Page images
PDF
EPUB

This "dependency of thing on thing" is not only one of the most incontestible evidences of mental sanity, but of a highly-educated mind. It is this one faculty which distinguishes one mind from another-which at once characterizes the scholar and the clown; it is the power to "re-word," as Hamlet says-knowing the dependency, the relation must be the same. Madness gambols from method, so does the undisciplined mind of the uneducated, unthinking boor: in both, the same aberrations occur, the difference is only in degree the effect is the same, the cause only is different. Our "myriad minded" bard must himself have possessed an absolute judgment; his memory was the mere subservient virtue. Method confers on the soul a sort of divine prescience, by which every result is predetermined. Without method, a mind is either a gloomy wild, or a wilderness of sweets; either destitute and dark, or confused amid the ungoverned exuberance of its fancy. The "fine phrenzy of the poet," the ravings of madness, or the ill-dependent relations of ignorance, illustrate the old proverb, that "extremes meet."

I reluctantly leave this subject; but it must be deferred until considering the character of Hamlet-or rather the biography of Hamlet, for the incidents of the play serve but to develop his mind; all centres in Hamlet, every line seems like a ray of light converging to one point.

What a fine illustration of method is this speech of Isabella :

"Isab.-I am the sister of one Claudio,
Condemn'd upon the act of fornication
To lose his head; condemn'd by Angelo:
I, in probation of a sisterhood,

Was sent to by my brother: One Lucio
As then the messenger;-

*

In brief,-to set the needless process by,
How I persuaded, how I pray'd, and kneel'd,
How he refell'd me, and how I replied;

(For this was of much length,) the vile conclusion
I now begin with grief and shame to utter:

He would not, but by gift of my chaste body

To his concupiscible intemperate lust,

Release my brother; and, after much debatement,

My sisterly remorse confutes mine honour,

And I did yield to him: But the next morn betimes,

His purpose surfeiting, he sends a warrant

For my poor brother's head."

What a "dependency of thing on thing!" In a few lines is

compressed the beginning, middle, and end; every line is the direct transit to what follows. Let the reader compare this speech with the gambols of Mrs. Quickly, or the Clown, in the first act of this play; the comparison is perfect.

The play ends by the exposure of Angelo's guilt, and reparation to the persecuted Mariana. The incidents are somewhat confused, and the sudden absence and re-appearance of the Duke as the Friar, seems awkward. Angelo's speech fills up the measure of our disgust for his character. The determined and satanic villainy of Iago, is less offensive than the pusillanimous repentance of Angelo. It may be received as a truth, that a stern unforgiving rule is the weakest of all virtues. The wisest men are, ceteris paribus, always the most merciful, because their appreciation goes beyond the act.

Z.

ON THE CONNECTION OF PHRENOLOGY
WITH PHYSIOGNOMY.*

By J. L. LEVISON.

THE science of Phrenology is one based on observation and induction. Its professors assert that it enables them to decide on the number of the connate mental faculties, their relative development, and that it thus furnishes the means of ascertaining the probable character of any individual, or, in other words, what are his natural tendencies. On the other hand, the advocates of Physiognomy claim for their science, data for obtaining a correct knowledge of character; and they assert that its rules are also deduced from numerous observations on men and animals. It will, therefore, be the object of this paper to treat of the relative merits of these two sciences, and to point out the greater importance of Phrenology when compared with Physiognomy, and subsequently to prove that it is only when they are studied together that the latter assumes anything of value for practical purposes.

Physiognomy is but the outward manifestation of the mental faculties, and only really so when some strong feeling or sentiment communicates a particular action to the facial muscles, which, in

* The substance of this paper forms part of one read by Mr. Levison, in 1827, before the members of the Hull Society for Phrenological Inquiry.

time, fashion the hard outline of the features.

But when there is

only a moderate capacity—that is, when there is nothing decided in a character-the face will then be a bad index to read, particularly if we desire to understand the subject in a definite manner. The features, when in a quiescent state, can only furnish certain arbitrary rules to judge by, as all kinds of disposition, every variety of temper, and every modification of the intellect, are found associated with similar typical forms of noses, mouths, chins, &c. I know a person with high mental qualifications, having features of a Roman cast, and another, equally talented and moral, with features resembling some kind of Monkey. The expression may be extremely similar in persons whose features are nevertheless very different. In these cases, the persons have invariably a similar cerebral organization, although they are unlike in the form of their features. Hence, in the science of Phrenology, there is considerably more certainty in our examinations than there is in Physiognomy, although both are interesting in forming conceptions of character.

We have abundant evidence that there exists a general harmony between the features and the head, similar to that which is to be traced throughout the whole of the bodily organs of an individual; there is an individuality in every organ. But how absurd would be the attempt to decide the mental qualifications of any one by his peculiar gait or stature, or by the form of the hand or arm, &c.! It is quite another thing when we have to judge by means of the cerebral organs: having ascertained their numbers and their functions, and how far the mental power is modified by the size of the whole brain, or its separate organs, under certain conditions,* we may be more accurate than by any other species of investigation. Our knowledge of the functions of the cerebral organs is as correct as the certainty of our knowledge of the functions of the eye or the ear. I now proceed to offer some proof of these statements. When there is anything like a definite character, the phrenologist cannot fail to recognise it; but the individual he examines may have national or family features similar to many commonplace personages. These may be considered exceptions to physiognomical rules, but they prove that these rules are less to be depended upon than are the phrenological data. Suppose a person is examined with the base of the brain and back of the head (basilar and occipital regions) larger than the moral sentiments and intellectual faculties; we

* The modifications alluded to are the bodily constitution or temperaments.

could at once declare his tendency to animal and selfish propensities, and we could specify his temper and disposition: nay, all this could be done without any inspection of the nose, mouth, or chin, &c.; but, in most instances, I admit that these features would indicate what is called "an animal face," though the most gifted disciple of Lavater would be puzzled to name particulars of such a person's disposition, &c. Or suppose the converse of the latter example :— the forehead ample, and the whole superior region much elevated, whilst the head, when viewed in front, presented it as narrow compared to the height. The merest tyro in Phrenology could, by mere manipulation, pronounce such an organization as indicative of great intellectual capacity and high moral perception; and this without any previous acquaintance with the person examined, or any knowledge of his facial expression.

Another proof of the superiority of Phrenology is the fact that, to obtain a correct likeness, the head must be a fac-simile. My attention was first called to the importance of this to the painter and sculptor from the following circumstance :-I had occasion to call on Mr. Higson, House Surgeon of the Hull Infirmary, when he pointed out a bust in plaster, and asked me whether I knew who it was like. I gave a hesitating answer, guessing it might be intended for his own, because the bust had a collar and white handkerchief round its neck, similar to the manner in which Mr. Higson himself used to wear them. On my exclaiming against it as a likeness, he supplied the following explanation: an Italian artist had taken his mask in plaster, which is a fac-simile of his features; but as he objected to have his head taken in the same way, the artist supplied "a fancy sketch," giving him, instead of his own high and wellformed head, one extremely narrow, and rather of an amorphous shape so that his most intimate friends did not know him, or even surmise that it was ever intended for him: he, therefore, dressed it in the manner described, and some, like myself, guessed against our own ocular information.

These and similar cases prove that the head is actually more important than the features as a means for recognising a likeness, and to individualize a person it is still more so. The slightest depression or elevation of the eye-brows more or less than they should be, destroys the identity of a portrait; in other words, a greater or less development of any of the perceptive faculties alters the intellectual character, and destroys the individuality of a person. If this be the case in the small group of organs which affect the form of the eyebrows, how much more so must it be when there is a greater

elevation of the head than there should be, or too much depression of the superior region of the moral sentiments, or if the animal propensities are rendered larger or smaller than in the original!

With these general introductory remarks I must, for the present, conclude; many extremely interesting proofs of their general accuracy are in my possession, and may be communicated at some future opportunity.

Doncaster, Nov. 13, 1836.

(To be continued).

SOME REMARKS ON MUSEUMS OF NATURAL

HISTORY.

BY JOHN EDWARD GRAY, F.R.S., &c.

STAYING lately in the neighbourhood of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, I repeatedly visited the Museum of the Natural History Society of that town, and I was much pleased with the collection, and the admirable state in which it is kept; but I was more especially gratified with the liberality of the subscribers in throwing the Museum open, without the necessity of an introduction, or any charge to their fellow-townsmen—a facility of access scarcely to be expected, except in a national establishment like the British Museum. The museum of this society was formerly opened to all classes in an evening, when it was lighted up for the occasion; but the visitors who availed themselves of the privilege were so numerous, that it was impossible for them to inspect the collection with advantage. The committee, in consequence, was under the necessity of altering their mode of admission; they now issue a certain number of tickets each night, which are sent to the workmen of the different factories in the neighbourhood, in rotation, for the admission of the holder and his family, or to such persons as make previous application at the institution; a plan which has been found to give gen. eral satisfaction.

The anniversary meeting occurred during my stay in Newcastle, and it is characteristic of the liberality of the subscribers, that one of its members rose and inquired if the council had taken into consideration how increased facilities could be given for the admission

VOL. V.-No. XVIII.

2 M

« PreviousContinue »