to arrive at a perfect classification and numeration of the organs until the whole of them shall have been discovered, and the primitive or elementary faculties shall have been ascertained. Any order, therefore, adopted in the mean time, must be to some extent arbitrary. Dr Spurzheim has shewn this to be the case by the frequent alterations which he has made in the numeration of the organs, without having added any corresponding discoveries to the science. The difficulties attending a correct classification are stated in the Appendix, No. II., and for the present I retain, as a matter of convenience, the order followed in the third and fourth editions of this work.

EDINBURGH, 31st March 1843.







PHRENOLOGY, (derived from the Greek word ...., mind, and λογς, discourse,) professes to be a system of Philosophy of the Human Mind, founded on the physiology of the brain. It was first offered to public consideration on the continent of Europe in 1796, but in Britain was almost unheard of till the year 1815. It has met with strenuous support from some individuals, and determined opposition from others ; while the great body of the public remain uninstructed as to its merits. On this account, it may be useful to present, in an introductory form, 1st, A short notice of the reception which other discoveries have met with on their first announcement ; 2dly, A brief outline of the principles involved in Phrenology; 3rdly, An inquiry into the presumptions for and against these principles, founded on the known phenomena of human nature ; and, 4thly, An historical sketch of the discovery of the organs of the mind.

I shall follow this course, not with a view of convincing the reader that Phrenology is true, (because nothing short of patient study and extensive personal observation can produce this conviction,) but for the purpose of presenting him


with motives to prosecute the investigation for his own satisfaction.

First, then-one great obstacle to the reception of a discovery is the difficulty which men experience in at once parting with old notions which have been instilled into their minds from infancy, and become the stock of their understandings. Phrenology has encountered this impediment, but not in a greater degree than other discoveries which have preceded it. Locke, in speaking of the common reception of new truths, says : " Who ever, by the most cogent arguments, will be prevailed with to disrobe himself at once of all his old opinions and pretences to knowledge and learning, which with hard study he hath all his time been labouring for, and turn himself out stark naked in quest afresh of new notions'? All the arguments that can be used, will be as little able to prevail as the wind did with the traveller to part with his cloak, which he held only the faster." 1

Professor Playfair, in his historical notice of discoveries in physical science, contained in the third Preliminary Dissertation in the Encyclopaedia Britannica, observes, that " in every society there are some who think themselves interested to maintain things in the condition wherein they have found them. The considerations are indeed sufficiently obvious, which, in the moral and political world, tend to produce this effect, and to give a stability to human institutions, often so little proportionate to their real value or to their general utility. Even in matters purely intellectual, and in which the abstract truths of arithmetic and geometry seem alone concerned, the prejudices, the selfishness, or vanity of those who pursue them, not unfrequently combine to resist improvement, and often engage no inconsiderable degree of talent in drawing back, instead of pushing forward, the machine of science. The introduction of methods entirely new must often change the relative place of the men engaged in scientific pursuits ; and must oblige many, after descending from the stations they formerly oc-

1 Locke On the Human Understanding, b. iv. c. 20, sect. 11.


cupied, to take a lower position in the scale of intellectual advancement. The enmity of such men, if they be not animated by a spirit of real candour, and the love of truth, is likely to be directed against methods by which their vanity is mortified, and their importance lessened." '

Every age has afforded proofs of the justness of these observations. " The disciples of the various philosophical schools of Greece inveighed against each other, and made reciprocal accusations of impiety and perjury. The people, in their turn, detested the philosophers, and accused those who investigated the causes of things of presumptuously invading the rights of the Divinity. Pythagoras was driven from Athens, and Anaxagoras was imprisoned, on account of their novel opinions. Democritus was treated as insane by the Abderites for his attempts to find out the cause of madness by dissections ; and Socrates, for having demonstrated the unity of God, was forced to drink the juice of hemlock." *

But let us attend in particular to the reception of the three greatest discoveries that have adorned the annals of philosophy, and mark the spirit with which they were hailed.

Mr Playfair, speaking of the treatment of Galileo, says :- " Galileo was twice brought before the Inquisition. The first time, a council of seven cardinals pronounced a sentence which, for the sake of those disposed to believe that power can subdue truth, ought never to be forgotten : viz. That to maintain the sun to be immoveable, and without local motion, in the centre of the world, is an absurd proposition, false in philosophy, heretical in religion, and contrary to the testimony of Scripture ; and it is equally absurd and false in philosophy to assert that the earth is not immoveable in the centre of the world, and, considered theologically, equally erroneous and heretical." The following extract from Galileo's Dialogue on the Copernican

1 Encydapodia, Britannica, 7th edit. i. 533.

2 Dr Spurzheim's Philosophical Principles of Phrenology. London 1825, p. 96.


System of Astronomy, shews, in a very interesting manner how completely its reception was similar to that of Phrenology.

" Being very young, and having scarcely finished my course of philosophy, which I left off as being set upon other employments, there chanced to come into those parts a certain foreigner of Rostoch, whose name, as I remember, was Christianus Urstitius, a follower of Copernicus, who, in an academy, gave two or three lectures upon this point, to whom many flocked as auditors ; but I, thinking they went more for the novelty of the subject than otherwise, did not go to hear him : for I had concluded with myself that that opinion could be no other than a solemn madness ; and questioning some of those who had been there, I perceived they all made a jest thereof, except one, who told me that the business was not altogether to be laughed at : and because the man was reputed by me to be very intelligent and wary, I repented that I was not there, and began from that time forward, as oft as I met with any one of the Copernican persuasion, to demand of them if they had been always of the same judgment. Of as many as I examined, I found not so much as one who told me not that he had been a long time of the contrary opinion, but to have changed it for this, as convinced by the strength of the reasons proving the same ; and afterwards questioning them one by one, to see whether they were well possessed of the reasons of the other side, I found them all to be very ready and perfect in them, so that I could not truly say that they took this opinion out of ignorance, vanity, or to shew the acuteness of their wits. On the contrary, of as many of the Peripatetics and Ptolomeans as I have asked (and out of curiosity I have talked with many) what pains they had taken in the book of Copernicus, I found very few that had so much as superficially perused it, but of those who I thought had understood the same, not one : and, moreover, I have inquired amongst the followers of the Peripatetic doctrine, if ever any of them had held the contrary opinion, and likewise found none that


had. Whereupon, considering that there was no man who followed the opinion of Copernicus that bad not been first on the contrary side, and that was not very well acquainted with the reasons of Aristotle and Ptolemy, and, on the contrary, there was not one of the followers of Ptolemy that had ever been of the judgment of Copernicus, and had left that to embrace this of Aristotle ;-considering, I say, these things, I began to think that one who leaveth an opinion imbued with his milk and followed by very many, to take up another, owned by very few and denied by all the schools, and that really seems a great paradox, must needs have been moved, not to say forced, by more powerful reasons. For this cause I became very curious to dive, as they say, into the bottom of this business."

It is mentioned by Hume, that Harvey was treated with great contumely on account of his discovery of the circulation of the blood, and in consequence lost his practice. An eloquent writer in the 94th Number of the Edinburgh Review, when speaking of the treatment of Harvey, observes, that " the discoverer of the circulation of the blood-a discovery which, if measured by its consequences on physiology and medicine, was the greatest ever made since physic was cultivated-suffers no diminution of his Reputation in our day, from the incredulity with which his doctrine was received by some, the effrontery with which it was claimed by others, or the knavery with which it was attributed to former physiologists by those who could not deny and would not praise it. The very names of these envious and dishonest enemies of Harvey are scarcely remembered ; and the honour of this great discovery now rests, beyond all dispute, with the great philosopher who made it." This shews that Harvey, in his day, was treated exactly as Dr Gall has been in ours ; and if Phrenology be true, these or similar terms may one day be applied by posterity to him and his present opponents.

Again, Professor Playfair, with reference to the discovery of the composition of light by Sir Isaac Newton, says :


" Though the discovery now communicated had every thing to recommend it which can arise from what is great, new, and singular ; though it was not a theory or a system of opinions, but the generalization of facts made known by experiments ; and though it was brought forward in the most simple and unpretending form ; a host of enemies appeared, each eager to obtain the unfortunate pre-eminence of being the first to attack conclusions which the unanimous voice of posterity was to confirm. . . . Among them one of the first was Father Pardies, who wrote against the experiments, and what he was pleased to call the hypothesis, of Newton. A satisfactory and calm reply convinced him of his mistake, which he had the candour very readily to acknowledge. A countryman of his, Mariotte, was more difficult to be reconciled, and, though very conversant with experiment, appears never to have succeeded in repeating the experiments of Newton."1 ' A farther account of the hostility with which Newton's discoveries were received by his contemporaries, will be found in his Life by Brewster, p. 171.

Here, then, we see that persecution, condemnation, and ridicule, awaited Galileo, Harvey, and Newton, for announcing three great scientific discoveries. In mental philosophy the conduct of mankind has been similar.

Aristotle and Descartes " may be quoted, to shew the good and bad fortune of new 'doctrines. The ancient antagonists of Aristotle caused his books to be burned ; but in the time of Francis I. the writings of Ranrus against Aristotle were similarly treated, his adversaries were declared heretics, and, under pain of being sent to the galleys, philosophers were prohibited from combating his opinions. At the present day, the philosophy of Aristotle is no longer spoken of. Descartes was persecuted for teaching the doctrine of innate ideas ; he was accused of atheism, though he had written on the existence of God ; and his books were burned by order of the University of Paris. Shortly after-

1 Encyc. Brit. i. 551.


wards, however, the same learned body adopted the doctrine of innate ideas ; and when Locke and Condillac attacked it, the cry of materialism and fatalism was turned against them. Thus the same opinions have been considered at one time as dangerous because they were new, and at another as useful because they were ancient. What is to be inferred from this, but that man deserves to be pitied ; that the opinions of contemporaries on the truth or falsehood, and the good or bad consequences, of a new doctrine, are always to be suspected ; and that the only object of an author ought to be to point out the truth."1

To these extracts many more might be added of a similar nature ; but enough has been said to demonstrate, that, by the ordinary practice of mankind, great discoveries are treated with hostility, and their authors with hatred and contempt, or at least with neglect, by the generation to which they are originally published.

If, therefore, Phrenology be a discovery at all, and especially if it be also important, it must of necessity come into collision, on the most weighty topics, with the opinions of men hitherto venerated as authorities in physiology and the philosophy of mind ; and, according to the custom of the world, nothing but opposition, ridicule, and abuse, could be expected on its first announcement. If we are to profit, however, by the lessons of history, we ought, after surveying these mortifying examples of human weakness and wickedness, to dismiss from our minds every prejudice against the subject before us, founded on its hostile reception by men of established reputation of the present day. He who does not perceive that, if Phrenology shall prove to be true, posterity will regard the contumelies heaped by the philosophers of this generation on its founders as another dark speck in the history of scientific discovery,-and who does not feel anxious to avoid all participation in this ungenerous treatment,-has reaped no moral improvement from the re-

1 Dr Spurzheim's Philosophical Principles of Phrenology, p. 97.


cords of intolerance which we have now contemplated : But every enlightened individual will say, Let us dismiss prejudice, and calmly listen to evidence and reason ; let us not encounter even the chance of adding our names to the melancholy list of the enemies of mankind, by refusing, on the strength of mere prejudice, to be instructed in the new doctrines submitted to our consideration ; let us inquire, examine, and decide.

These, I trust, are the sentiments of the reader ; and on the faith" of their being so, I shall proceed, in the second place, to state very briefly the principles of Phrenology.

It is a notion inculcated-often indirectly no doubt, but not less strongly-by highly venerated teachers of intellectual philosophy, that we are acquainted with Mind and Body as two distinct and separate entities. The anatomist treats of the body, and the logician and moral philosopher of the mind, as if they were separate subjects of investigation, either not at all, or only in- a remote and unimportant degree, connected with each other. In common society, too, men speak of the dispositions and faculties of the mind, without thinking of their close connexion with the body.

But the human mind, as it exists in this world, cannot, by itself, become an object of philosophical investigation. Placed in a material world, it cannot act or be acted upon, but through the medium of an organic apparatus. The soul sparkling in the eye of beauty transmits its sweet influence to a kindred spirit only through the filaments of an optic nerve ; and even the bursts of eloquence which flow from the lips of the impassioned orator, when mind appears to transfuse itself almost directly into mind, emanate from, and are transmitted to, corporeal beings, through a voluminous apparatus of organs. If we trace the mind's progress from the cradle to the grave, every appearance which it presents reminds us of this important truth. In earliest life the mental powers are feeble as the body ; but when manhood conies, they glow with energy, and expand with power ; till


at last the chill of age makes the limbs totter, and the fancy's fires decay.

Nay, not only the great stages of our infancy, vigour, and decline, but the experience of every hour, remind us of our alliance with the dust. The lowering clouds and stormy sky depress the spirits and enerve the mind ;-after short and stated intervals of toil, our wearied faculties demand repose in sleep ;-famine or disease is capable of levelling the proudest energies with the earth ;-and even the finest portion of our compound being, the Mind itself, apparently becomes diseased, and, leaving nature's course, flies to self-destruction to escape from wo.

These phenomena must be referred to the organs with which, in this life, the mind is connected : but if the organs exert so great an effect over the mental manifestations, no system of philosophy can be looked on as complete, which neglects their influence, and treats the thinking principle as a disembodied spirit. The phrenologist, therefore, regards man as he exists in this world ; and desires to investigate the laws which regulate the connexion between the mind and its organs, but without attempting to discover the essence of either, or the manner in which they are united.

The popular notion, that we are acquainted with mind unconnected with matter, is therefore founded on an illusion. In point of fact, we do not in this life know mind as one entity, and body as another ; but we are acquainted only with the compound existence of mind and body. A few remarks will place this doctrine in its proper light.

In the first place, we are not conscious of the existence of the organs by means of which the mind operates in this . life, and, in consequence, many acts appear to us to be purely mental, which experiment and observation prove in-contestibly to depend on corporeal organs. For example, in stretching out or withdrawing the arm, we are conscious of an act of the will, and of the consequent movement of the arm, but not of the existence of the apparatus by means of which our volition is carried into execution. Experi-


ment and observation, however, demonstate the existence of bones of the arm curiously articulated and adapted to motion ; of muscles endowed with the power of contraction ; and of three sets of nervous fibres all running in one sheath

-one communicating feeling, a second exciting motion, and a third believed to convey to the mind information of the state of the muscles, when in action ; all which organs, except the nerve of feeling, must combine and act harmoniously before the arm can be moved and regulated by the will. All that a person uninstructed in anatomy knows, is, that he wills the motion, and that it takes place ; the whole act appears to him to be purely mental, and only the arm. or thing moved, is conceived to be corporeal. Nevertheless, it is positively established by anatomical and physiological researches that this conclusion is erroneous-that the act is not purely mental, but is accomplished by the instrumentality of the various organs now enumerated. In like manner, every action of vision involves a certain state of the optic nerve, and every act of hearing a certain state of the tympanum ; yet of the existence and functions of these organs we obtain, by means of consciousness, no knowledge whatever.

Now, I go one step farther in the same path, and state, that every act of the will, every flight of imagination, every glow of affection, and every effort of the understanding, in this life, is performed by means of the cerebral organs, unknown to us through consciousness, but the existence of which may be demonstrated by experiment and observation ; in other words, that the brain is the organ of the mind

-the material condition without which no mental act is possible in the present world. The greatest physiologists admit this proposition without hesitation. The celebrated Dr Cullen of Edinburgh states, that " the part of our body more immediately connected with the mind, and therefore more especially concerned in every affection of the intellectual functions, is the common origin of the nerves ; which I shall, in what follows, speak of under the appellation of


the brain." Again, the same author says : " We cannot doubt that the operations of our intellect always depend upon certain motions taking place in the brain." The late Dr James Gregory, when speaking of memory, imagination, and judgment, observes, that " Although at first sight these faculties appear to be so purely mental as to have no connexion with the body, yet certain diseases which obstruct them prove, that a certain state of the brain is necessary to their proper exercise, and that the brain is the primary organ of their internal powers." The great physiologist of Germany, Blumenbach, says : " That the mind is closely connected with the brain, as the material condition of mental phenomena, is demonstrated by our consciousness, and by the mental disturbances which ensue upon affections of the brain." l According to Magendie, a celebrated French physiologist, " the brain is the material instrument of thought : this is proved by a multitude of experiments and facts."

" I readily concur," says Mr Abernethy, " in the proposition, that the brain of animals ought to be regarded as the organization by which the percipient principle becomes variously affected. First, because, in the senses of sight, hearing, &c. I see distinct organs for the production of each perception. Secondly, because the brain is larger and more complicated in proportion as the variety of the affections of the percipient principle is increased. Thirdly, because disease and injuries disturb and annul particular faculties and affections without impairing others. And, fourthly, because it seems more reasonable to me to suppose that whatever is perceptive may be variously affected by means of vital actions transmitted through a diversity of organization, than to suppose that such variety depends upon original differences in the nature of the percipient principle."

" If the mental processes," asks Mr Lawrence, " be not the functions of the brain, what is its office ? In animals which possess only a small part of the human cerebral struc-

1 Elliotson's translation of Blumenbach's Physiology, 4th edit. p. 196.


ture, sensation exists, and in many cases is more acute than in man. What employment shall we find for all that man possesses over and above this portion-for the large and prodigiously-developed human hemispheres I Are we to believe that these serve only to round the figure of the organ, or to fill the cranium?" l And in another place he says :- " In conformity with the views already explained respecting the mental part of our being, I refer the varieties of moral feeling, and of capacity for knowledge and reflection, to those diversities of cerebral organization which are indicated by, and correspond to, the differences in the shape of the skull." 2

Dr Mason Good, speaking of intellect, sensation,' and muscular motion, says :-" All these diversities of vital energy are now well known to be dependent on the organ of the brain, as the instrument of the intellectual powers, and the source of the sensific and motory ; though, from the close connexion and synchronous action of various other organs with the brain, and especially the thoracic and abdominal viscera, such diversities were often referred to several o* the latter in earlier ages, and before anatomy had traced them satisfactorily to the brain as their fountain-head. And of so high an antiquity is this erroneous hypothesis, that it has not only spread itself through every climate on the globe, but still keeps a hold on the colloquial language of every people ; and hence the heart, the liver, the spleen, the reins, and the bowels, generally are, among all nations, regarded, either literally or figuratively, as so many seats of mental faculties or moral feeling. . . . The study of anatomy, however, has corrected the loose and confused ideas of mankind upon this subject ; and while it distinctly shews us that many of the organs popularly referred to as the seat of sensation, do, and must, from the peculiarity of their nervous connexion with the brain, necessarily participate in the feelings and faculties thus generally ascribed to them, it also demonstrates that the primary source of these attri-

1 Lectures on Phyinoloyy, &c. Lect. 4. 2 Ibid. Sect. ii. ch. 8.


butes, the quarter in which they originate, or which chiefly influences them, is the brain itself." '

Dr Neil Arnott, in his Elements of Physics, writes thus : -" The laws of mind which man can discover by reason, are not laws of independent mind, but of mind in connection with body, and influenced by the bodily condition. It has been believed by many, that the nature of mind separate from body, is to be at once all-knowing and intelligent. But mind connected with body can only acquire knowledge slowly, through the bodily organs of sense, and more or less perfectly according as these organs and the central brain are perfect. A human being born blind and deaf, and therefore remaining dumb, as in the noted case of the boy Mitchell, grows up closely to resemble an automaton ; and an originally misshapen or deficient brain causes idiocy for life. Childhood, maturity, dotage, which have such differences of bodily powers, have corresponding differences of mental faculty : and as no two bodies, so no two minds, in their external manifestation, are quite alike. Fever, or a blow on the head, will change the most gifted individual into a maniac, causing the lips of virgin innocence to utter the most revolting obscenity, and those of pure religion to speak the most horrible blasphemy : and most cases of madness and eccentricity can now be traced to a peculiar state of the brain." (Introduction, p. xxiii.) Let it be observed, that most of these authors are not among the supporters of Phrenology.2

The fact that the mental phenomena of which we are conscious are the result of mind and brain acting together, is farther established by the effects of swooning, of compression of the brain, and of sleep. In profound sleep consciousness is entirely suspended : this fact is explicable on the principle of the organ of the mind being then in a state of

1 Good's Study of Medicine, 2d edit. iv. 3, 4.

2 Additional authorities are cited by Mr Wildsmith, in his excellent Inquiry concerning the Relative Connexion which subsists between the Mind and the Brain, London, 1828,


repose ; but it is altogether inconsistent with the idea of the immaterial principle, or the mind itself, being capable of acting independently of the brain-for if this were the case, thinking could never be interrupted by any material cause. In a swoon, blood is rapidly withdrawn from the brain, and consciousness is for the moment obliterated. So also, where part of the brain has been laid bare by any injury inflicted on the skull, it has been found that consciousness could be suspended at the pleasure of the surgeon, by merely pressing on the brain with his fingers, and that it could be restored by withdrawing the pressure. A few such cases may be cited :-

M. Richerand had a patient whose brain was exposed in consequence of disease of the skull. One day, in washing of the purulent matter, he chanced to press with more than usual force ; and instantly the patient, who, the moment before, had answered his questions with perfect correctness, stopped short in the middle of a sentence, and became altogether insensible. As the pressure gave her no pain, it was repeated thrice, and always with the same result. She uniformly recovered her faculties the moment the pressure was taken off. M. Richerand mentions also the case of an individual who was trepanned for a fracture of the skull, and whose faculties and consciousness became weak in proportion as the pus so accumulated under the dressings as to occasion pressure of the brain.1 A man at the battle of Waterloo had a small portion of his skull beaten in upon the brain and became quite unconscious and almost lifeless ; but Mr Cooper having raised up the depressed portion of bone, the patient immediately arose, dressed himself, became perfectly rational, and recovered rapidly.2 Professor Chapman of Philadelphia mentions in his Lectures, that he saw an individual with his skull perforated and the brain exposed, who used to submit himself to the same experiment of pressure as that performed on Richerand's patient, and who was

1 Nouveaux Elément de Physiologie, 7th edit., ii. 195-6.

2 Hennen's Principles of Military Surgery.


exhibited by the late Professor Wistar to his class. The man's intellect and moral faculties disappeared when pressure was applied to the brain : they were literally " held under the thumb," and could be restored at pleasure to their full activity.1 A still more remarkable case is that of a person named Jones, recorded by Sir Astley Cooper. This man was deprived of consciousness, by being wounded in the head, while on board a vessel in the Mediterranean. In this state of insensibility he remained for several months at Gibraltar, whence he was transmitted to Deptford, and subsequently to St Thomas's Hospital, London. Mr Cline, the surgeon, found a portion of the skull depressed, trepanned him, and removed the depressed part of the bone. Three hours after this operation he sat up in bed, sensation and volition returned, and in four days he was able to get up and converse. The last circumstance he remembered was the capture of a prize in the Mediterranean thirteen months before.-A young man at Hartford, in the United States of America, was rendered insensible by a fall, and had every appearance of being in a dying condition. Dr Brigham removed more than a gill of clotted blood from beneath the skull ; upon which " the man immediately spoke, soon recovered his mind entirely, and is now, six weeks after the accident, in good health both as to mind and body."2

The question may present itself, Why did these injuries, which were inflicted only on a small portion of the brain, induce general insensibility, instead of disturbing only a single faculty ? Answer.-The brain is soft and pulpy ; and is very full of bloodvessels, which during life contain a large quantity of blood. It is enveloped in air-tight membranes, so that it approaches very closely to the condition of a fluid mass contained within a hollow sphere. By the law which

1 Principles of Medicine, by Samuel Jackson, M.D.

2 Remarks on the Influence of Mental Cultivation, &c. upon Health. By Amariah Brigliam, M.D. 2d edit. p. 23. Boston, U. S. 1833. Several of the cases in the text have already been collected by this very intelligent writer.


regulates the pressure of fluids, force applied to any portion of such a mass, diffuses itself equally over the whole of it ; and every part is pressed with the same degree of force. This law applies to the brain ; und all the faculties are suspended, because all the brain is compressed. If a blow cut the skull and integuments, so as to allow the blood to flow outwardly, and the brain to protrude, general insensibility will not ensue.

PINEL relates a case which strikingly illustrates the connexion of the mind with the brain. " A man," says he, " engaged in a mechanical employment, and afterwards confined in the Bicêtre, experiences at regular intervals fits of madness characterized. by the following symptoms. At first there is a sensation of burning heat in the abdominal viscera, with intense thirst, and a strong constipation ; the heat gradually extends to the breast, neck, and face,-producing a flush of the complexion ; on reaching the temples, it becomes still greater, and is accompanied by very strong and frequent pulsations in the temporal arteries, which seem as if about to burst : finally, the nervous affection arrives at the brain ; the patient is then seized with an irresistible propensity to shed blood ; and if there be a sharp instrument within reach, he is apt to sacrifice to his fury the first person who presents himself."1 The same writer speaks of another insane patient, whose manners were remarkably mild and reserved during his lucid intervals, but whose character was totally altered by the periodical morbid excitement of his brain ; for, says Pinel, " on the return of the paroxysm, particularly when marked by a certain redness of the face, excessive heat in the head, and a violent thirst, his walk is precipitate, his look is full of audacity, and he experiences the most violent inclination to provoke those who approach him, and to fight with them furiously."2 Dr Richy has recorded the case of a Madagascar negro, who had an attack of an intensely ferocious delirium, in consequence

1 Pinel, surr l'Aliénation Mentale, p. 157, § 160.

2 Op. cit. p. 101. § 116.


of a wound on the head near the lower part of the left parietal bone. When recovering, he was calmer, and less blood-thirsty ; but an overpressure of his bandage on the wound brought back his furious paroxysms.1

That the brain is the organ of the mind, is strongly confirmed by the phenomena observed when it is exposed to view, in consequence of the removal of a part of the skull. Sir Astley Cooper mentions the case of a young gentleman who was brought to him after losing a portion of his skull just above the eyebrow. " On examining the head," says Sir Astley, " I distinctly saw the pulsation of the brain ; it was regular and slow ; but, at this time, he was agitated by some opposition to his wishes, and directly the blood was sent with increased force to the brain, and the pulsation became frequent and violent. If, therefore," continues Sir Astley, " you omit to keep the mind free from agitation, your other means will be unavailing" in the treatment of injuries of the brain.2

In a case of a similar description, which fell under the notice of Blumenbach, that physiologist observed the brain to sink whenever the patient was asleep, and to swell again with blood the moment he awoke.3

A third case is reported by Dr Pierquin, as having been observed by him in one of the hospitals of Montpelier, in the year 1821. The patient was a female, who had lost a large portion of her scalp, skull, and dura mater, so that a corresponding portion of the brain was subject to inspection. When she was in a dreamless sleep, her brain was motionless, and lay within the cranium. When her sleep was imperfect, and she was agitated by dreams, her brain moved, and protruded without the cranium, forming cerebral hernia. In vivid dreams, reported as such by herself, the protrusion was considerable ; and when she was perfectly awake, especially if engaged in active thought or sprightly

1 Journal de la Société Phrénologigue de Paris, No. 2. p. 171.

2 Sir A. Cooper's Lectures on Surgery, by Tyrrel, i. 279.

3 Elliotson's Blumenbach, 4th edit. p. 283.



conversation, it was still greater,1 A writer in the Medico-Chirurgical Review, after alluding to this case, mentions that many years ago he had " frequent opportunities of witnessing similar phenomena in a robust young man, who lost a considerable portion of his skull by an accident which had almost proved mortal. When excited by pain, fear, or anger, his brain protruded greatly, so as sometimes to disturb the dressings, which were necessarily applied loosely ; and it throbbed tumultuously, in accordance with the arterial pulsations."2

The cause of these appearances obviously was, that the brain, like the muscles and other organs of the body, is more copiously supplied with blood when in a state of activity than while at rest ; and that when the cerebral bloodvessels were filled, the volume of the brain was augmented, and the protrusion above noticed took place.

On 15th May 1839, I saw, in New York, a girl of eight years of age, who four years before that time had fallen from a height of two stories, and fractured her skull extensively at the crown. Dr Matt removed a large portion of the two parietal bones, and found the brain and pia mater uninjured. I saw the pieces of the skull which had been removed. They might be about three inches by three and a half in superficial extent. The external integuments were replaced, and re-united over the wound. On placing my hand on the head, I felt that the skull was absent over the organs of Self-Esteem and Love of Approbation.; also over a small part of Conscientiousness, and the posterior margin of Firmness. Her father, James Gmapes, Esq. mentioned that before the accident, he considered her rather dull. Her mother did not concur in this opinion, but both agreed that since her recovery, she had been acute, and fully equal to children of her own age in ability. Her brain is favourably developed. Her father said that when the brain was visible, he distinctly saw particular parts of

1 Annals of Phrenology, No. 1. Boston, U. S., Oct. 1833, p. 37. ' Medico-Chirurgical Review, No. 46. p. 366. Oct. 1835.


it move when the child was agitated by particular feelings.1 A very striking argument in favour of the doctrine that the brain is the organ of the mind, is found in the numerous cases in which changes of character have been produced by injuries inflicted on the head. In this way the action of the brain is sometimes so much altered, that high talents are subsequently displayed where mediocrity or even extreme dulness existed before ; in other instances, the temper from being mild and amiable becomes irritable and contentious ; while in others, again, it occasionally happens (in consequence of the injury depressing instead of exalting the tone of the brain), that talents formerly enjoyed are obscured or lost. Dr Gall refers to a case reported by Hildanus, of a boy ten years old, a portion of whose skull was accidentally driven in ; nothing was done to remedy the injury, and the boy, who had previously given promise of excellent parts, became altogether stupid, and in that condition died at the age of forty. He adds a similar case of a lad whose intellectual vivacity was destroyed by cerebral disease accompanied with fever.2 The aeronaut Blanchard had the misfortune to fall upon his head, and thenceforward his mental powers were evidently feeble ; after death Dr Gall found his brain diseased.3

Even in the Edinburgh Review, where the dependence of the mind upon the brain was formerly held to be exceedingly questionable,4 the doctrine is now admitted in all its latitude. " Almost from the first casual inspection of animal bodies," says a writer in No. 94, " the brain was regarded as an organ of primary dignity, and, more particularly in the human subject, the seat of thought and feeling, the centre of all sensation, the messenger of intellect, the presiding organ of the bodily frame." " AU this superiority (of man over the brutes), all these faculties which elevate and dig-

1 See a more particular report of this case in the present volume vane 366-7.
* Gall, ii. p. 172. s Id- p 1?3
4 See No. 48. Article 10 ; also No. 88, cited below.


nify him, this reasoning power, this moral sense, these capacities of happiness, these high aspiring hopes, are felt, and enjoyed, and manifested, by means of his superior nervous system. Its injury weakens, its imperfection limits, its destruction (humanly speaking) ends them. "

More recently one of the most esteemed medical journals, viz., The British and Foreign Medical Review, says, " We must reiterate our decided conviction that the proposition, that the brain is the organ of the mind, forms peculiarly a principle of phrenological science, and that, however general the assent yielded to the same in the present day, even by parties who would disdain to be considered phrenologists, it is not the less a principle strictly phrenological. Gall was the first who interrogated nature, in all her departments, to ascertain the fallacy or soundness of the principle in question ; and he was the first successfully to investigate certain facts that had seemed to militate against the proposition, and to show their entire accordance with the general rule. Hence we conceive, that whoever admits the function of the brain to be to develope the attributes of the conscious principle, is, pro tanto, a phrenologist, and a disciple of Gall. In fine, Phrenology, as a science, has, in our estimation, established, by the method of induction, the soundness of its first principle, that the brain is the organ of the mind.''''1

Besides referring to these facts and authorities, I may remark, that consciousness localizes the mind in the head, and gives us a full conviction that it is situated there ; but consciousness does not reveal what substance is in the interior of the skull. It does not tell whether the mind occupies an airy dome, a richly furnished mansion, one apartment, or many ; or in what state or condition it resides in its appointed place. It is only on opening the head that we discover that the skull incloses the brain ; and then, by

1 The objection that this doctrine leads to Materialism is considered in vol. ii., page 407.

Additional evidence that the brain is the organ of the mind will be found in the Appendix, No. I,


an act of the understanding, we infer that the mind must have been connected with it in its operations.

It is worthy of observation also, that the popular notions of the independence of the mind on the body are modern, and the offspring of philosophical theories that have sprung up chiefly since the days of Locke. In Shakspeare, and our older writers, the word " brain" is frequently used as implying the mental functions ; and, even in the present day, the language of the vulgar, which is less affected by philosophical theories than that of polite scholars, is more in accordance with nature. A stupid person is vulgarly called a numbskull, a thick-head ; or said to be addle-pated, badly furnished in the upper-story ; while a clever person is said to be strong-headed or long-headed, to have plenty of brains ; a madman is called wrong in the head, touched in the noddle, &c. When a catarrh chiefly affects the head, we complain of stupidity, because we have such a cold in the head.1

The principle which I have so much insisted on, that we are not conscious of the existence and functions of the organs by which the mind acts, explains the source of the metaphysical notion which has affected modern language, that we know the mind as an entity by itself. The acts which really result from the combined action of the mind and its organs, appear, previously to anatomical and pathological investigation, to be produced by the mind exclusively ; and hence have arisen the neglect and contempt with which the organs have been treated, and the ridicule cast upon those who have endeavoured to shew their importance in the philosophy of mind. After the explanations given above, the reader will appreciate the real value of the following statement by Lord Jeffrey, in his strictures on the second edition of this work, in the 88th number of the Edinburgh Review. His words are: "The truth, we do not scruple to say it, is, that there is not the smallest reason for supposing that the mind ever operates through the

1 Elliotson's Blumenbach, p. 66.


agency of any material organs, except in its perception of material objects, or in the spontaneous movements of the body which it inhabits." And, " There is not the least reason to suppose that any of our faculties, but those which connect us with external objects, or direct the movements of our bodies, act by material organs at all :" that is to say, feeling, fancy, and reflection, are acts so purely mental, that they have no connection with organization.

Long before Lord Jeffrey penned these sentences, however, Dr Thomas Brown had written, even in the Edinburgh "Review, that " memory, imagination, and judgment, may be all set to sleep by a few grains of a very common and simple drug ;" and Dr Cullen, Blumenbach, Dr Gregory, Magendie, and in short all physiological authors of eminence, had published positive statements, that the mental faculties are connected with the brain.

Lord Brougham also, in his Discourse of Natural Theology, argues in favour of the mind's independence of matter in this life, and adduces in support of his position the phenomena of dreaming, and the allegation that " unless some unusual and violent accident interferes, such as a serious illness or a fatal contusion, the ordinary course of life presents the mind and the body running courses widely different, and in great part of the time in opposite directions." (P. 120.) But Mr Stewart has furnished a satisfactory answer to this remark. " In the case of old men," says he, " it is generally found that a decline of the faculties keeps pace with the decay of bodily health and vigour. The few exceptions that occur to the universality of this fact, only prove that there are some diseases fatal to life, which do not injure those parts of the body with which the intellectual operations are more immediately connected."1 Lord Brougham, moreover, is glaringly inconsistent with himself. He first maintains that the mind is wholly independent of the body, and then admits that " a serious illness" is capable of impairing its

1 Outlines of Moral Philosophy, p. 233.


power. Yet how, on his hypothesis, can it be affectable by this any more than by the slightest disease ?

It is a popular opinion, that in pulmonary consumption, and other lingering diseases attended with waste of the body, the mind nevertheless continues to act with entire vigour up to the very day or hour of dissolution. This notion, if true, would militate against the doctrine of the mind being affected by the state of the organs ; but it is really unfounded. There is a difference between derangement of an organ and mere weakness in its functions. In pulmonary consumption the lungs alone are disorganized ;-the brain and other organs, remaining entire in their structure, are sound although weakened in their functions. The mind in such patients, therefore, does not become disordered ; but its vigour is unquestionably impaired. In the case of the patient's legs, the bones and muscles remaining entire, he can -walk : In health, however, he could have accomplished a journey of many miles without fatigue, whereas he cannot in disease do more than cross his bed-room. It might certainly be said that he could walk to the last, but it could not with truth be maintained that his power of perambulation was as great at his death as in health ; and so it is with the brain and the mind.

What, then, does the proposition that the brain is the organ of the mind imply ? Let us take the case of the eye as somewhat analogous. If the eye be the organ of vision, it will be conceded, first, That sight cannot be enjoyed without its instrumentality ; secondly, That every act of vision must be accompanied by a corresponding state of the organ, and, vice versa, that every change of condition in the organ must influence sight ; and, thirdly, That the perfection of vision will be in relation to the perfection of the organ. In like manner, if the brain be the organ of the mind, it will follow that the mind does not act in this life independently of its organ-and hence, that every emotion and judgment of which we are conscious, is the result of the mind and its organ acting together ; secondly, that every mental affection


must be accompanied by a corresponding state of the organ, and, vice versa, every state of the organ must be attended by a certain condition of the mind ; and, thirdly, that the perfection of the manifestations of the mind will bear a relation to the perfection, of its organ. These propositions appear to be incontrovertible, and to follow as necessary consequences from the -simple fact that the mind acts by means of organs. But if they be well-founded, how important a study does that of the organs of the mind become ! It is the study of the" mind itself, in the only condition in which it is known to us ; and the very- fact that in past ages the mind has been studied without reference to organization, accounts for the melancholy truth, that, independently of Phrenology, no mental philosophy suited to practical purposes exists.

Holding it then as established by the evidence of the most esteemed physiologists, and also by observation, that the brain is the organ of the mind, and that the state of the brain influences that of the mental powers, the next question which presents itself is, Whether the mind in every act employs the whole brain as one organ, or whether separate mental faculties are connected with distinct portions of the brain as their respective organs? The following considerations may throw light on this question.

lst, In all ascertained instances, different functions are never performed by the same organ, but the reverse ; each function has an organ for itself: the stomach, for instance, digests food, the liver secretes bile, the heart propels the blood, the eyes see, the ears hear, the tongue tastes, and the nose smells. Nay, on analyzing these examples, it is found that wherever the function is compound, each element of it is performed by means of a distinct organ : thus, to accomplish the lingual duties, there is one nerve whose office is to move the tongue, another nerve whose duty it is to communicate the ordinary sense of feeling to the tongue, and a third nerve which conveys the sensation of taste. A similar combination of nerves takes place in the hands, arms, and


other parts of the body which contain voluntary muscles : one nerve gives motion, another bestows feeling, while a third conveys to the mind a knowledge of the state of the muscle ; and, except in the case of the tongue, all these ' nerves are blended in one common sheath.

In the economy of the human frame, there is no ascertained example of one nerve performing two functions, such as feeling and communicating motion, or seeing and hearing, or tasting and smelling. The spinal marrow consists of three double columns : the anterior column of each lateral division is for motion, the posterior for sensation, and the middle for respiration.1 In the case of the brain, therefore, analogy would lead us to expect, that if reasoning be an act essentially different from loving or hating, there will be one organ for reasoning, another for loving, and a third for hating.

2dly? It is an undisputed truth, that the various mental powers of man appear in succession, and, as a general rule, that the reflecting or reasoning faculties are those which arrive latest at perfection. In the child, the emotions of fear and of love appear before that of veneration ; and the capacity of observing the existence and qualities of external objects arrives much sooner at maturity than that of abstract reasoning. Daily observation shews that the brain undergoes a corresponding change ; whereas we have no evidence that the immaterial principle varies in its powers from year to year. If every faculty of the mind be connected with the whole brain, this successive development of mental powers is utterly at variance with what we should expect a priori ; because, if the general organ is fitted for manifesting with success one mental faculty, it ought to be equally so for manifesting all. On the contrary, observation shews that dif-

1 The function of the middle column is disputed, but the connection of the others with sensation and motion is admitted by the best physiologists.

2 Most of the following arguments are taken from Dr Andrew Combe's Observations on Dr Barclay's Objections to Phrenology, published in the Transactions of the Phrenological Society (Edinburgh, 1824), page 413.


ferent parts of the brain are really developed at different periods of life, corresponding with the successive evolution of the faculties. In infancy, according to Chaussier, the cerebellum forms one-fifteenth of the encephalic mass, and, in adult age, from one-sixth to one-eighth ; its size being thus in strict accordance with the energy of the sexual propensity, of which it is the organ. In childhood, the middle part of the forehead generally predominates ; in later life, the upper lateral parts become more prominent-which facts also are in strict accordance with the periods of unfolding of the observing and reasoning powers.

3dly, Genius is almost always partial, which it ought not to be if the organ of the mind were single. A genius for poetry, for mechanics, for drawing, for music, or for mathematics, sometimes appears at a very early age in individuals who.'in regard to all other pursuits, are mere ordinary men, and who, with every effort, can never attain to any thing above mediocrity.

4thfy, The phenomena of dreaming are at variance with the supposition of the mind manifesting all its faculties by means of a single organ ; while they are quite consistent with, and explicable by, that of a plurality of organs. In dreaming, the mind experiences numerous vivid emotions,-such as fear, anger, and affection,-arising, succeeding one another, and departing, without control from the intellectual powers ; or it is filled with a thousand varied conceptions, sometimes connected and rational, but more frequently disjointed and absurd, and all differing widely from the waking operations of the mind, in wanting consistency and sense. These phenomena harmonize remarkably with the doctrine of a variety of faculties and organs, some of which, being active, communicate those disordered ideas and feelings that constitute a dream, while the repose of others permits the disordered action which characterizes the pictures formed by the fancy in sleep.

Were the organ of mind single, it is clear that all the faculties should be asleep or awake to the same extent at the


same time ; or, in other words, that no such thing as dreaming could take place.

5thly, The admitted phenomena of partial idiocy and partial insanity, are so plainly and strongly in contradiction to the notion of a single organ of mind, that Pinel himself, no friend to Phrenology, asks if they can be reconciled with such a conception.

Partial idiocy is that state in which an individual manifests one or several powers of the mind with an ordinary degree of energy, while he is deprived to a greater or less extent of the power of manifesting all the others. Pinel, Haslam, Rush, Esquirol, and, in short, every writer on insanity, speak of the partial development of certain mental powers in idiots ; and Rush, in particular, alludes not only to the powers of intellect, but also to the. partial possession of the moral faculties. Some idiots, he observes, are as remarkable for correct moral feelings as some great geniuses are for the reverse. Foderé, in his Traité du Goitre et de la Crétinisme, thus speaks, p. 133 :-" It is remarked, that, by an inexplicable singularity, some of these individuals (cretins), endowed with so weak minds, are born with a particular talent for copying paintings, for rhyming, or for music. I have known several who taught themselves to play passably on the organ and harpsichord ; others who understood, without ever having had a master, the repairing of watches, and the construction of some pieces of mechanism." He adds, that these powers could not be attributed to the intellect, " for these individuals not only could not read books which treated of the principles of mechanics, but ils étaient déroutés lorsqu'on en parlait, et ne se perfectionnaient jamais." It must be observed also, that these unfortunate individuals differ very much in the kind as well as quantity of mental power possessed. One, for example, is all kindness and good-nature, another quarrelsome and mischievous ; or one has a lively perception of harmony in music, while another has none. An instance is given by Pinel of an idiot girl who manifested a most wonderful propensity to imitate


whatever she heard or saw, but who displayed no intellectual faculty in a perceptible degree, and never attached an idea to any sound she uttered. Dr Rush particularizes one man who was remarkable for his religious feelings, although exceedingly deficient in the other moral sentiments, and in understanding; and, among the cretins, many are to be found who scarcely manifest any other faculty of the mind except Amativeness.

It ought farther to be observed, that the characteristic features of each particular case are strictly permanent. The idiot, who to-day manifests the faculty of Tune, or the feeling of Benevolence, of Veneration, or of Self-esteem, will not to-morrow, or in a year, exhibit a different kind of predominant manifestations. Were deficiency of the brain as a single organ the cause of idiocy, these phenomena ought not to appear ; for, being able to manifest one faculty, it ought, according to .the circumstances in which the individual is placed, be equally able to manifest all others whose activity may be required, and thus the character of the idiocy ought to change with every passing event-which it never does. Foderé calls these facts " inexplicable singularities ;" and, no doubt, on his theory they truly are so. To the phrenologist, however, they offer no difficulty for they are in perfect harmony with his views. The difference in the kind of powers manifested in cases of partial idiocy-between the capacity for mechanics, for instance, and the sentiment of Veneration, Self-esteem, or Benevolence-is as great as between the sensations excited by a sound and an odour. To infer, therefore, that one organ serves for the manifestation of all these faculties, is really much the same, in point of logic, as to suppose all the external senses to have only one organic apparatus, in spite of the fact of many individuals being blind who are not deaf, or deaf and not blind.

Partial insanity, or that state in which one or more faculties of the mind are deranged, while the integrity of the remainder is unaffected, is known by the name of monomania,


and appears equally with the former to exclude the possibility of one organ manifesting all the mental faculties ; for the argument constantly recurs, that if the organ be sufficiently sound to manifest one faculty in its perfect state, it ought to be equally capable of manifesting all-which, however, is known to be in direct opposition to fact. On this subject, I shall confine myself to the statement of a single instance, merely in illustration.

Of folie raisonnante Pinel thus speaks :-" Hospitals for the insane are never without some example of mania marked by acts of extravagance, or even of fury, with a kind of judgment preserved in all its integrity, if we judge of it by the conversation : the lunatic gives the most just and precise answers to the questions of the curious ; no incoherence of ideas is discernible ; he reads and writes letters as if his understanding were perfectly sound ; and yet, by a singular contrast, he tears in pieces his clothes and bed-covers, and always finds some plausible reason to justify his wandering and his fury. This sort of mania is so far from rare, that the vulgar name of folie raisonnante has been given to it.5'- P. 93. Here, again, the difficulty recurs of reconciling such facts with the idea of one organ executing all the functions of the mind. How comes that organ to be able to manifest in a sound state several but not all of the faculties ?

6thly, Besides the phenomena of idiocy and insanity, there is another class of facts (to which, however, I shall at present only allude) equally at variance with the supposition of a single organ of the mind-viz. partial injuries of the brain, which are said to have occurred without injury to the intellectual faculties. I merely observe, that if every part of the brain is concerned in every mental act, it appears strange that all the processes of thought should be manifested with equal effect, when a great part of the brain is injured or destroyed, as when its whole structure is sound and entire. If the fact were really as here stated, the brain would form an exception to the general laws of organic structure ; for although a part of the lungs may be sufficient to maintain


respiration, or a part of the stomach, to execute digestion, in such a way as to support life, there is no instance in which these functions have been as successfully performed by impaired organs, as they would have been by lungs and a stomach in their natural state of health and activity. The phrenologists are reduced to no strait to reconcile the occurrence of such cases with their system ; for as soon as the principle of a plurality of organs is acknowledged, the facts admit of an easy and satisfactory explanation.

7thly, Daily experience may satisfy us that the mind manifests a plurality of faculties by a plurality of organs. An individual-receives an affront in a venerable assembly, and the following mental states may present themselves simultaneously. He feels anger, yet he feels awe or respect for the persons present ; he uses reflection and restrains his wrath. These states of mind may continue to co-exist for hours. A single organ could not serve to give consciousness of indignation, to feel awe, and to practise restraint, all at the same moment ; but this is quite practicable by a plurality of organs. Indeed we are able at the same moment to manifest opposite emotions in our actions, if we employ different instruments in doing so. A man may pity the oppressed, and at the same instant burn with indignation against the oppressor. An artist may execute a drawing, and at the same instant sing a song. If one cannot compose poetry and calculate logarithms at the same moment, it is because some of the organs required in the one operation are necessary also in the other, and the same organs cannot perform two duties at once.

From the preceding considerations it appears, that any theory founded upon the notion that the brain is a single organ, is uniformly at variance with much that is ascertained to be fact in the philosophy of mind ; and that, on the other hand, the principle of a plurality of organs, while it satisfactorily explains most of the facts, is consistent with all of them. Its truth is thus almost demonstrated, not by far-fetched or pretended facts which few can verify, but by


facts which daily " obtrude themselves upon the notice of the senses." This principle, indeed, bears upon its face so much greater a degree of probability than the opposite view, that it has long since forced itself on the minds of many inquirers. " The brain is a very complicated organ," says Bonnet, " or rather an assemblage of very different organs ;"' Tissot contends that every perception has different fibres ;! and Haller and Van Swieten were of opinion that the internal senses occupy, in the brain, organs as distinct as the nerves of the external senses.3 Cabanis entertained a similar notion ;4 and so did Prochaska. Cuvier says, that " certain parts of the brain in all classes of animals are large or small, according to certain qualities of the animals ;"5 and the same eminent author admits that Gall's doctrine of the functions of the brain is nowise contradictory to the general principles of physiology.6 According to Tiedemann, " the comparative study of the actions and organization of the brain in different animals will dispel the cloud from o'er the functions devolving on its separate parts ;" and he adds, that " it is a general truth, recognised at present, that the cerebral functions of animals become more numerous and diversified, according as their brain and nervous system possess a more complicated structure."7 Soemmering trusts that we shall one day find the particular seats of the different orders of ideas. " Let the timid, therefore, take courage," says Dr Georget, " and after the example of such high authorities, fear not to commit the unpardonable crime of innovation, of passing for cranioscopists, in admitting the plurality of the faculties and the mental organs of the brain, or at least in daring to examine the subject."8 Foderé himself, a very zealous opponent of

1 Palingéntsie, i. 334. 2 Ouvres, iii. 33. 3 Van Swieten, i. 454.

2 Rapports du Physique et du Moral de l'Homme, 2de edit. i. 233-4.

5 Anatomie Comparée, torn. ii.

6 Rapport Historique sur les Progrès des Sciences Naturelles, &c. p..193, 7Anatomy of the Fotal Brain, Bennett's translation, p. 4.

8 Physiologie du Système Nerveux, i. 126.


Phrenology, after recapitulating a great many reasons similar to those given above, which had been employed by physiologists antecedent to Drs Gall and Spurzheim, for believing in a' plurality of mental organs, is constrained to admit, that " this kind of reasoning has been employed by the greater number of anatomists, from the time of Galen down to our own day, and even by the great Haller, who experienced a necessity for assigning a function to each department of the brain." Pinel also (in the article Manie in the Encyclopédie Méthodique}, after relating some cases of partial insanity, asks, whether all this collection of facts can be reconciled with the opinion of a single faculty and a single organ of the understanding \ Even in the Edinburgh Review (No. 94), Sir Charles Bell is commended for " attacking the common opinion, that a separate sensation and volition are conveyed by the same nerves," and for asserting " the different functions of different parts- of the cerebrum and cerebellum."

It is not surprising, therefore, that reflecting men were early led to imagine that particular mental powers must be connected with particular parts of the brain ; and accordingly, before the eighteenth century, when modern metaphysics sprang up, we find traces of this opinion common, not only among eminent anatomists and physiologists, but among authors on human nature in general. Burton, in his j4natomy of Melancholy, published in 1621, says, " Inner senses are three in number, so called because they be within the brain-pan, as common sense, phantasie, and memory :" of common sense he says, that " the fore part of the brain is his organ and seat ;" of phantasie or imagination, which some call ^estimative or cogitative, that " his organ is the middle cell of the brain ;" and of memory, that " his seat and organ is the back part of the brain." This was the account of the faculties given by Aristotle, and repeated, with little variation, by the writers of the middle ages. In the thirteenth century, a head divided into regions according to these opinions, was designed by Albert the Great, bishop



of Ratisbon ; and another was published by Petrus Montagnana, in 1491.' One published at Venice, in 1562, by Ludovico Dolce, in a work upon strengthening and preserving the memory, is here represented :-

In the British Museum is a chart of the universe and the elements of all sciences, in which a large head so delineated is conspicuous. It was published at Rome so lately as 1632.2

If, then, so many physiologists and others have been led to believe in a plurality of mental organs, by a perception of the contradiction and inconsistency existing between the phenomena and the supposition of the whole brain being the single organ of the mind, I cannot err much in saying, that the latter notion, far from being self-evident, appears so improbable as to require even stronger facts to prove it than the opposite view ; and that the presumptions are all in favour of a plurality of mental faculties manifesting themselves by means of a plurality of organs.

I have now endeavoured to shew, first, That the ridicule, opposition, and abuse with which Phrenology was treated

1 Gall, Sur les Fonctions du Cerveau, 8vo, Paris, 1822-1825, ii. 354-5. This work is a reprint of the physiological portion of the Anatomie et Physiologie du Système Nenettx, 4to, partly by Gall and Spurzheim, and partly by Gall alone.-See also Phren. Journ., ii, 378.

2 Elliotson's Blumenbach, p. 205.



at its first announcement, and its continued rejection by men of established reputation, whose opinions it contradicts, afford no presumption that it is untrue, for many great discoveries have met with a similar fate :-Secondly, That we are really unacquainted with the mind, as an entity distinct from the body, and that it is owing to the mind not being conscious of its organs, that metaphysicians have supposed their feelings and intellectual perceptions to be emanations of pure spirit, whereas they are the results of mind and its, organs acting in combination :-Thirdly, That the greatest anatomists and physiologists admit. the brain to be the organ of the mind, and common feeling localizes thought in the head, although it does not inform us what substance occupies the interior of the skull ; farther, that the very idea of the mind having an organ, implies that every mental act is accompanied with an affection of the organ, and vice versa, so that the true philosophy of the mind cannot be discovered without taking the influence of the organs into account at every step :-And, fourthly, That the analogy of the nerves of feeling and motion, of the five senses, and of other parts of the body, all of which perform distinct functions by separate organs-also the successive appearance of the faculties in youth, and the phenomena of partial genius, of dreaming, of partial idiocy, of monomania, and of partial injuries of the brain-furnish presumptive evidence that the mind manifests a plurality of faculties by means of a variety of organs, and exclude the supposition of a single power operating by a single organ. The next inquiry, therefore, naturally is, What effect does the condition of the organs produce on the state of the mind ? Is it indifferent whether the organs be large or small -well or ill constituted-in health or in disease 1

I submit the following facts to prove that, in other departments of organized nature, size in an organ, other conditions being the same, is a measure of power in its func-


tion; i.e. that small size indicates little power, and large size much power, when all other circumstances are alike.1

In our childhood, we have all been delighted with the fable of the old man who shewed his sons a bundle of rods, and pointed out to them how easy it was to snap one asunder, and how difficult to break the whole. The principle involved in this simple story pervades all material substances ; for example, a muscle is composed of a number of fleshy fibres, and hence it follows that each muscle will be strong in proportion to the number of fibres which enter into its composition. If nerves be composed of parts, a nerve which is composed of twenty parts must be more vigorous than one which consists of only one. To render this principle universally true, however, one condition must be observed-namely, that all the parts compared with each other, or with the whole, shall be of the same quality : for example, if the old man in the fable had presented ten twigs of wood tied up in a bundle, and desired his sons to observe how much more difficult it was to break ten than to sever one ; and if his sons, in refutation of this assertion, had presented him with a rod of iron of the same thickness as one twig, and said that it was as difficult to break that iron rod, although single, as his whole bundle of twigs, although tenfold, the answer would have been obvious, that the things compared differed in kind and quality, and that if he took ten iron rods, and tried to break them, the difficulty would be as great compared with that of severing one, as the task of breaking ten twigs of wood compared with that of breaking one. In like manner, nerves, muscles, brain, and all other parts of the body, may be sound, or they may be diseased ; they may be of a fine structure or a coarse structure ; they may be old or young ; they may be almost dissolved by the burning heat of a tropical sun, or near-

1 This subject is fully treated of by Dr Andrew Combe in an Essay on the Influence of Organic Size on Energy of Function, particularly as applied to the Organs of the external Senses and Brain, in the Phrenological Journal, vol. iv. p. 161.


ly frozen under the influence of an arctic winter ; and it would be altogether irrational to expect the influence of size to stand forth as a fixed energy overruling all these circumstances, and producing effects constantly equal. The strength of iron itself, and adamantine rock, depends on temperature ; for either will melt with a certain degree of heat, and at a still higher point they will be dissipated into vapour. The true principle then is, that,-constitution, health, and outward circumstances being the same,-a large muscle, or large nerve, composed of numerous fibres, will act with more force than a small one comprehending few.

In tracing the influence of this law in animated beings, however, we cannot consistently compare one species with another ; because in such comparisons other conditions besides size are not the same. It has been stated as an objection to Phrenology, that a bee has no perceptible brain, and that yet it manifests great intelligence. The objector intends that we should infer from this fact, either that man also may manifest the mind without a brain, or at least, that in him, size in the mental organ has no influence on the power of manifestation. But no two creatures can be more unlike than a bee and a man ; and it is unsound in philosophy to draw conclusions relative to the one, from facts observed in the other, when we can ascertain the truth by a^ direct investigation of the structure and functions of each by itself. By the same mode of reasoning, we might prove that Kings are not necessary for respiration in man, because some insects, such as the butterfly, the bee, the worm, and the louse, have no lungs, and yet live in air. The power of the Creator is infinite, and he is not limited in his expedients. Although-analogy of principle may be traced in his works, yet the same end is often obtained by different means. In insects the blood is aerated by means of tubes, in fishes by means of gills, and in man by means of lungs ; and why may not the bee manifest its instincts by * piece of nervous matter modified to suit its nature, and man manifest his mental faculties by a brain ?


Again, it is objected that man, the beaver, and .the bee, for example, all construct, yet the bee's organ of Constructiveness must be very minute ; and if we compare the imperceptible organ in it with the relative organ in man or the beaver, it is argued that man and the beaver do not excel the bee in art, in proportion to the excess of size in their organs of Constructiveness. But this is an incorrect method of reasoning. The structure of every species of animals is modified to suit its own condition of life. The ox has four stomachs, and the horse only one ; yet both digest the same kind of food. The proper mode of proceeding is, as I have said, to compare, in different individuals of the same species, size of particular organs with strength of particular functions (health, age, exercise, and constitution being alike), and then size will be found correctly to indicate power.1 The more nearly any two species resemble each other, the fitter they become for being profitably compared in their structure and functions ; and hence a reflected light of analogy may be obtained in regard to the laws of the human economy, by studying that of the more perfect of the lower animals. Still, however, we derive only presumptive evidence from this source, and positive proof can be obtained only by direct observations on man himself. This last evidence alone is admitted by phrenologists as sufficient, and on it exclusively their science rests.

In the following observations on the influence of size in the organs upon the power of function, I intend, where different species of animals are compared, merely to illustrate the doctrine in a popular manner, and not to prove it by rigid evidence : For that evidence I confine myself to observations on individuals of the same species.

It will scarcely be disputed, that the strength of the bones

1 See Phrenological Journal, vol. ix. p. 515 ; also vol. x. p. 27, inhere will be found an ample " Reply to an Objection to Phrenology, founded on .

2 Comparison of the Brains of Animals of different Species-and to the Allegation that certain Animals are altogether destitute of Brain. By Charles Caldwell, M.D.''


is always, other circumstances being equal, proportioned to their size. So certain is this, that when nature requires to give strength to a bone in a bird, and, at the same time, to avoid increasing the weight of the animal, the bone is made of large diameter, but hollow in the middle ; and, on mechanical principles, the increase of volume, adds to its strength. That the law of size holds in regard to the bloodvessels and heart, is self-evident to every one who knows that a tube of three inches' diameter will transmit more water than a tube of only one inch. And the same may be said in regard to the lungs, liver, kidneys, and every other part. If a liver with a surface of ten square inches can secrete four ounces of bile, it is perfectly manifest that one having a surface of twenty square inches will be able, all other things being equal, to secrete a quantity greater in proportion to its greater size. If this law did not hold true, what would be the advantage of large and capacious lungs over small and confined I There could be none.

The spinal marrow always increases in size at the points where it gives off nerves of sensation and motion most numerously ; for example, in the cervical region, where these nerves go off to the upper extremities, and at the lumbar region, where it sends off nerves of sensation and motion to the lower extremities. It is proportionally larger in birds, Adhere it gives off these nerves to the wings, than in the same region in fishes.

Speaking generally, there are two classes of nerves distributed over the body, those of motion and those of sensation or feeling. In motion, the muscle is the essential or chief apparatus, and the nerve is required only to communicate to it the impulse of the will ; but in sensation the reverse is the case-the nerve itself is the chief instrument, and the part on which it is ramified is merely a medium for putting it into relation with the specific qualities which it is destined to recognise.

To illustrate the effect of size on the strength of the functions of these nerves, the following cases may be adduced :


they are stated on the authority of Desmoulins, a celebrated French physiologist, when no other name is given. The horse and ox have much greater muscular power, and much less intensity of sensation, in their limbs than man ; and, in conformity with the principle now under discussion, the nerves of motion going to the four limbs in the horse and ox are at least one-third more numerous than the nerves of sensation going to the same parts,-whereas in man, the nerves of motion going to the legs and arms are a fifth or a sixth part fewer than the nerves of sensation distributed on the same parts. In like manner, in birds and reptiles which have scaly skins and limited touch, but vigorous powers of motion, the nerves of sensation are few and small, and the nerves of motion numerous and large. Farther, wherever Nature has given a higher degree of sensation or touch to any particular part than to the other parts of an animal, there the nerve of sensation is invariably increased ; for example, the single nerve of feeling ramified on the tactile extremity of the proboscis of the elephant exceeds in size the united volume of all the muscular nerves of that organ. Some species of monkeys possess great sensibility in the tail, and some species of bats have great sensibility in their wings ; and in these parts the nerves of sensation are increased in size in proportion to the increase of functional power. Birds require to rise in the air, which is a medium much lighter than their own bodies. To have enlarged the size of their muscles would have added to their weight, and increased their difficulty in rising. Nature, to avoid this disadvantage, has bestowed on them large nerves of motion, which infuse a very powerful stimulus into the muscles, and increase the power of flying. Fishes live in water, which has almost the same specific gravity with their bodies. To them Nature has given large muscles, in order to increase their locomotive powers ; and in them the nerves of motion are less. In these instances, Nature curiously adds to the power of motion, by increasing the size of that part of the locomotive apparatus which may be enlarged most couve-


niently for the animal ; but either the muscle or the nerve must be enlarged, otherwise there is no increase of power. In regard to the external senses, it is proper to observe that each is composed, first, of an instrument or medium on which the impression is made-the eye for example ; and, secondly, of a nerve to conduct that impression to the brain. The same law of size holds in regard to these organs of the senses : a large . eye will collect more rays of light, a large ear more vibrations of sound, and large nostrils more odorous particles, than the same organs if small. This is so obvious, that it scarcely requires proof; yet, as Lord Jeffrey has ridiculed the idea, I may mention that Monro, Blumenbach, Soemmering, Cuvier, Magendie, Georget, and a whole host of other physiologists, support it. Blumenbach, when treating of smell, says : " While animals of the most acute smell have the nasal organs most extensively evolved, precisely the same holds in regard to some barbarous nations. For instance, in the head of a North American Indian (represented in one of his plates), the internal nostrils are of an extraordinary size," &c. And again : " The nearest to these in point of magnitude, are the internal nostrils of the Ethiopians, from among whom I have eight heads, very different from each other, but each possessing a nasal organ much larger than that described by Soemmering. These anatomical observations accorded with the accounts given by most respectable travellers, concerning the wonderful acuteness of smell possessed by those savages." In like manner, Dr Monro primus-no mean authority,-when treating, in his Comparative Anatomy, of the large organ of smell in the dog, says : " The sensibility (of smell) seems to be increased in proportion to the surface ; and this will be also found to take place in all the other senses." The same author states, " that the external ear in different quadrupeds is differently framed, but always calculated to the creature's manner of life ; thus hares and such other animals as are daily exposed to insults from beasts of prey, have large ears directed backwards, their eves warning them of danger before."


These observations apply to the external portion of the organs of sense, but the inner parts or nerves are not less subject to the same law of size. Georget, an esteemed physiological writer, in treating of the nerves, affirms, that " the volume of these organs bears a uniform relation, in all the different animals, to the extent and force of the sensations and movements over which they preside ; thus, the nerve of smell in the dog is larger than the five nerves of the external senses in man." The surface of the mucous membrane of the ethmoidal bone, on which the nerve of smell is ramified, is computed to extend in man to twenty square inches,-in the seal to 120. The nerve of smell is small in man and in the monkey tribe ; scarcely, if at all, perceptible in the dolphin ; large in the dog and the horse ; and altogether enormous in the whale and the skate, in which it actually exceeds in diameter the spinal marrow itself. In the mole it is of extraordinary size, while the optic nerve is very small. In the eagle the reverse is observed, the optic nerve being very large, and the olfactory small. Most of the quadrupeds excel man in the acuteness of their hearing, and accordingly it is a fact, that the auditory nerve in the sheep, the cow, the horse, Sec., greatly exceeds the size of the same nerve in man. In some birds of prey, which are known to possess great sensibility of taste, the palate is found to be very copiously supplied with nervous filaments.

But the organ of sight affords a most interesting example of the influence of size. The office of the eye-ball is to collect the rays of light. A large eye, therefore, will take in more rays of light, or, in other words, command a greater sphere of vision, than a small one. But to give intensity or power to vision, the optic nerve also is necessary. Now, the ox placed upon the surface of the earth is of a heavy structure and ill fitted for motion, but he has a large eye-ball, which enables him to take in a large field of vision without turning ; yet, as he does not require very keen vision to see his provender, on which he almost treads, the optic nerve


is not large in proportion to the eye-ball. The eagle, on the other hand, by ascending to a great height in the air, enjoys a wide field of vision from its mere physical position. It looks down from a point over an extensive surface. It has no need, therefore, of a large eye-ball to increase artificially its field of vision, and accordingly the ball of its eye is comparatively small. But it requires, from that height, to discern its prey upon the surface of the earth ; and not only is the distance great, but the prey often resembles in colour the. ground on which it rests. To the eagle, therefore, great intensity of vision is necessary. Accordingly, in it the optic nerve is increased to an enormous extent. Instead of forming a single membrane only lining the inner surface of the posterior chamber of the eye, as in man and animals which do not require extraordinary vision,- and consequently only equalling in extent the sphere of the eye to which it belongs,-the retina or expansion of the nerve of vision in these quick-sighted birds of prey is found to be composed of a great number of folds, each hanging loose into the eye, and augmenting, in a wonderful degree, not only the extent of nervous surface but the mass of nervous matter, and giving rise to that intensity of vision which distinguishes the eagle, falcon, hawk, and similar animals.1 In the case of the senses, then, we plainly see, that when Nature designs to increase their power, she affects her purpose by augmenting the size of their organs.

Let us now attend to the brain. Were I to affirm that difference of size in the brain produces no effect on the vi-

1 In December 1836, Dr G. I. Berwick, of the Honourable the East India Company's Service, who had studied natural history practically in Bengal, mentioned to me that when he was dissecting a dead leopard, in an out-house that had only one opening, the door,-a great number of hawks, kites, and adjutants assembled, coming from great distances, (for he had seen none of them in the neighbourhood before he began the dissection,) and waited till he threw out the carcass, which they devoured. He considered them to have been led by the sense of smell ; and he regards this sense, as well as that of vision, to be powerful in these animals. Ho had not examined the size of the olfactory nerve in them.


gour of its functions,-or that a small brain, in perfect health, and of a sound constitution, is equal in functional power and efficiency to a large one in similar condition,- would the reader, after the evidence which has been laid before him of the influence of size in increasing the power of function in other parts of the body, be disposed to credit the assertion 1 He would have the utmost difficulty in believing it, and would say that if such were the fact, the brain must form an exception to a law which appears general over organized nature ; and yet the phrenologists have been ridiculed for maintaining that the brain does not form an exception to this general law, but that in it also, vigour of function is in proportion to size, other conditions being alike. I shall proceed to state some direct evidence in proof of this fact ; but the reader is requested to observe that I am here expounding only general principles in an introductory discourse. The conditions and modifications under which these principles ought to be applied in practice, will be stated in a subsequent chapter.

First, The brain of a child is small, and its mind weak, compared with the brain and mental faculties of an adult.

Secondly, Small size in the brain is an invariable cause of idiocy. Phrenologists have in vain called upon their opponents to produce a single instance of the mind being manifested vigorously by a very small brain.

Dr Gall has laid it down as a fact to which there is no exception, that where the brain is so small that the horizontal circumference of the head does not exceed thirteen or fourteen inches, idiocy is the necessary consequence. " Complete intelligence," he remarks, " is absolutely impossible with so small a brain ; in such cases idiocy, more or less complete, invariably occurs, and to this rule no exception either has been, or ever will be found." ' To the same effect, Dr Spurzheim, in his work on Insanity, says : " We are very well aware that a great number of facts repeated under various circumstances are necessary before we

' Sur les Fonctions du Cerveau, ii. 330.


can draw a general conclusion ; but with respect to idiotism from birth, we have made such a number of observations in various countries, that we have no hesitation in affirming that a too small brain is unfit for the manifestation of the mind. I beg to remark, that I do not say that idiotism is the attribute of a too small brain only. Idiotism may be the result of different causes, one of which is a too small brain. We are convinced from observation, that the laws of nature are constant ; and if we continually observe that the same phenomenon takes place under the same circumstances, we consider our conclusion as certain, till experience shews the contrary. No one, then, has the right to maintain that an inference is too hastily drawn because he has -not made a sufficient number of observations. It is his duty to shew facts which prove the contrary, if he intend to deny the inference." In the Journal of the Phrenological Society of Paris for April 1835, Dr Voisin reports observations made upon the idiots under his care at the Parisian Hospital of Incurables in order to verify the assertion of Gall in the passage above quoted ; and mentions that he found it substantiated by every one of his cases. In the lowest class of idiots, where the intellectual manifestations were null, the horizontal circumference, taken a little higher than the orbit, varied from eleven to thirteen inches, while the distance from the root of the nose backwards over the top of the head to the occipital spine was only between eight and nine inches. When the size varied from fourteen to seventeen inches of horizontal measurement, and eleven or twelve in the other direction, glimpses of feelings and random intellectual perceptions were observable, but without any power of attention or fixity of ideas. Lastly, when the first measurement extended to eighteen or nineteen, inches, although the head was still small, the intellectual manifestations were regular enough, but deficient in intensity. In a full-sized head, the first measurement is equal to twenty-two inches, and the second to about fourteen inches, So large was the


head of Spurzheim, that even on the skull, these two measurements amount to 22 1/4 and 13 6/10 inches respectively. Those who deny the influence of size of the brain on the manifestations of the mind, should reconcile these facts with their own views, before they denounce Phrenology as at variance with nature, and maintain that, so far as vigour of mind is concerned, it is indifferent whether the head be large or small.

Even Pinel, who will not be suspected of any desire to favour Phrenology, admits, that " it appears that idiocy from birth always accompanies an original defect of the brain, that it cannot, undergo any sort of change, and that its duration is the same with that of the physical cause from which it arises." ' Dr Gall has represented, in the Atlas of his quarto work (Plates 18, 19, and 20), three very small heads of idiots ; and similar engravings are given by Pinel. A striking case of idiocy in conjunction with a diminutive brain, will be found in the 42d number of The Phrenological Journal? An engraving of the head is here subjoined, in contrast with a sketch of that of the celebrated Hindoo reformer Rammohun Roy.

1 Dict, des Sciences Med. tom. i. p. 313, article Alienation.

2 Vol. ix, p. 126.


Dr Elliotson mentions a cast of the head of a male idiot, aged eighteen years, which he received from Dr Formby of Liverpool, and subsequently presented to the London Phrenological Society. It is only 16 inches in circumference, and 7f inches from ear to ear over the vertex. The cerebrum weighed only 1 lb. 7 5 oz., and the cerebellum but 4 ounces.1 In a case reported by Mr Richard Cull,3 the circumference is 14j inches, and the distance from ear to ear over the vertex 9J.

Deficiency of size in the brain is not, however, the only cause of idiocy. A brain may be large and diseased, and mental imbecility may arise from the disease ; but, as above shewn, although disease be absent, if the size be very deficient, idiocy will invariably occur.

Thirdly, Men who have been remarkable, not for mere cleverness, but for great force of character, such as Bonaparte, Franklin, and Burns, have had heads of unusual magnitude. Fourthly, It is an ascertained fact, that nations in whom the brain is large, possess so great a mental superiority over those in whom it is small, that they conquer and oppress them at pleasure. The Hindoo brain, for example, is considerably smaller than the European, and it is well known that a few thousands of Europeans have subdued and keep in subjection millions of Hindoos. The brain of the aboriginal American, also, is smaller than the European, and the same result has been exemplified in that quarter of the world.

Lastly, The influence of size is now admitted by the most eminent physiologists. " The volume of the brain," says Magendie, " is generally in direct proportion to the capacity of the mind. We ought not to suppose, however, that every man having a large head is necessarily a person of~superior intelligence ; for there are many causes of an augmentation of the volume of the head beside the size of the brain ; but it is rarely found that a man distinguished by his mental faculties has not a large head. The only way

1 Elliotson's Blumenbach, p. 109. 2 Phrenological Journal, xi. 287.


of estimating the volume of the brain, in a living person, is to measure the dimensions of the skull ; every other means, even that proposed by Camper, is uncertain." '

After quoting the statements of many authors, and detailing the weights of fifty-two European brains, examined by himself, Tiedemann2 mentions that " the weight of the brain in an adult male European varies between 3 lb. 2 oz. and 4 lb. 6 oz. troy. The brain of men who have distinguished themselves by their great talents is often very large. The brain of the celebrated Cuvier weighed 4 lb. 11 oz. 4 dr. 30 gr. troy, and that of the celebrated surgeon Dupuytren weighed 4 lb. 10 oz. troy. The brain of men en-domed with but feeble intellectual powers is, on the contrary, often very small, particularly in congénital idiotismus" Here, then, is ample confirmation of the phrenological evidence, and from a source which cannot be considered as biassed in our favour. Tiedemann proceeds-" The female brain is lighter than that of the male. It varies between 2 lb. 8 oz. and 3 lb. 11 oz. I never found a female brain that weighed 4 lb. The female brain weighs on an average from four to eight ounces less than that of the male ; and this difference is already perceptible in a new-born child." This also corresponds entirely with the long-repudiated statements of the phrenologists, and it is pleasant to see the fact thus broadly admitted.

Tiedemann goes even beyond the phrenologists in his applications of the principle of size being a measure of power. He says, " There is undoubtedly a very close connexion between the absolute size of the brain and the INTELLECTUAL powers and functions of the mind. This is evident from the remarkable smallness of the brain in cases of congenital idiotismus, few much exceeding in weight that of a new-born child. Gall, Spurzheim, Haslam, Esquirol, and others, have

1 Compendium of Physiology, Milligan's Translation, p. 104, edit. 1826.

2 On the Brain of the Negro compared with that of the European and the Ourang-Outang. By Professor Tiedemann, of Heidelberg. (Philosophical Transactions for 1836. Part ii.)


already observed this, which is also confirmed by my own researches. The brain of very talented men is remarkable on the other hand for its size." (P. 502). Here certainly is ample corroboration of the influence of organic size on mental power ; but Tiedemann has fallen into the very serious error of taking absolute size of the brain as a measure of intellectual power only ; whereas it indicates, as might be expected à priori, absolute mental power, without determining whether that power lies in extent of intellect, in strength of moral feeling, or in the force of passion or affection. A brain of four pounds' weight may be large in the anterior lobe, and smaller in the middle and posterior lobes ; or its chief size and weight may be in the posterior lobes, and the anterior portions be actually small. In both cases Tiedemann would infer equal " intellectual" power ; whereas the phrenologist would perceive at a glance, that in the former the intellectual ability would far preponderate, while in the latter the great power of mind would consist entirely in intensity of feeling, and the intellect, properly so called, be rather weak than strong.

The following passage, which occurs in the 94th Number of the Edinburgh Review, also implies, not only that different parts of the nervous system, including the brain, have different functions, but that an increase of volume in the brain is marked by some addition to, or amplification of, the powers of the animal. " It is in the nervous system alone that we can trace a gradual progress in the provision for the subordination of one (animal) to another, and of all to man ; and are enabled to associate every faculty which gives superiority -with some addition to the nervous mass, even from the smallest indications of sensation and will, up to the highest degree of sensibility, judgment, and expression." " The brain is observed progressively to be improved in its structure, and, with reference to the spinal marrow and nerves, augmented in volume more and more, until we reach the human brain-each addition being marked by some addition to. or amplification of, the powers of the animal-until in man


we behold it possessing some parts of which animals are destitute, and wanting none which theirs possess."

There is here, then, pretty strong evidence and authority for the assertion, that the brain does not form an exception to the general law of organized nature, that, other conditions being equal, size of organ is a measure of power of function.1

The circumstances which modify the effects of size demand next to be considered. These are, constitution, health, exercise, excitement from without, and, in some cases, the mutual influence of the organs.

The question naturally presents itself, Do we possess any index to constitutional qualities of brain ?

There are some constitutional qualities2 which can be judged of only by knowing the qualities of the stock, or race, from which the individual under examination is descended. I have observed a certain feebleness in the brain, indicating itself by weakness of mind, without derangement, in some individuals born in India of an English father and Hindoo mother. The tinge of colour and the form of the features indicate this descent. I have noticed feebleness and sometimes irregularity of action in the brains of individuals, not insane, but who belonged to a family in which insanity abounded. I do not know any external physical indication of this condition. The temperaments indicate to a certain extent important constitutional qualities. There are four temperaments, accompanied by different degrees of

1 It is certified by hatters, that the lower classes of the community, who are distinguished for muscular vigour much more than mental capacity, require a smaller size of hat than those classes whose occupations are chiefly mental, and in whom vigour of mind surpasses that of body. But the phrenologist does not compare intellectual power with the size of brain in general ; and, besides, the hat doe-: not indicate the size of the whole head. The reader will find details on this point in the Phrenological Journal, iv. 539, v. 213, and ix. 221.

2 See an able Essay " On Quality of Brain as influencing functional Manifestation," by Mr Daniel Noble ; Phren. Journ. vol. xii. p. 121.


strength and activity in the brain-the lymphatic, the sanguine, the bilious, and the nervous. The temperaments are supposed to depend upon the constitution of particular systems of the body : the brain and nerves being predominantly active from constitutional causes, seem to produce the nervous temperament ; the Kings, heart, and bloodvessels being constitutionally predominant, to give rise to the sanguine ; the muscular and fibrous systems to the bilious ; and the glands and assimilating organs to the lymphatic.

The .different temperaments are indicated by external signs, which are open to observation. The first, or lymphatic, is distinguishable by a round form of the body, softness of the muscular system, repletion of the cellular tissue, fair hair, and a pale skin. It is accompanied by languid vital actions, with weakness and slowness in the circulation. The brain, as part of the system, is also slow, languid, and feeble in its action, and the mental manifestations are proportionally weak.

The second or sanguine temperament, is indicated by well defined forms, moderate plumpness of person, tolerable firmness of flesh, light hair inclining to chestnut, blue eyes, and fair complexion, with ruddiness of countenance. It is marked by great activity of the bloodvessels, fondness for exercise, and an animated countenance. The brain partakes of the general state, and is vigorous and active.

The fibrous (generally, but inappropriately, termed the bilious] temperament, is recognised by black hair, dark skin, moderate fulness and much firmness of flesh, with harshly expressed outline of the person. The functions partake of great energy of action, which extends to the brain ; and the countenance, in consequence, shews strong, marked, and decided features.

The nervous temperament is recognised by fine thin hair, thin skin, small thin muscles, quickness in muscular motion, paleness of countenance, and often delicate health. The whole nervous system, including the brain, is predominantly active and energetic, and the mental manifestations are proportionally vivacious and powerful.

Pl. 1_________ Pl. 2
The four Temperaments


It is thus clearly admitted, that constitution or quality of brain greatly modifies the effects of size upon the mind ;' but let us attend to the consequences. As a general rule, all the parts of the same brain have the same constitution, and if size be a measure of power, then in each head the large organs will be more powerful than the small ones. This enables us to judge of the strong and the weak points in each head. But if we compare two brains, we must recollect that their size may be equal, and that nevertheless the one, from possessing the finer texture and more vigorous constitution, may be active and energetic, while the other, from being inferior in quality, is naturally inert. The consequence may be, that the better constituted though smaller brain will manifest the mind with the greater vigour. That size is nevertheless a measure of power, may be proved by contrasting the manifestations of a small and of a large brain, possessing the same configuration, and equally well constituted ; the power or energy will then be found superior in the latter. This illustrates what is meant by other natural conditions being equal. As the temperaments are distinguishable by the countenance and the general make of the body, and as the brain partakes of the general constitution, we possess a valuable though not all-sufficient index to its natural qualities. I repeat that these remarks apply only to the case of comparing one brain with another. The parts of the same brain have in general the same constitution ; and, on the principle that size is a measure of power, the largest organs in each individual will be naturally the most vigorous. If the temperament be lymphatic, all the organs will act feebly and slowly, but the largest will be the most powerful and active, on account of their superior size. If the temperament be active, all will be active, but the largest will take the lead. It is on this account that a student of Phrenology in search of evidence, should not com-

1 See an excellent treatise " On the most Effective Condition of the Brain as the organ of the Mind, and on the Modes of attaining it," by Charles Caldwell, M. D., in American Phren. Journ., vol. i. p. 393.


pare the same organs in different brains, without attending very strictly to the temperament.

Of the causes of the temperaments, various theories have been formed, but none hitherto propounded can be regarded as altogether satisfactory.' But, as is well remarked by a writer in The Phrenological Journal, " It is with the effects of the temperaments, more than their causes, that we are concerned-and happily the former are less obscure than the latter. When an individual is characterized by softness of flesh, fairness of the skin, flaxen hair, plumpness of figure, a weak slow pulse, and a loutish inanimate expression, physiologists agree in describing him as a person of lymphatic temperament ; and whatever be the cause of these appearances, we know from experience that they are indications of great languor of the bodily and mental functions. Coteris paribus, temperament seems to affect equally every part of the body ; so that if the muscles be naturally active and energetic, we may expect also activity and energy of the brain ; and if one set of muscles be active, the like vivacity may be looked for in the others. This principle is practically recognised by William Cobbett, who, whatever may be his merits or demerits as a politician, is certainly a shrewd observer and describer of real life. In his Letter to a Lover, he discusses the question, ' Who is to tell whether a girl will make an industrious woman 1 How is the purblind lover especially to be able to ascertain whether she, whose smiles, and dimples, and bewitching lips have half bereft him of his senses ; how is he to be able to judge, from any thing that he can see, whether the beloved object will be industrious or lazy ? Why, it is very difficult,' he answers : ' There are, however, certain outward signs, which, if attended to with care, will serve as pretty sure guides. And, first, if you find the tongue lazy, you may be nearly certain that the hands and feet are the same. By laziness of the tongue I do not mean silence ; I do not mean an ab-

1 See Section on " Application of Principles," in a subsequent page, for a notice of Dr Thomas's theory of the Temperaments.


sence of talk, for that is, in most cases, very good ; but I mean a slow and soft utterance ; a sort of sighing out of the words, instead of speaking them ; a sort of letting the sounds fall out, as if the party were sick at stomach. The pronunciation of an industrious person is generally quick and distinct, and the voice, if not strong, firm at least. Not masculine ; as feminine as possible : not a croak nor a bawl, but a quick, distinct, and sound voice.' ' Another mark of industry is a quick step, and a somewhat heavy tread, shewing that the foot comes down with a hearty good will.' ' I do not like, and I never liked, your sauntering, soft-stepping girls, who move as if they were perfectly indifferent as to the result.' ' We are disposed to think that Cobbett's homely advice will prove sound in all cases where the nervous and muscular systems are equally developed, equally healthy, and equally accustomed to exercise. But if the head be large and the muscles small, the individual will be much more inclined to mental than to muscular activity ; and, on the other hand, if he have large muscles and a small brain, the activity derived from a sanguine or bilious temperament will have a tendency to expend itself in exercise or labour of the body. The reason of this is, that the largest organs have, coteris paribus, the greatest tendency to act ; their activity is productive of the greatest pleasure ; hence they are more frequently exercised than the smaller organs ; and thus the energy and activity of the larger are made to predominate still more than, they did originally, over those of the smaller." " The remarks now offered in reference to the comparative efficiency of the muscular and cerebral functions, are equally applicable to the cerebral organs, considered in relation to each other. Where two organs are alike in development and cultivation, a nervous or sanguine temperament will render them equally active ; but where one is more fully developed than the other, it will excel the latter both in power and activity. In another brain of the same size and form, but with a lymphatic temperament, a

1 Cobbett's Advice to Young Men, Letter III. sect. 102-5.


similar predominance of the power and activity of one organ over those of the other will be found ; but the absolute power and activity of both will be less than in the other case supposed. Temperament, therefore, besides influencing the activity of the organs, affects their power also, to a greater extent than some phrenologists seem inclined to allow." '

Further, the brain must possess a healthy constitution, and that degree of activity which is the usual accompaniment of health. Now, the brain, like other parts of the body, may be affected with certain diseases which do not diminish or increase its magnitude, but yet impair its functions. The phrenologist ascertains the health by inquiry. In cases of disease, great size may be present, and very imperfect manifestations appear ; or the brain may be attacked with other diseases, such as inflammation, or any of those particular affections whose nature is unknown, but to which

1 Phrenological Journal, vol. ix. p. 116-118 ; see also pp. 54, 267. Engravings illustrative of the Temperaments will be found in Dr Spurzheim's Phrenology m Connexion with the Study of Physiognomy, London, 1826, Plate I.

As the error is still very common, that phrenologists consider the power of an organ to depend on its size alone, I subjoin several passages on this subject, extracted from phrenological works. Dr Gall, in the first volume of his treatise Sur les Fonctions du Cerveau, says :-" L'énergie des fonctions des organes ne dépende pas seulement de leur développement, niais aussi de leur excitabilité.''-(P. 196.) " Les fonctions des sens dont les organes sont plus considérables, plus sains, et plus développés, ou qui ont reçu une irritation plus forte, sont, par cela même, plus vives. La même phénomène se reproduit dans les facultés de l'âme ; les organes de ces facultés agissent avec plus d'énergie, s'ils sont pins irrités ou plus développés."-(P. 308.) And Dr Spurzheim, in his work on Physiognomy, above referred to, states that " it is important, in a physiological point of view, to take into account the peculiar constitution or temperament of individuals, not as the cause of determinate faculties, but as influencing the energy with which the special functions of the several organs are manifested."-(P. 15.) " The energy and excellence of the brain," says Dr Caldwell, " depend on its size, configuration, and tone-its extensity and intensity."-(Elements of Phrenology, Lexington, Ky., 1824, p. 38). See farther on the temperaments, The Phrenological Journal, viii. 293, 369, 447, 509, 564, 595 ; x. 583 ; xii.


the name of Mania is given in nosology, and which greatly exalt its action ; and then very forcible manifestations may proceed from a brain comparatively small : but it is no less true, that when a larger brain is excited to the same degree by the same causes, the manifestations are still more energetic, in proportion to the superiority of size. These cases, therefore, form no valid objection to Phrenology; for the phrenologist ascertains, by previous inquiry, that the brain is in a state of health. If it is not, he makes the necessary limitations in drawing his conclusions.

The effects of exercise in adding to mental power are* universally known, and ought never to be overlooked by the phrenologist. " The brain, being an organized part, is subject, in so far as regards its exercise, to precisely the same laws as the other organs of the body. If it be doomed to inactivity, its health decays, and the mental operations and feelings as a necessary consequence become dull, feeble, and slow. If it be duly exercised, after regular intervals of repose, the mind acquires readiness and strength ; and, lastly, if it be over-tasked, either in the force or duration of its activity, its functions become impaired, and irritability and disease take the place of health and vigour."1 The other circumstances which modify size will be considered afterwards.

Let us turn our attention to the point of the argument at which we are now arrived. We have seen that the brain is the organ of the mind ; that it is not a single organ, but that the analogy of all the other organs, the successive development of the faculties, with the phenomena of partial genius, partial insanity, monomania, dreaming, and partial injuries of the brain, indicate that it is a congeries of organs manifesting a plurality of faculties ; and that, in the cases of the bones, muscles, nerves of motion, "nerves of feeling, and nerves of the other senses, size has an influence on power of

1 The Principles of Physiology applied to the Preservation of Health, and to the Improvement of Physical and Mental Education. By Andrew Combe M.D. 4th edit. p. 292.


function : and from the analogy of these organs, as well as from direct facts and physiological authorities, we have come to the same conclusion regarding the brain-that vigour of function, other circumstances besides magnitude being equal, is in proportion to the size of the organ. From these premises it follows as a necessary consequence, that, with respect to the manifestation of the mental faculties, it will not be indifferent in what direction the brain is most or least developed : for example, if different parts of the brain possess different functions, and if the strength of function be in proportion to the size of the part, the vigour of the faculties connected with the forehead, whatever these may be, will be greater where the frontal region predominates in size than where the predominance is in the posterior portion ; and differences will occur also in cases of preponderance in the superior or inferior regions. In short, it is obvious that two brains may be composed of exactly the same number of cubic inches of cerebral matter, and yet serve to manifest two minds totally different from each other in the kind of disposition or capacity by which they are characterized ; so that the form of the head is an object of attention to the phrenologist, not less interesting and important than its size.1 This fact shews how erroneous it is to draw any precise inferences as to either the talents or the dispositions of an individual from the size of his hat ; for even supposing this to be an accurate indication of the size of the head (which, however, it is not), we must still ascertain the directions in which the brain is most largely and most sparingly developed.

Here we have a representation of the skull of Dr Spurzheim, and of the skull of a native of New Holland ; both taken from casts in the collection of the Phrenological Society. The difference in the forehead is very conspicuous.2 If the part of the brain lying in that region have any func-

1 See Phren. Jour. x. 628.

2 In these and some of the other ruts illustrating this work, the skulls and heads contrasted with each other have accidentally been drawn in


tion connected with intellect, and if size be a measure of power, the two beings should form a strong contrast of power and weakness in that department. And, accordingly, the case is so. Dr Spurzheim has left in his phrenological works a durable record of moral and intellectual greatness ; while Sir Walter Scott describes the other as follows :-" The natives of New Holland are, even at present, in the very lowest scale of humanity, and ignorant of every art which can add comfort or decency to human life. These unfortunate savages use no clothes, construct no cabins or huts, and are ignorant even of the manner of chasing animals, or catching fish, unless such of the latter as are left by the tide, or which are found on the rocks ; they feed upon the most disgusting substances, snakes, worms, maggots, and whatever trash falls in their way. They know, indeed, how to kindle a fire ; in that respect only they have stepped beyond the deepest ignorance to which man can be subjected ; but they have not learned how to boil water ; and when they see Europeans

different positions. Although the circumstance was not likely to escape the reader's notice, I have thought proper to mention it here. In the present instance, it will be observed that from the cast of Spurzheim's skull being on a pedestal, the head is in the natural position, while the skull of the New Hollander reclines a little backwards.


perform this ordinary operation, they have been known to run away in great terror."

We have now arrived, by a fair and legitimate induction, at strong presumptive evidence in favour of the general principles of Phrenology-namely, that the brain is the organ of the mind ; that different parts of it are connected with different faculties ; and that the size of the organ exerts an influence on the power of manifestation. Here, then, the inquiry presents itself, What faculties and what parts of the brain are mutually connected ? This is the grand question remaining to be solved, in order to render our knowledge of the functions of the brain and the organs of the mind precise and practically useful. Let us inquire what progress the metaphysician and anatomist have made in elucidating this point. It is of importance to take a view of the past efforts of philosophers on this subject, that we may be able correctly to appreciate both what remains to be done, and how far Phrenology affords the means of accomplishing it.

By one set of philosophers, the mind has been studied with too little reference to the body, and the laws of thought have been expounded with as much neglect of organization as if we had already " shuffled off this mortal coil." From this erroneous practice of many distinguished authors, such as Locke, Hume, Reid, Stewart, and Brown, a prejudice has arisen against the physiology of man, as if the mind were degraded by contemplating it in connection with matter ; but man is the work of the Greater of the world, and no part of his constitution can be unworthy of regard and admiration. The whole phenomena of life are the result of mind and body joined, each modifying each ; and how can we explain a result without attending to all the causes which combine towards its production ? In the words of Dr John Gregory, " It has been the misfortune of most of those who have studied the philosophy of the human mind, that they have been little acquainted with the structure of the human body,


and the laws of the animal economy ; and yet the mind and body are so intimately connected, and have such a mutual influence on one another, that the constitution of either, examined apart, can never be thoroughly understood. For the same reason, it has been an unspeakable loss to physicians, that they have been so generally inattentive to the peculiar laws of the mind and their influence on the body."1 Mr Dugald Stewart quotes with approbation from another work of the same author,2 the following observation regarding " the laws of union between the mind and body, and the mutual influence they have upon one another :" This, says Dr Gregory, " is one of the most important inquiries that ever engaged the attention of mankind, and almost equally necessary in the sciences of morals and medicine."3

Another set of philosophers, in avoiding Scylla, have thought it necessary to dash into Charybdis, and, teaching that the mind is nought but a combination of matter, have endeavoured to explain its functions by supposed mechanical motions in its parts : But, as we shall afterwards see, this course of proceeding is equally erroneous with the other.

In surveying the phenomena of mind, we are struck by the variety of faculties with which it appears to be endowed. Philosophers and the vulgar equally admit it to be possessed of different powers. Thus it is said to reason by one faculty, to fear by another, and by a third to discriminate between right and wrong.

If, however, we inquire what progress has hitherto been made by metaphysicians in ascertaining the primitive mental powers, and in rendering the philosophy of man interesting and practically useful to persons of ordinary understanding, we shall find a deficiency that is truly deplorable. From the days of Aristotle to the present time, the most

1 Comparative View of the State and Faculties of Man with those of the Animal World, 3d edit. p. 5. Lond. 1766.

2 On the Duties and Qualifications of a Physician, Lecture IV.

3 See Stewart's Preliminary Dissertation ; Encyc. Brit. 7th edit Vol i p. 224.


powerful intellects have been directed, with the most persevering industry, to this department of science ; and system after system has flourished, fallen, and been forgotten, in rapid and melancholy succession. To confine our attention to modern times :-Dr Reid overturned the philosophy of Locke and Hume ; Mr Stewart, while he illustrated Reid, yet differed from him in many important particulars ; and, recently, Dr Thomas Brown has attacked, with powerful eloquence and philosophical profundity, the fabric of Stewart, which already totters to its fall. The very existence of the most common and familiar faculties of the mind is debated among these philosophers. Mr Stewart maintains Attention to be a faculty, but this is denied by Dr Brown. Others, again, state Imagination to be a primitive power of the mind, while Mr Stewart informs us, that " what we call the power of Imagination, is not the gift of nature, but the result of acquired habits, aided by favourable circumstances." ' Common observation informs us, that musical talent, and a genius for poetry and painting, are gifts of nature, bestowed only on a few ; but Mr Stewart, by dint of his philosophy, has discovered that these powers, and also a genius for mathematics, " are gradually formed by particular habits of study or of business." 2 On the other hand, he treats of Perception, Conception, and Memory, as original powers ; while Dr Thomas Brown denies their title to that appellation. Reid, Stewart, and Brown, admit the existence of moral emotions ; but Hobbes, Mandeville, Paley, and many others, resolve the sentiment of right and wrong into a regard to our own good, perception of utility, and obedience to human laws or to the Divine command. Thus, after the lapse and labour of more than two thousand years, philosophers are not yet agreed concerning the existence of many of the most important principles of action, and intellectual powers of man. While the philosophy of mind shall remain in this uncertain condition, it will be impossible to give to morals and natural religion a scientific foundation ;

1 Elements, chap. 7, sect. 1. * Outlines, p. 16.


and, until these shall assume the stableness and precision of sciences,-education, political economy, and legislation, must continue defective in their principles and application. If, therefore, Phrenology could introduce into the philosophy of mind even a portion of the certainty and precision which attend physical investigations, it would confer no small benefit on this interesting department of science ; and that it is fully competent to do so, shall be made apparent after we have attended to a few preliminary points requiring consideration.

In the next place, supposing the number and nature of the primitive faculties to be ascertained, it is to be remarked, that, in actual life, they are successively developed. The infant feels anger, fear, attachment, before it is alive to the sublime or the beautiful ; and it observes occurrences long before it reasons. A correct theory of mind ought to unfold the principles to which these facts also may be referred.

Farther ; even after the full maturity of age is attained, how different the degrees in which we are endowed with the various mental powers ! Admitting each individual to possess all the faculties which constitute the human mind, in what a variety of degrees of relative strength do they appear in different persons ! In one, the love of glory is the feeling which surpasses all ; another is deaf to the voice of censure, and callous to the accents of applause. The soul of one melts with softest pity at a tale of woe ; while the eye of another never shed a sympathetic tear. One individual spends his life in an ardent chace of wealth, which he stops not to enjoy ; another scatters in wasteful prodigality the substance of his sires, and perishes in want from a mere incapacity to retain. One vast intellect, like Newton's, fathoms the profundities of science ; while the mind of another can scarcely grope its way through the daily occurrences of life. The towering imagination of a Shakspeare or a Milton soars beyond the boundaries of sublunarv space :


while the sterile fancy of a clown sees no glory in the heavens, and no loveliness on earth.

A system of mental philosophy, therefore, pretending to be true, ought not only to unfold the simple elements of thought and of feeling, but to enable us to discover in what proportions they are combined in different individuals. In chemical science, one combination of elementary ingredients produces a medicine of sovereign virtue in removing pain ; another combination of the same materials, but differing in their relative proportions, brings forth a mortal poison. In human nature, also, one combination of faculties may produce the midnight murderer and thief-another a Franklin, a Howard, or a Fry, glowing with charity to man.

If, however, we search the works of those philosophers who have hitherto written on the mind, for rules by which to discriminate the effects produced upon the character and conduct of individuals by different combinations of the mental powers, what information do we receive? Instead of light upon this interesting subject, we find only disputes whether such differences exist in nature or are the result of education and other adventitious circumstances ; many maintaining the one opinion, while some advocate the other. This department of the philosophy of man, in short, is a perfect waste. Mr Stewart was aware equally of its importance and of its forlorn condition. " The varieties of intellectual character among men," says he, " present another very interesting object of study, which, considering its practical utility, has not yet excited, so much as might have been expected, the curiosity of our countrymen." ' The reason appears sufficiently obvious ; the common modes of studying man afforded no clew to the discovery desired.

In thus surveying the philosophy of the human mind, as at present exhibited to us in the writings of philosophers, we perceive, first, That no account is given of the influence of the material organs on the mental powers ; and that the

1 Dissertation, Encyc. Brit. vol. i. p. 223.


progress of the mind from youth to age, and the phenomena of sleep, dreaming, idiocy and insanity, are left unexplained or unaccounted for by any principles admitted in their systems : secondly, That the existence and functions of some of the most important primitive faculties are still in dispute : and, thirdly, That no light whatever has been thrown on the nature and effects of combinations of the primitive powers, in different degrees of relative proportion. It is with great truth, therefore, that Monsieur de Bonald, quoted by Mr Stewart, observes, that " the diversity of doctrines has increased from age to age, with the number of masters, and with the progress of knowledge ; and Europe, which at present possesses libraries filled with philosophical works, and which reckons up almost as many philosophers as writers ; poor in the midst of so much riches, and uncertain, with the aid of all its guides, which road it should follow ; Europe, the centre and the focus of all the lights of the world, has yet its philosophy only in expectation." '

While philosophers have been thus unsuccessfully engaged in the study of mental science, human nature has been investigated by another set of observers-Moralists, Poets, and Divines. These have looked upon the page of life merely to observe the characters there exhibited, with the view of tracing them anew in their own compositions ; and certainly they have executed their design with great felicity and truth. In the pages of Shakspeare, Addison, Johnson, Tillotson, and Scott, we have the lineaments of mind traced with a perfect tact, and exhibited with matchless beauty and effect. But these authors had no systematic object in view, and aimed not at founding their observations on principles which might render them subservient to the practical purposes of life. Hence, although in their compositions we find ample and admirable materials for the elucidation of a true system of the philosophy of man, yet, without other aids than those which they supply, we

1 Recherches Philosophiques, p. 58 ; quoted in Encyc. Brit. vol. i. p. 230.


cannot arrive at fundamental principles sufficient to guide us in our intercourse with, the world. The charge against their representations of human nature is, not that they are incorrect, but that they are too general to be useful. They draw striking pictures of good men and of bad men, but do not enable us to discover, previously to experience, whether any particular individual with whom we may wish to connect our fortunes, belongs to the one class or to the other-a matter of extreme importance, because, in the course of gaining experience, we encounter the risk of suffering great calamities. In short, poets and novelists describe men as they do the weather : in their pages they make the storm to rage with terrific energy, or the sun to shine with the softest radiance, but do not enable us to discover whether, to-morrow, the elements will war, or the zephyrs play ; and, without this power, we cannot put to sea with the certainty of favouring gales, nor stay in port without the risk of losing winds that would have wafted us to the wished-for shore. Phrenology, therefore, if a true system of human nature, ought not only to present to the popular reader a key of philosophy which shall enable him to unlock the stores of intellectual wealth contained in the volumes of our most gifted authors ; but likewise to render their representations of human character practically useful, by enabling him to discover the natural qualities of living individuals previously to experience of their conduct, and thus to appreciate their tendencies before becoming the victim of their incapacity or passions.

The causes of the failure of the metaphysician are easily recognised. He studied the mind chiefly by reflecting on his own consciousness ; he turned his attention inwards, observed the phenomena of his own faculties, and recorded these as metaphysical science. But the mind is not conscious of organs at all ; we are not informed by it of the existence of muscles, nerves of motion, nerves of taste, nerves of smell, an auditory apparatus, optic nerves, or any mental organs whatever. All that consciousness reveals is, that


the mind inhabits the head ; but it does not inform us what material substances the head contains : hence it was impossible for the metaphysician to discover the organs of the mind by his method of philosophizing, and no metaphysical philosopher pretends to have discovered them. The imperfection of this mode of investigation accounts for the contradictory representation of the human mind given by different metaphysicians. Suppose an individual with a brain like that of a New Hollander, to turn philosopher ; he would never, by reflecting on his own consciousness, find an instinctive sentiment of justice, and therefore he would exclude it from his system. On the other hand, another philosopher, constituted like Dr Spurzheim, would feel it strongly, and give it a prominent place.

"When we turn our attention to the works of Physiologists, we discover the most ceaseless, but fruitless, endeavours to ascertain, the parts of the body with which the several mental powers are most closely connected. Some of them have dissected the brain, in the hope of discovering in its texture an indication of the functions which it performs in relation to the mind ; but success has not hitherto crowned their efforts. When we examine, with the most scrupulous minuteness, the form, colour, and texture of the brain, no sentiment can be perceived slumbering in its fibres, nor half-formed ideas starting from its folds. It appears to the eye only as a mass of curiously convoluted matter ; and the understanding declares its incapacity to penetrate the purposes of its parts. In fact, we cannot, by merely dissecting any organ of the body whatever, discover its vital functions. Anatomists for many centuries dissected the nerves of motion and feeling, and saw nothing in their structure that indicated the difference of their functions ; and, at this moment, if the nerves of taste and of hearing were presented together on the table, we might look at them for ages without discovering traces of separate functions in their structure. Simple dissection of the brain, therefore,



could not lead to the discovery of the functions of its different parts.1

Thus, the obstacles which have hitherto opposed the attainment of this information have ,been numerous and formidable. The imagination, however, has been called in, to afford a substitute for the knowledge which philosophy withheld, and theories have been invented to supply the place of principles founded on facts and legitimate induction. Some physiologists, while they locate the understanding in the brain, derive the affections and passions from various abdominal and thoracic viscera, ganglia, and nerves. But the groundlessness of this notion is apparent from a variety of circumstances. In the first place, there is a presumption against it in the fact, that the heart, liver, and intestines have well-known functions entirely different from those so ascribed to them ; and it is contrary to the established principles of physiology to suppose that a muscular organ like the heart is at once an apparatus for propelling the blood., and the organ of courage and love,-or that the liver, which secretes bile, and the bowels, which are organs of nutrition, are at the same time respectively the organs of anger and compassion. These emotions being mental phenomena, it is presumable that they ought to be referred, like the analogous phenomena of intellect, to the nervous system. Secondly, no relation is found to subsist between the size of these viscera and the mental qualities ascribed to them : cowardly men have not small hearts, nor do we find the liver more ample in angry men than in mild and pacific. Thirdly, disease of the brain influences the affective faculties not less than the intellectual ; while, on the other hand, the abdominal and thoracic viscera are often in a morbid

1 The proposition that the structure of an organ does not reveal its function is to be understood with reference not to mechanical functions, but only to vital. Harvey was led to discover the function of the heart and bloodvessels, by observing in them certain valves capable of permitting the blood to flow in one direction, but not in the opposite. So true it is. however, that vital functions are not revealed by dissection, that physiologists have, not even yet been able to determine the office of the spleen.


state without any corresponding change of the faculties ascribed to them. Fourthly, why do not children, in whom these viscera are well developed even at birth, manifest all the passions in their earliest years ? Fifthly, many idiots, almost or wholly destitute of some of the affections, have nevertheless a complete development of the thoracic and abdominal viscera. Sixthly, it is very improbable that animals of different species having the viscera alike, should manifest opposite affections-that the heart, for example, should be the organ of fear in the sheep and of courage in the dog.1 Lastly and above all, observation proves that the affective faculties are stronger and weaker according as certain parts of the brain are more or less developed ; a fact which will be demonstrated when we come to treat of them in detail. Those who argue that, because fear and anger cause palpitation of the heart, it must be the organ of these passions, do in reality (according to the remark of Dr Mason Good, quoted above, p. 12.) mistake an effect for its cause. By means of the nerves the thoracic and abdominal viscera are intimately connected with the brain, and a very close sympathy exists between them. Excitement and disease of the brain, therefore, often produce marked effects upon the viscera ; and in like manner diseases of the stomach and liver have a very obvious influence on the brain. Excitement even of the intellectual faculties is not unfrequently found to affect the viscera: thus it is recorded of Malebranche, that he was seized with lively palpitations of the heart when reading the Treatise on Man of Descartes ; and Tissot, in his work on the Diseases of Literary and Sedentary Persons, refers to many cases where over-exertion of the intellect occasioned the same diseases of the viscera as those produced by too great violence of the passions. So also, vomiting is sometimes occasioned by wounds of the brain ; but the brain is not therefore the seat of vomiting.

1 Gall, ii. 93-97.-I do not regard the sixth argument as of much value; for an organ apparently the same may have different functions in difterent speeds of animals. See on this subject the Phrenological Journal , ix. 514.


On the other hand, nervous affections, equally with those of the viscera, result from great activity of the passions, in the various forms of palsy, convulsions, madness, and epilepsy. Grief, as every one is aware, makes us shed tears ; fear produces a sensation of cold in the skin, and causes the legs to totter; and indigestion frequently occasions toothache : but are we thence to infer that the lachrymal glands are the organs of grief, the teeth the seat of indigestion, and the skin or legs the organs of fear? In short, to use the words of Adelon, who has adopted the whole of Gall's arguments on this point, "les objections se présentent en foule contre toute cette doctrine."1 Even Dr Prichard, who proposes no other seat for the passions, abandons the claim of the thoracic and abdominal viscera as utterly hopeless-on the ground, among others, " that the same emotion will display its effect on different organs in different individuals. Fear or terror will occasion in one person fainting or palpitation of the heart ; in another, it affects the liver or intestinal canal ; but the particular effect would probably be uniform and unvaried if the mental emotion were dependent on some particular ganglion of the great sympathetic nerve [which was the idea of Bichât]. The vagueness of popular language on this subject is sufficient to prove that the physical effects of the emotions are very various. The Greeks referred most of the passions to the liver, spleen, and diaphragm ; the Hebrews, to the bowels and reins; the moderns refer them almost solely to the heart. The diversity of these phenomena, which vary according to the peculiarities of constitution, proves that they are secondary effects produced by the emotions through sympathy on the functions of the viscera, those organs being most affected which in each individual have the greatest irritability or susceptibility of impressions." 2

1 Adelon, Physiologie de l'Homme, 2d. edit. i. 160.

2 Prichard's Review of the Doctrine of a Vital Principle, &c. p. 179. In a subsequent sentence, this author displays no small degree of ignorance, real or affected, of the facts collected and observed by other physiologists.


Another class of physiologists have compared the size of the brain of man with that of the brains of the lower animals, contrasting at the same time their mental powers ; and have been led to the conclusion that it is the organ of the mind, and that its superior development in man indicates his mental superiority over the brutes ; but these philosophers have not .succeeded in determining the functions of the different parts of this organ, and have not been able in any important degree, to connect their discoveries with the philosophy of mind. Camper, in order to measure the extent of the brain, and, as he imagined, the corresponding energy of the intellectual faculties, drew a vertical line, touching the upper lip and the most prominent part of the forehead ; and also a horizontal line, crossing the former, and touching the tips of the upper front teeth and the external opening of the ear, or at least corresponding to these points in its direction : and he thought that man and brutes have more understanding, the more the upper and inner angle formed by the two lines, or that including the upper jaw, nose, &c. is obtuse ; and, on the contrary, that they are more stupid, the more this " facial angle" is acute. But this way of measuring the intellectual facilities is not more correct than that previously mentioned. The facial angle applies only to the middle parts of the brain situated in the forehead, and is inapplicable to all the lateral and posterior parts ; hence it could, even if there were no other objection, indicate only those faculties whose organs constitute the middle of the forehead. Besides, in many Negroes, the jaw-bones are extremely prominent, and the facial angle acute ; while their foreheads are in fact largely developed, and their intellectual faculties powerful-although, by Camper's rule, they ought to be inferior to many stupid Europeans, whose foreheads are deficient, but whose jaws re-

« Later writers," says he, "have abandoned the notion of Bichât and have referred the passions to the brain. But this supposition is equally gratuitous, and supported by no proof !" P. 180.


cede. Hence, the facial angle cannot serve as a means of measuring the moral sentiments and intellectual faculties.1

Some physiologists, as Sommering and Cuvier, have compared the size of the brain in general with the size of the face ; and, according to them, animals are stupid as the face is large in proportion to the brain. But that this rule is not infallible, is easily proved ; because Leo, Montaigne, Leibnitz, Haller, and Mirabeau, had large faces and very considerable brains. Bossuet, Voltaire, and Kant, had, on the contrary, small faces and also large brains.2

The cerebral parts have likewise been compared with each other, in order to ascertain their functions ; as, the brain with the cerebellum, the brain with the medulla oblongata, with the nerves, &c. : but these modes also have led to no satisfactory results.

Some physiologists have endeavoured to discover the functions of the parts of the brain, by mutilating certain portions of it in animals, and observing the effects produced on their mental manifestations. But four conditions are necessary to the success of this method of investigation :-
First, The part destroyed must be a distinct organ with a specific function ; secondly, The part injured must be such that it can be cut without necessarily involving the disorder of the functions of a variety of other parts ; thirdly, If it be nerves that we cut, the functions of the organ to which they are distributed must be known ; and, fourthly, After the operation, the state of these functions must be completely within reach of observation. These conditions were present in Sir Charles Bell's experiments in irritating or cutting roots of the nerves of motion and sensation. (See the Section on the Nerves in a subsequent page.) For, 1st, These nerves were distinct organs, each having a specific function ; 2dly, It was possible to cut a branch of the fifth pair, or a root of a spinal nerve, without involving the functions of the nervous system in general in derangement ; 3dly, It was known that

1 Spurzheim's Phrenology, p. 58-60. 2 Ibid. p. 61.


the muscles manifest voluntary motion and sensation ; and hence, when one of these powers was suppressed, it was possible to distinguish its absence ; 4thly, the muscles on which the cut nerves were ramified were so much within reach of observation, that they could be forced into action or sensation at the will of the experimenter, and hence he could discover the effect of his operations.

When, however, Flourens proceeded to cut out, in living animals, the cerebellum and different parts of the hemispheres of the brain, these conditions were wanting. For, 1st, He could not say whether the parts were or were not distinct organs, executing specific functions ; 2dly, These parts could not be laid open and cut away without involving the functions of the nervous system generally-this proposition is now admitted by Sir Charles Bell and many other physiologists ; 3dly, He did not know beforehand what mental power the part destroyed manifested, and he could not therefore judge of its suppression ; and, 4thly, The animals in whom the cerebellum and parts of the convolutions were destroyed, were not, after the operations, in a condition of health, or placed in external circumstances calculated to shew whether they were or were not capable of manifesting any propensity which might be connected with the injured organs. There is not a shadow of evidence, for example, that these creatures manifested the propensity of Amativeness after the cerebellum was destroyed. Yet, it would be only by their doing so, that our doctrine, that this feeling is connected with the cerebellum, could be refuted by these experiments.

The physiologists who compared the size of the brain of man with that of the brains of the lower animals, in order to discover their functions, acted on the implied confession that the functions of the different parts of the brain in both were unknown. They entertained, it is true, some vague general ideas of the mental powers of man and animals, but they confessedly were unable to point out any particular faculty as connected with any particular part of the brain. Indeed, the object of their comparisons was


to discover this connection. They seem, however, not to have considered the difficulty of extracting a positive, out of two negatives, or to have perceived, that, by comparing two parts, both of whose uses were unknown, there were small probability of evolving a knowledge of the functions of either. Apparently they were led to adopt this method of investigation, in consequence of the success which had attended the comparison of the nerves, bones, bloodvessels, and other organs in man, with the same organs in animals. But they seem to have overlooked the fact, that wherever this comparison had enriched science, the uses of the organs compared were previously ascertained in each species, by direct observations made on itself. "Where this had not been the case, unknown functions have not been brought to light by this method. The nerves, for example, proceeding from the spinal marrow, had often been compared in man and animals, without leading to the discovery that those connected with the anterior column manifest motion, and those with the posterior, feeling. The vivi-sectors appear to have been led to institute their experiments, by the success which attended the vivisections of Sir Charles Bell in discovering the nerves of motion and sensation, without having reflected on the great difference between these nerves and the brain. The cutting of these nerves led to the discovery of their functions only because their extremities were ramified on external organs (the skin and muscles), on which each produced a special effect discoverable by observation. But each of the different emotions and intellectual powers, is not provided with a special external organ for its manifestation. Benevolence uses the same voluntary muscles to accomplish its deeds of charity, which Destructiveness employs to gratify its feelings of revenge. If each distinct cerebral part used a special external organ, then by destroying a given part of the brain, we might reasonably expect a certain external organ to lose its functions, and by this means we might discover what mental power the part destroyed manifested. But as the whole mental faculties, affective and intellectual, use the same external organs


for their manifestations, this index is wanting. When the whole brain is destroyed, we are told that » the animal sits as if it were stupified, it does not leave its place, it experiences no desires, no feeling, no fear, no anxiety ;" in other words, its whole mental functions are suppressed, and the outward manifestations of them cease ; but although this proves that the brain in general is the organ of the mind in general, it throws no light on the functions of its different


This method of discovering the functions of the brain is bow pretty generally given up. Sir Charles Bell says, " It is but a poor manner of acquiring fame, to multiply experiments on brutes, and take the chances of discovery. We ought at least to try to get at the truth without cruelty, and to form a judgment without having recourse to torture."l

1 An Essay on the Circulation of the Blood, by Charles Bell, &c. 1819, p. 25.

An inclination has occasionally been evinced to detract from the honour due to Dr Gall, by affirming that many previous writers taught the plurality of cerebral organs. In answer to such assertions I refer to page 20, and also quote the following remarks from The Medico-Chirurgical Review: " No great discovery was probably ever made instanter. Conjectures long precede proofs, in most instances. The real and effective discoverer, we imagine, is he who fixes the attention of the world on, and proves the discovery, by bringing it into complete operation. If Harvey or some other person had not demonstrated the circulation of the blood, all the hints and suppositions of his predecessors, from Hippocrates downwards, would have gone for nothing. Of what use was the actual knowledge of vaccination, possessed by the Gloucestershire farmers, till Jenner fixed the attention of the profession on it, and proved its efficacy in preventing variola ? Great numbers of Harvey's contemporaries denied the truth of the discovery-and afterwards, when the world acknowledged the truth of it, they attempted to prove that the circulation was known to many others before he was born. This has ever been the case, and arises from the envy and jealousy which men feel towards each other, while living, and rivals."-(No. 43. p. 31, January 1835). If the plurality of the cerebral organs was known, before the time of Gall, how was it possible for a physiologist like Dr Cullen to pen the following sentences? " Although we cannot doubt that the operations of our intellect always depends upon certain motions taking place in the brain, yet these motions have never been the objects of our senses, nor have we been able to perceive that any particular part of the brain has more confer» in the operations of our


Dr Roget, an opponent of Phrenology, freely confesses that " the brain is, even at the present day, as incomprehensible in its functions, as it is subtile and complex in its anatomy;"1 and the writer in the 94th Number of The Edinburgh Review says :-" Even within our own time, although many great anatomists had devoted themselves almost exclusively to describing the brain, this organ used to be demonstrated, by the greater number of teachers, in a manner which, however invariable, was assuredly not particularly useful. It was so mechanically cut down upon, indeed, as to constitute a sort of exhibition connected with nothing. The teacher and the pupil were equally dissatisfied with the performance, and the former probably the most ; the latter soon gave up the painful attempt to draw any kind of deductions from what he witnessed, and disposed of the difficulty as he best could, when he had to render an account of what he had seen. Up to this day, our memory is pained by the recollection of the barbarous names and regular sections of what was then the dullest part of anatomical study ; which, although often repeated, left no trace but of its obscurity or its absurdity. Here an oval space of a white colour, and there a line of grey or curve of red, were displayed ; here a cineritious, there a medullary mass ; here a portion white without and grey within, there a portion white within and grey without ; here a gland-pituitary, there a gland like grains of sand ; here a ventricle, there a cul-de-sac ; with endless fibres, and lines, and globules, and simple marks, with appellations no less fanciful than devoid of meaning."

" The anatomist dissected, and toiled on in this unpromising territory, and entangled himself more in proportion

intellect than any other. Neither have we attained any knowledge of what share the several parts of the brain have in that operation ; and, therefore, in this situation of our science, it must be a very difficult matter to discover those states of the brain that may give occasion to the various states of our intellectual functions." (Practice of Physic, vol. i. sect. 1539.) See also Dr T. Brown's Lectures, i. 420.

1 Encyc. Brit., article " Phrenology," vol. xvii. p. 454.


to his unwillingness to be defeated ; and he succeeded, no doubt, in making out a clear display of all these complicated parts, which few, however, could remember, and fewer still could comprehend. Then came the physiologist in still greater perplexity, and drew his conclusions, and assigned offices to the multiplied portions and ramifications of nervous substance, by arbitrary conjecture for the most part, and often with manifest inconsistency. Although the brain was generally allowed to be the organ of the intellectual faculties, it was supposed to give out from particular portions of the mass, but quite indifferently, nerves of sensation, general and specific, nerves of motion, and nerves of volition ; the single, double, or multiplied origin of nerves, which had not escaped notice, not being supposed to be connected with these separate offices."

" Such, so vague, so obscure, so inexact, so unsatisfactory, was the kind of knowledge communicated to the student, until a very recent period ; and the impression left by it was that of confused and unintelligible profusion in the distribution of nerves, of intricacy without meaning, of an expenditure of resources without a parallel in the other works of nature." (Pages 447-449.)

Unless, then, Dr Gall could boast of some other method of investigation than those of the ordinary physiologist and metaphysician, he could offer no legitimate pretensions to the solution of the question, What parts of the brain, and what mental faculties, are connected ? By great good fortune, however, he was led to adopt a different and superior mode of inquiry ; and this leads me to state shortly a few particulars of the history of the science which is now to be expounded.

Dr francis joseph gall, a physician of Vienna, afterwards resident in Paris,1 was the founder of the system. Prom an early age he was given to observation, and was

1 Born at Tiefenbrunn, near Pforzheim, in Suabia, on 9th March 1757; died at Paris 22d August 1828.


struck with the fact, that each of his brothers and sisters, companions in play, and schoolfellows, was distinguished from other individuals by some peculiarity of talent or disposition. Some of his schoolmates were characterized by the beauty of their penmanship, some by their success in arithmetic, and others by their talent for acquiring a knowledge of natural history or languages. The compositions of one were remarkable for elegance ; the style of another was stiff and dry ; while a third connected his reasonings in the closest manner, and clothed his argument in the most forcible language. Their dispositions were equally different ; and this diversity appeared also to determine the direction of their partialities and aversions. Not a few of them manifested a capacity for employments which they were not taught : they cut figures on wood, or delineated them on paper ; some devoted their leisure to painting, or the culture of a garden ; while their comrades abandoned themselves to noisy games, or traversed the woods to gather flowers, seek for bird-nests, or catch butterflies. In this manner, each individual presented a character peculiar to himself; and Gall observed, that the individual who in one year had displayed selfish or knavish dispositions, never became in the next a good and faithful friend.

The scholars with whom Gall had the greatest difficulty in competing, were those who learned by heart with great facility ; and such individuals frequently gained from him by their repetitions, the places which he had obtained by the merit of his original compositions.

Some years afterwards, having changed his place of residence, he "still met individuals endowed with an equally great talent for learning to repeat. He then observed that his schoolfellows so gifted possessed prominent eyes, and recollected that his rivals in the first school had been distinguished by the same peculiarity. When he entered the University he directed his attention, from the first, to the students whose eyes were of this description, and found that they all excelled in getting rapidly by heart, and giving cor-


rect recitations, although many of them were by no means distinguished in point of general talent. This fact was recognised also by the other students in the classes ; and although the connexion between talent and external sign was not at this time established upon such complete evidence as is requisite for a philosophical conclusion, Gall could not believe that the coincidence of the two circumstances was entirely accidental. From this period, therefore, he suspected that they stood in an important relation to each other. After much reflection, he conceived that if memory for words was indicated by an external sign, the same might be the case with the other intellectual powers ; and thereafter,. all individuals distinguished by any remarkable faculty became the objects of his attention. By degrees he conceived himself to have found external characteristics which indicated a decided disposition for painting, music, and the mechanical arts. He became acquainted also with some individuals remarkable for the determination of their character,. and he observed a particular part of their heads to be very largely developed : this fact first suggested to him the idea of looking to the head for signs of the dispositions or affective powers. But in making these observations, he never conceived for a moment that the skull was the cause of the different talents, as has been erroneously represented : from the first, he referred the influence, whatever it was, to the brain.

In following out, by observations, the principle which accident had thus suggested, he for some time encountered difficulties of the greatest magnitude. Hitherto he had been altogether ignorant of the opinions of physiologists touching the brain, and of metaphysicians respecting the mental faculties. He had simply observed nature. When, however, he began to enlarge his knowledge of books, he found the most extraordinary conflict of opinions every where prevailing ; and there for the moment, made him hesitate about the correctness of his own observations. He found that


the affections and passions had, by almost general consent, been consigned to the thoracic and abdominal viscera ; and that, while Pythagoras, Aristotle, Plato, Galen, Haller, and same other physiologists, placed the sentient soul or intellectual faculties in the brain, Van Helmont placed it in the stomach, Descartes and his followers in the pineal gland, and Drelincourt and others in the cerebellum.

He found also, that a great number of philosophers and physiologists asserted that all men are born with equal mental faculties ; and that the differences observable among them are owing either to education or to the accidental circumstances in which they are placed. If differences were accidental, he inferred, there could be no natural signs of predominating faculties ; and consequently the project of learning, by observation, to distinguish the functions of the different portions of the brain, must be hopeless. This difficulty he combated by the reflection, that his brothers, sisters, and schoolfellows, had all received very nearly the same education, but that he had still observed each of them unfolding a distinct character, over which circumstances appeared to exert only a limited control ; and farther, that not unfrequently those whose education had been conducted with the greatest care, and on whom the labours of teachers had been most assiduously bestowed, remained far behind their companions in attainments. " Often," says he, " we were accused of want of will, or deficiency of zeal ; but many of us could not, even with the most ardent desire, followed out by the most obstinate efforts, attain, in some pursuits, even to mediocrity ; while in some other points, some of us surpassed our schoolfellows without an effort, and almost, it might be said, without perceiving it ourselves. But, in point of fact, our masters did not appear to attach much faith to the system which taught equality of mental faculties ; for they thought themselves entitled to exact more from one scholar, and less from another. They spoke frequently of natural gifts, or of the gifts of God, and consoled


their pupils in the words of the Gospel, by assuring them that each would be required to render an account only in proportion to the gifts which he had received."1

Being convinced by these facts that there is a natural and constitutional diversity of talents and dispositions, he encountered in books still another obstacle to his success in determining the external signs of the mental powers. He found that, instead of faculties for languages, drawing, music, distinguishing places, and mechanical arts, corresponding to the different talents which he had observed in his schoolfellows, the metaphysicians spoke only of general powers, such as perception, conception, memory, imagination, and judgment : and when he endeavoured to discover external signs in the head, corresponding to these general faculties, and to determine the correctness of the physiological doctrines taught by the authors already mentioned regarding the seat of the mind, he found perplexities without end, and difficulties insurmountable.

Abandoning, therefore, every theory and preconceived opinion, Dr Gall gave himself up entirely to the observation of nature. Being a friend of Dr Nord, physician to a lunatic asylum in Vienna, he had opportunities, of which he availed himself, of making observations on the insane. He visited prisons, and resorted to schools ', he was introduced to the courts of princes, to colleges, and to seats of justice ; and wherever he heard of an individual distinguished in any particular way, either by remarkable endowment or deficiency, he observed and studied the development of his head. In this manner, by an almost imperceptible induction, he at last conceived himself warranted in believing that particular mental powers are indicated by particular configurations of the head.

Hitherto he had resorted only to physiognomical indications, as a means of discovering the functions of the brain. On reflection, however, he was convinced that physiology is imperfect when separated from anatomy. Having observed

1 Sur les Fonction» du Cerceau, Preface-; and tome v. p. 12.


a woman of fifty-four years of age, who had been afflicted with hydrocephalus from her youth, and who, with a body a little shrunk, possessed a mind as active and intelligent as that of other individuals of her class, Dr Gall declared his conviction, that the structure of the brain must be different from what was generally conceived-a remark which Tulpius also had made, on observing a hydrocephalic patient who manifested the mental faculties. He therefore felt the necessity of making anatomical researches into the structure of the brain.

In every instance where an individual whose head he had observed while alive happened to die, he requested permission to examine the brain, and frequently was allowed to do so ; and he found, as a general fact, that, on removal of the skull, the brain, covered by the dura mater, presented a form corresponding to that which the skull had exhibited in life.

The successive steps by which Dr Gall proceeded in his discoveries, are particularly deserving of attention. He did not, as many have imagined, first dissect the brain, and pretend, by that means, to discover the seats of the mental powers ; neither did he, as others have conceived, first map out the skull into various compartments, and assign a faculty to each, according as his imagination led him to conceive the place appropriate to the power. On the contrary, he first observed a concomitance between particular talents and dispositions, and particular forms of the head ; he next ascertained, by removal of the skull, that the figure and size of the brain are indicated by external appearances ; and it was only after these facts had been determined, that the brain was minutely dissected, and light thrown upon its structure.

At Vienna, in 1796, Dr Gall for the first time delivered lectures on his system.

In 1800, Dr JOHN GASPAR SPURZHEIM1 began the study

1 Born at Longuich, near Treves, on the Moselle, 31st December 1776 ; died at Boston, United States, on 10th November 1832.



of Phrenology under him, having in that year assisted, for the first time, at one of his lectures. In 1804, he was associated with him in his labours ; and, subsequently to that period, not only added many valuable discoveries to those of Dr Gall, in the anatomy and physiology of the brain, but contributed to form the truths brought to light by their respective observations, into a beautiful and interesting system of mental philosophy, and developed its moral applications. In Britain we are indebted chiefly to his personal exertions and printed works for a knowledge of the science.

In the beginning of his inquiries, Dr Gall neither did, nor could, foresee the results to which they would lead, or the relation which each successive fact, as it was discovered, would bear to the whole truths which time and experience might bring into view. Having ascertained any fact, he boldly affirmed its reality, without regard to any thing but truth. Perceiving, for instance, that the intensity of the desire for property bore a relation to the size of one part of the brain, he announced this fact by itself, and called the part the organ of Theft, because he found it prominent in thieves. When he had discovered that the propensity to conceal was in connexion with another part of the brain, he announced this fact also as an isolated truth, and named the part the organ of Cunning, because he found it very large in sly and fraudulent criminals. In a similar way, when he had discovered the connexion between the sentiment of Benevolence and another portion of the cerebral mass, he called the part the organ of Benevolence; and so on in regard to the other organs. This proceeding has nothing in common with the formation of an hypothesis ; and, so far from a disposition to invent a theory being conspicuous, there appears, in the disjointed items of information which Dr Gall at first presented to the public, a want of even an ordinary regard for systematic arrangement. His only object seems to have been to furnish a candid and uncoloured statement of the facts in nature which he had observed ;



leaving their value to be ascertained by time and farther investigation.

As soon, however, as observation had brought to light a great body of facts, and the functions of the organs were contemplated with a philosophical eye, a system of mental philosophy appeared to emanate almost spontaneously from the previous chaos.

Although, when the process of discovery had proceeded a certain length, the facts were found to be connected, yet, at first, it was impossible to perceive their logical relations. The doctrines appeared as a mere rude and undigested mass of rather unseemly materials ; the public mirth was, not unnaturally, excited by the display of organs of Theft, Quarrelsomeness, and Cunning, as they were then named ; and a degree of obloquy was brought upon the science, from which it is only now recovering. At this stage the doctrines were merely a species of physiognomy, and the apparent results were neither very prominent nor very inviting. When, however, the study had been pursued for years, and the torch of philosophy had been applied to the facts discovered by observation, its real nature as the physiology of the brain and the science of the human mind, and its beautiful consistency and high utility, became apparent, and its character and name changed as it advanced. It is finely remarked by Middleton, that no truth " can possibly hurt or obstruct the good effect of any other truth whatsoever : for they all partake of one common essence, and necessarily coincide with each other; and, like the drops of rain which fall separately into the river, mix themselves at once with the stream, and strengthen the general current."1

Having now unfolded the principles and method of investigation of Phrenology, I solicit the attention of the reader to one question. We have heard much of antiphrenologists ; and I would ask, What does the term antiphrenologist mean? Does it mean a person who, like Lord Brougham or Lord

1 Middleton's Miscellaneous Works, Preface.


Jeffrey, denies that the mind in feeling and reflecting uses organs at all ? To such I reply, that they ought to call themselves antiphysiologists ; because, as already mentioned, every physiological writer of eminence in Europe maintains, that the brain is the organ of the mind, and that injuries of it impair the mental faculties. Or does antiphrenologist mean one who admits the brain to be the organ of the mind, but contends that the whole of it is essential to every mental act? Then I request of him to reconcile with his theory the phenomena of dreaming, partial genius, partial idiocy, partial insanity, partial lesion of mental functions arising from partial injuries of the brain, and the successive development of the mental powers in youth. If antiphrenologist means a person who admits the mind to manifest a plurality of faculties by a plurality of organs, but denies that phrenologists have ascertained any of them, I ask him, Whether he disputes the three grand propositions-first, that dissection alone does not reveal vital functions ; secondly, that reflection on consciousness does not reveal organs ; and, thirdly, that mental manifestations may be compared with development of brain? If he denies these principles, he is beyond the reach of reason ; while, if he admits them, I would ask him to state what forms of brain, and what mental manifestations, he has found concomitant in his observations ? because, until he can make such a statement, his denial of the correctness of the observations of others is entitled to no consideration. But an antiphrenologist furnished with counter-facts has never yet appeared. The word, in its common signification, seems to indicate only an individual who, like the Ptolemeans in the time of Galileo, is pleased to deny that phrenologists are right, without knowing either their principles or their facts, or having any pretensions to advance the cause of truth by propounding sounder data or correcter observations of his own.

Vol. 1: [front matter], Intro, Nervous system, Principles of Phrenology, Anatomy of the brain, Division of the faculties 1.Amativeness 2.Philoprogenitiveness 3.Concentrativeness 4.Adhesiveness 5.Combativeness 6.Destructiveness, Alimentiveness, Love of Life 7.Secretiveness 8.Acquisitiveness 9.Constructiveness 10.Self-Esteem 11.Love of Approbation 12.Cautiousness 13.Benevolence 14.Veneration 15.Firmness 16.Conscientiousness 17.Hope 18.Wonder 19.Ideality 20.Wit or Mirthfulness 21.Imitation.
Vol. 2: [front matter], external senses, 22.Individuality 23.Form 24.Size 25.Weight 26.Colouring 27.Locality 28.Number 29.Order 30.Eventuality 31.Time 32.Tune 33.Language 34.Comparison, General observations on the Perceptive Faculties, 35.Causality, Modes of actions of the faculties, National character & development of brain, On the importance of including development of brain as an element in statistical inquiries, Into the manifestations of the animal, moral, and intellectual faculties of man, Statistics of Insanity, Statistics of Crime, Comparative phrenology, Mesmeric phrenology, Objections to phrenology considered, Materialism, Effects of injuries of the brain, Conclusion, Appendices: No. I, II, III, IV, V, [Index], [Works of Combe].


Back to home page

© John van Wyhe 1999-2011. Materials on this website may not be reproduced without permission except for use in teaching or non-published presentations, papers/theses.