Phrenology, a term derived from Φρήν, mind, and λόγος, discourse, designates a science which professes to be a 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 by Dr Gall, a German physician. (See GALL.) In Britain, it attracted little attention until 1815. It has met with strenuous support and determined opposition during the last half century, and its claims as an established science are still sub judice.
Phrenology claims preference over all other systems as a professedly practical science of mind. Starting from its fundamental principle, that the brain is the essential organ of the mental powers, it attempts to show in what respects, and by what methods, the mental nature of man can be developed, and his material and moral welfare advanced. In other words, it systematically applies our knowledge of the anatomy, physiology, and pathology of the brain to education, legislation, religion, morals, the fine arts, and the science and art of medicine.
The principles of phrenology are as follows:—1. Phrenology maintains that the mind and the body are inseparable in this world, and cannot be investigated apart from each other. It is man as a "concrete Ego," and not as an immaterial Ego, that it examines. This principle is controverted by the doctrine of "spirits," and the views of speculative theologians and metaphysicians, but it is evidently in concurrence with the daily practice and common sense of mankind. 2. The brain is the immediate organ of the mind; or, in other words, all the modifications of our consciousness, known as feeling, thought, and will, take place within that portion of the body contained within the skull, i.e., the encephalon or cerebral organs. This is a doctrine founded also on the common sense of mankind, and admitted by a preponderating majority of philosophers and physiologists. 3. The brain is a double organ, one-half of which may act independently of the other. That is to say, just as we can see with one eye, hear with one ear, or see or hear differently with the two organs, so the one-half of the brain may act independently of, or differently from, the other half. This principle is now admitted by the best modern writers, as it was by the most distinguished of the ancients. Nevertheless, as in seeing and hearing, the two organs of the senses usually act consensuously, so in thought and will the two mental organs, or cerebral hemispheres and their connections, commonly act consensuously. 4. Phrenology affirms that there are separate and distinct mental faculties, and that each has its corresponding seat or organ in each of the cerebral hemispheres; in other words, although consciousness is one, its modes of manifestation are diverse, according to the development of certain corresponding portions of the cerebrum. There is an exception to this principle in the love of the sexes, which has only one organ, and that the cerebellum. This principle has been much controverted, on grounds which we will shortly examine. 5. It is further maintained that power of mind is, ceteris paribus, dependent upon size or development of the cerebral hemispheres; and since what is true of the whole must be true of the parts, it follows that the power of particular faculties is also, ceteris paribus, dependent on the size of special organs. This doctrine has also been much controverted.
Phrenologists have founded upon these principles:—1. A system of psychology, in which the nature, mode of action, sphere of operation, and relations of distinct mental faculties, are set forth. 2. A system of physiognomy, founded upon (a) the form of the skull, as determined by the size and form of the cerebral hemispheres, or of particular portions of them; (b) upon the natural language of the feelings and faculties, as displayed in the attitudes, &c. 3. A practical sociology, or the application of these systems of psychology and physiognomy, in connection with the fundamental principles of cerebral physiology, to the welfare of society and the ordinary business of life.
Organology of Phrenology.—We will notice some of the most important of the phrenological principles, still sub judice; and first as to the Organology of Phrenology. This doctrine is twofold in its nature, being psychological, as it respects the arrangement of the modes of consciousness into faculties; anatomical and physiological, as it respects the assignment of a portion of the brain to each faculty. The proofs adduced by the advocates of phrenology in support of these doctrines are as follows:—
(a.) As to the psychological division into faculties and the like. 1. It is an undisputed truth that varying mental states characterise the different stages of man's development. Reasoning powers appear later than emotional states; a child observes much sooner than he reflects; he fears and loves before he venerates. 2. But it is not only the individual man, at various stages of his life, that manifests various faculties. Man, when examined in the mass, as in families, races, or nations, presents great varieties of faculties, desires, sentiments, instincts. Metaphysicians do but re-echo popular opinion when they arrange these varying states of consciousness under such generic terms as the instinctive, emotional, and intellectual faculties. Every thoughtful father is anxious to discover whether his son has congenitally or "naturally" any predominant faculties, modes, or powers of action, so that his course of life may be so shaped as to give scope to the free exercise of the so-called "talents" he possesses. It is within the experience of every observing man that there are so-called "talented families," one member of which excels perhaps Phrenology in mathematics, another in poetry, another in music, another in painting, and so on. It was, in fact, this diversity of character which first suggested to Gall to observe whether there was any connection between it and diversity of external form. Observing accordingly, he at last connected these diversities of character with diversities of physiognomy, and at last was led to the idea that the variety of faculties was connected with varieties in the form and size of the cranium, and therefore with the form and size of the brain. The observation of races of mankind led to similar results. Thus the psychological observation of the faculties preceded the physiognomical observation of the organs. It follows, therefore, that the psychology of phrenology is not dependent upon either the physiology or the physiognomy of the science; or, in other words, it may be considered and applied as a distinct system of mental philosophy, independently of the latter.
It being determined by observation and induction that there are distinct faculties, sentiments, propensities, and the like, and it being also determined that the brain is the organ of the mind in general, it remains to determine, further, whether special portions of it are the seat or mechanism of special faculties or propensities, the existence of which is as necessary to the manifestation of those special mental states as the existence of the organ, as a whole, is necessary to the manifestation of mind as a whole. The following are the arguments adduced in favour of a multiplicity of cerebral organs:
1. It is noticeable, that in every organism there is a division of labour or function, with corresponding distinctness of organ. "In the economy of the human frame," Mr Combe remarks, "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; the middle for respiration;" or at least their functions are different, however physiologists may vary in opinion as to the nature or character of those functions. In like manner as to the general functions of the organism. 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. This is the argument founded on differentiation of structure and function, and is by no means so forcibly put by phrenological writers as it might be.
2. We have seen that the various mental powers of man are manifested in succession from childhood to adult life. And concurrently with this order of manifestation there is an order of development of the component parts of the brain. In childhood, for example, the middle part of the forehead generally predominates; in later life, the upper and lateral parts become more prominent—changes in strict accordance with the consecutive order of evolution of the observing and reasoning faculties.
3. Genius is almost always partial; which it ought not to be if there were no partial development of the organ, and if the whole brain were the seat of all and every faculty; in that case every faculty would be equally manifested, and none would be above another in power.
4. The phenomena of dreaming, insanity, and idiocy are equally at variance with the theory of singleness of the organ of mind, but quite consistent with the theory of its plurality. Were the organ single, it is clear that all the faculties should be asleep or awake at the same time, and to the same extent; or, in other words, there could be no such thing as dreaming. But that change of the functional activity of the brain which constitutes sleep being only partial in Phrenology its intensity, or in the extent to which it involves the brain, those portions which are less affected are partially active, so that partial manifestations of the consciousness take place which in an infinite variety constitute dreaming. Again, in partial idiocy, whilst some faculties are manifested to a singular extent, others are absolutely deficient. Concurrently with this partial development of the intellect there is a partial development of the cerebrum. But, independently of the observed phenomena, it is a just a priori inference, that if the brain were a single organ, there would not be this remarkable absence of some mental powers with the presence of others. Not dissimilar are the conclusions to be drawn from the phenomena of mental disease, occurring in persons with ordinary development of the body and mind. Just as in idiocy and dreaming, so in monomania there is a morbid manifestation of special mental states. Now, the same argument, a priori, applies here as in the other instances; and it is inferred that there is a special disease of a portion of the brain upon which the special morbid manifestation depends. Partial injuries of the brain, and their accompanying phenomena, come under this category of disease, but are more demonstrative of the general principle.
All these phenomena are of daily occurrence, and the conclusions to which they point have been forced upon the attention of philosophers and physiologists from Aristotle and Galen downwards. The Aristotelian philosophy arranged the faculties under three heads, namely, the judgment, imagination, and memory. In the thirteenth century, Albertus Magnus divided the cranium phrenologically into three regions, so as to correspond to this arrangement: the anterior portion was allotted to the judgment or intellect, the middle to the imagination, the posterior to the memory. Petrus Montagnana published a similar chart in 1491. Mr Combe figures in his "System" a more elaborate craniological chart of this kind, published in 1562, at Venice, by Ludovico Dolce, in a work upon strengthening and refreshing the memory. In the second volume of the Phrenological Journal, drawings of human and comparative physiognomy are given from a work by John Baptista Porta (1596), entitled De Humana Physiognomia.
Modern anatomists and physiologists in general, from Willis downwards, have asserted the principle of multiplicity of cerebral structures as organs of mental powers, or seats of mental states. Willis made careful dissections of the brain, with a view to determine the seat of the various faculties, or, in his own words, the particular "canals" or "passages" through which the "animal spirits" pass when various mental states are induced or manifested. His dissections and engravings of the brain are interesting even now; for in some respects he taught doctrines similar to, and even in advance of, those of modern physiologists. He made the corpora striata the seat of consciousness, in connection with doctrines as to diversity of function of other portions of the encephalon. "As to the offices and uses of the corpora striata, though we can discern nothing with our eyes, or handle with our hands, of those things that are done within the secret conclave or closet of the brain, yet by the effects, and by comparing rationally the faculties and acts with the workmanship of the machine, we may at least conjecture what sort of works of the animal function are performed in these or those, or within some other parts of the head; especially because it plainly appears that the offices of the interior motions and senses, as well as of the exterior, are acted by the help of the animal spirits ordained within certain and distinct paths, or as it were small little..." Willis's researches were instituted in relation to the current theory of the animal spirits (subsequently replaced by the *vis nervosa* and "nervous fluid"), as the efficient agents of sensation, motion, and thought, which were generated in the brain. This was the doctrine of Galen, and held its ground until the commencement of the eighteenth century. In accordance with this theory, the Arabian writers, following Galen, fixed upon the ventricles of the brain as the special seat of the mental faculties; one of the anterior ventricles they made the seat of common sensation; the other of the imaginative faculty; the third ventricle was the seat of understanding, and the fourth of memory. These doctrines were also maintained by Duns Scotus, Thomas Aquinas, and other philosophers as late as Descartes; Caspar Banhun was the first to question them, and to maintain that the "animal spirits" were generated in the substance of the brain and distributed directly from thence through the nerves to the organs of sensation and motion. Plater, Varol, Spiegel, Caspar Hoffmann, and others, also opposed the ventricular theory of localization, especially the last mentioned, and who in consequence drew down upon him the anathemas of those who supported the ancient theories. He was particularly charged by Riolan the younger with ignorance, and with unsettling, by his new dogma, both the entire pathology and therapeutics of the brain; for he actually had the temerity to fix the seat of epilepsy and apoplexy in the substance of the brain, and not in the ventricles, as Galen taught.
"And this is the argument," Prochaska remarks (from whom we have taken the preceding facts), "with which physicians are accustomed to meet new dogmas when opposed to their own, even if true; lest they should be compelled by shame to unlearn, when old, those theories which they have learnt in youth. Harvey was met with almost a similar argument, and considered as an audacious man."
It was after the "animal spirits" were ejected from the ventricles that Malpighi, Sylvius, and Willis attempted to show that they were secreted by the cortical substance, whence they were received by the medullary substance, to be transmitted by it to the nerves of the whole body. To these, therefore, is due, and of these more especially to Willis, the first indication of the established doctrine of modern physiology, and which Gall and Spurzheim more fully developed—namely, that the cortical part of the brain, or the cineritious neurine, is ganglionic, or the seat of action or energy; and that the medullary or fibrous is a conducting structure, analogous to the trunks of the nerves. Willis retained some of the other Galenical doctrines; but he peculiarly advocated that the cerebrum subserves to the animal functions and the voluntary motions, the cerebellum to the involuntary; that a perception of all the sensations takes place in the ascending fibres of the *corpora striata*, and that through the descending fibres voluntary movements are excited; that the understanding and imagination have their seat in the *corpus callosum*, and the memory in the convolutions, which are its "storehouses."
A host of physiologists supported or opposed the doctrines of Willis; but amidst the innumerable controversies which arose, the doctrine of mental organology, or of cerebral differentiation of structure, with specialization of function, continually advanced. In 1784 Prochaska summarized the views of previous inquirers generally, and indicated the advance which the doctrine had reached at this period, when Gall began his researches and teaching. The 3d section of the 5th chapter of Prochaska's *Dissertation* (1784) is headed, "Do each of the divisions of the intellect occupy a separate portion of the brain?" In answer to this proposed problem, Prochaska proceeds thus: "It is our consciousness, and a certain peculiar feeling, which convinces every one that he thinks with his brain. But since the brain as well as the cerebellum is composed of many parts variously figured, it is probable that nature, which never works in vain, has destined those parts to various uses, so that the various faculties of mind seem to require different portions of the cerebrum and cerebellum for their production. Since, however, the *sensorium commune* reflects the sensorial impressions into motor by definite laws peculiar to itself, and independently of consciousness, and since we have laid down that the *sensorium commune* comprises the *medulla oblongata*, *medulla spinalis*, and the origin of all the nerves, it follows that the cerebrum and cerebellum, together with their connections, the *sensorium commune* excepted, constitute the organs of the faculty of thought; and as in some animals these are entirely wanting, it is fair to conjecture that the faculty of thought is also wanting, and that they exist solely in virtue of the *vis nervosa* of the *sensorium commune*, and of the nerves with which they are endowed." Prochaska thus eliminated the hemispheres with the *corpus callosum* and cerebellum from those portions of the encephalon which he allotted to the sensorium,—namely, the ganglionic origins of the cerebral nerves, the *crura*, the *medulla oblongata*, and *medulla spinalis*,—and constituted them the organs of mind.
This was the state of knowledge when Gall first attempted to allocate portions of the hemispheres to special faculties. But in doing this both Gall and Spurzheim limited the term *medulla oblongata* to that portion of the central axis which extends from the lower border of the *pons Varolii* to the occipital foramen, and thus deviated from the anatomical definitions of their predecessors,—for Prochaska was not alone in his doctrines. Long previously Willis had stated, "where the *corpus callosum* is thought to end, there the *medulla oblongata* begins," and he anatomically describes it accordingly. All the successors of Willis used the term *medulla oblongata* more or less in a similar sense. Hence the older writers marked three great divisions of the encephalon—the cerebrum, brain, or hemispheres, including their commissure, the *corpus callosum*; the cerebellum or little brain, with its *crura*, and the head of the spinal column; and the *medulla oblongata* or oblong medulla, including from the *corpora striata* downward. The *medulla spinalis* and *oblongata* were also termed the *cerebrum pro-longatum*, the prolonged brain,—the theory being, that this portion of the central axis arose, or was prolonged from, the cerebrum. Now the *medulla oblongata*, thus defined, was considered to be the point of origin of the encephalic nerves, and (through its continuation into the spinal cord) of all the nerves of the body. In this way it came to be considered the seat of sensation (the *sensorium commune*, the common centre of consciousness), or point of union between the sensory nerves on the one side, and the hemispheres on the other. This doctrine disappeared almost wholly with the advance of Gall's views, and the ganglia constituting that portion of the *medulla oblongata* situated above the *pons Varolii* were considered to be part of the brain or cerebrum. It is only within the last few years that Dr Carpenter has revived it as a new theory, giving the name "sensory ganglia" to these structures, instead of *sensorium commune*.
With this explanation, we can better understand Prochaska's conclusions as to a plurality of organs of the mental faculties. When he proceeds to discuss the question,—after
---
1 *Two Discourses concerning the Soul of Brutes*, which is that of the Vital and Sensitives of Man, by Thomas Willis, Doctor in Physick, Professor of Natural Philosophy in Oxford, &c.; Englished by S. Pordage, Student in Physick, folio, 1683, p. 27. 2 *The Principles of Physiology*, by J. A. Unzer, and a *Dissertation on the Functions of the Nervous System*, by George Prochaska; translated and edited for the Sydenham Society by Thomas Laycock, M.D., &c., &c., 1851, p. 371. 3 Op. citato, p. 446. 4 Ibid. loc. citato. Phrenology alluding to the obscurity of the subject, and remarking that he is of opinion with Haller, that "careful dissections of the brains of famous persons, apologetics, and such as have other disorders of the understanding," are the only means of throwing light upon it; and after advancing various arguments in support of the doctrine of organology, he adds, "It is therefore by no means improbable that each division of the intellect has its allotted organ in the brain [or hemispheres], so that there is one for the perceptions, another for the understanding, probably others also for the will, and imagination, and memory, which act wonderfully in concert, and materially excite each other to action. The organ of the imagination, however, amongst the rest, will be far apart, I should think, from the organ of perceptions, since the organ of perceptions being asleep and at rest, the organ of the imagination may be in action, a condition which produces dreams;" an argument identical, as we have seen, with that brought forward in support of the doctrine by modern phrenologists. It thus appears, therefore, that when Gall promulgated his views, the doctrine of plurality of mental organs was one which had been universally admitted since the time of Galen. The only questions that arose were as to the portions of the encephalon to be allotted to each: theologians, philosophers, schoolmen, physicians, anatomists, physiologists, all adopted without question the general principle. Mr Combe is completely justified, therefore, in his conclusion, "that the presumptions are all in favour of a plurality of mental faculties manifesting themselves by a plurality of organs." Modern physiologists have, however, objected to these doctrines. Dr Carpenter, for example, says that it "seems to be a fundamental error to suppose that the entire intellect can be split up into a certain number of faculties; for each faculty that is distinguished by the psychologist expresses nothing else than a mode of activity, in which the whole power of the mind may be engaged at once,—just as the whole power of the locomotive steam-engine may be employed in carrying it forwards or backwards, according to the direction given to its action. And if this be true, it must be equally erroneous to attempt to parcel out the cerebrum [meaning the hemispheres] into distinct 'organs' for these respective faculties; the whole of it (so far as we [Dr Carpenter] can form a judgment), being called into operation in every kind of intellectual process which occupies the attention at the time." The analogy drawn between the human mind and a steam-engine is rather too wide to help in the elucidation of an argument, and need not be examined, the more especially because Dr Carpenter really elsewhere expresses other and sounder views on this point. After noting the correspondence between the development of the brain, and the manifestations of intelligence in lower animals, and specially the "very decided evidence furnished by the great enlargement of the cerebrum [the hemispheres], and the corresponding alteration in the form of the cranium, which present themselves in those races of dogs most distinguished for their educability," Dr Carpenter adds, "This general inference, drawn from comparative anatomy, is borne out by observation of the human species. When the cerebrum [cerebral hemispheres] is fully developed, it offers innumerable diversities of form and size among various individuals; and there are as many diversities of character. It may be doubted if two individuals were ever exactly alike in this respect." We have placed within brackets an interpolation of the meaning of the word cerebrum in accordance with one of the senses in which it is used by the writer. Dr Carpenter evidently means to say (in common with the best of modern neurologists), that the hemispheres of the brain of man and the higher animals present as many diversities in form and size as there Phrenology are diversities of individual character. Now, the phrenologists say no more, except that they have carefully observed, and to a certain extent determined by observation, the relations which these diversities in the form and size of the hemispheres bear to the diversities in the characters of individuals. We may add, that one of the most distinguished of living physiological psychologists fully admits the phrenological doctrine of plurality of faculties and organs, although he is by no means in favour of phrenology generally. "The phrenologists rightly regard it as probable," Sir H. Holland remarks, "or even as proved, that there is a certain plurality of parts in the total structure of the brain corresponding to, and having connection with, the different intellectual and moral faculties. The undoubted natural diversity of these faculties makes this probable, seeing that we must regard a certain organization as ministering in the present life even to the higher powers of our nature. The partial and varying effects of accident, disease, or other less obvious change in the brain, in producing derangement of the mental functions, furnish more direct evidence, and such as we cannot refuse to admit."
On the side of modern psychology, we have equally strong testimony. Mr Herbert Spencer, one of the most profound thinkers of the day, remarks,—"No physiologist who calmly considers the question in connection with the general truths of this science can long resist the conviction that different parts of the cerebrum subserve different kinds of mental action. Localization of function is the law of all organization whatever; separateness of duty is universally accompanied with separateness of structure; and it would be marvellous were an exception to exist in the cerebral hemispheres. Let it be granted that the cerebral hemispheres are the seat of the higher psychical activities; let it be granted that among those higher psychical activities there are distinctions of kind, which, though not definite, are yet practically recognisable; and it cannot be denied, without going in direct opposition to established physiological principles, that these more or less distinct kinds of psychical activity must be carried on in more or less distinct parts of the cerebral hemispheres. To question this, is not only to ignore the truths of physiology as a whole, but especially those of the physiology of the nervous system." Mr Spencer further adds,—"either there is some arrangement, some organization in the cerebrum, or there is none. If there is no organization, the cerebrum is a chaotic mass of fibres incapable of performing any orderly action. If there is some organization, it must consist in that same physiological division of labour in which all organization consists; and there is no division of labour, physiological or other, of which we have any example, or can form any conception, but what involves the concentration of special kinds of activity in special places."
Now, although phrenology thus rightly connects those operations of the mind, or states of consciousness which are intellectual in their nature, with special centres of activity situate in the hemispheres, is it equally correct in placing the mere propensities or instincts, i.e., when devoid of ideas, exclusively in the same category? We think not, for it has been clearly shown, from arguments founded on the comparative anatomy and pathology of the encephalic structures, that this portion of the phrenological organology is very doubtful, and more particularly as to the seat of the sexual instinct, although we are not at all clear that doctrines like those of Dr Carpenter (certainly not new) are more valid. Just as Gall and Spurzheim used the term medulla oblongata in a more limited sense than preceding
---
1 System of Phrenology, 5th ed., vol. 1, p. 33. 2 Op. citato, p. 541-2. 3 Principles of Psychology, 1856, p. 607. 4 Human Physiology, 5th ed., pp. 598-9. 5 Chapters on Mental Physiology, 8vo, 1855, chap. IX. 6 Principles of Comparative Physiology, 4th edition, p. 692-703. Phrenology anatomists, and thereby gave rise to discrepancies of opinion and to novelties of doctrine more apparent than real; so it is to be feared, will be the case with Dr Carpenter's peculiar and varying use of the terms "cerebrum" and "brain," to which we have previously referred. If we must have a change in terms, the philosophical nomenclature of Professor Owen or Lamarck is the most in accordance with the laws of development of the encephalic structures. Lamarck termed the hemispheres the hypocoephalon, and the ganglionic structures below them the cephalon or brain proper, inasmuch as these are to be found in all vertebrate animals, and are essential structures, while in man and others the hemispheres are only superadded or superimposed structures. A classification of the convolutions, first begun by Gall, and carried out by his disciples, has been attempted by some of the most distinguished physiologists of the day,—viz., MM. Foville, Leuret, and Owen. It is very probable that a more philosophical application to phrenology of recent discoveries in comparative neurology will ultimately force on a modification of its organology as to the more instincts. In especial, the doctrines of Willis on this point will perhaps have renewed attention and development given to them.
When the phrenologist takes a larger grasp of this part of his system, and brings more comprehensive methods of psychological analysis and of physiological research to bear upon it, he will be better able to reconcile conflicting facts and conclusions. In particular, it will probably be found that the instincts and propensities have a two-fold relation to the organism, so that when manifested in connection with higher psychical states (as they almost always are in man), they are in relation with changes both in their own special or primary seats (the brain proper), and in the superadded structures (the hemispherical convolutions) the seat of the higher psychical faculties. Perhaps it will some day be proved that the several layers of gray and white matter which make up the hemispherical ganglia have themselves distinct functions, as ganglionic and conducting tissues.
It is generally admitted that Baillarger's arrangement of six layers,—namely, three gray and three white—is well founded, while Baillarger himself is inclined to adopt the views of Foville and Gratiolet, who have shown that there is a seventh layer, one of white or conducting matter, accompanying the innermost layer of gray matter throughout its whole extent. We might add more on this head, but it is obvious enough already that much has yet to be done before mental organology can be placed on a satisfactory foundation.
The Dynamics of Phrenology.—The neurological anatomy generally of phrenology does not differ in any essential respects from the doctrines of neurologists generally, or at least more than these differ from each other. Having indicated the special points of difference, we need only refer to Mr Solly's valuable work on The Human Brain as an admitted text-book of phrenologists in other respects. We now proceed to examine the dynamics or cerebral physiology of phrenology. It is a fundamental principle that power of mind is, ceteris paribus, dependent upon size or development of the cerebral hemispheres; and since what is true of the whole must be true of the parts, it follows that the power of special faculties is also, ceteris paribus, dependent on the size of special organs, i.e., portions of the hemispheres. No principle of phrenology has been more controverted than this, yet it is one upon which there is a singular unanimity amongst all classes of observers, whether popular, psychological, or physiological. A talented modern metaphysician remarks,
1 Philosophie Zoologique, tom. II., p. 223. His words are, "Or, cet hypocoephalon est l'organe spécial dans lequel se forment les idées et tous les actes de l'intelligence; et le cerveau proprement dit, cette partie de la masse médullaire principale qui contient le centre de rapport des nerfs, et à laquelle les nerfs des sens particulier viennent de réunir, ne saurait lui seul donner lieu à de semblables phénomènes."
2 Annales Med. Psychologie, tom. I., 1856.
in summary of the teachings of all the most distinguished Phrenology physiologists,—"There is an indisputable connection between size of brain and the mental energy displayed by the individual man or animal. It cannot be maintained that size is the only circumstance that determines the amount of mental force; quality is as important as quantity, whether in nerve, muscle, or any other portion of the animal structure. But just as largeness of muscle gives greater strength of body as a general rule, so largeness of brain gives greater vigour of mental impulse." This, the doctrine, we repeat, of all the best physiologists, is none other than the doctrine of all the phrenologists. Yet, when enunciated by them, it has usually been treated with derision, or if seriously controverted, controverted most usually on false premises, or on a false statement of the doctrine,—as, for example, that phrenology teaches that size corresponds absolutely to manifestation. But those physiologists, strange to say, who controvert the doctrines when applied by phrenologists to the hemispheres, adopt it themselves when they wish to demonstrate the functions of other portions of the encephalon. It is particularly from the facts of comparative anatomy that evidence can be deduced as to the functions of the complicated encephalon of man; and it is upon these, with especial reference to size or extent of organic development in lower animals in relation with manifestation, that the latest views as to the functions of the cerebellum and of the cerebral ganglia are founded. Now, the method of research applicable to various portions of the encephalon generally is equally applicable to the various portions of the hemispheres. If size of portions of the encephalon, taken in correspondence with energy of psychical manifestation, indicates in lower animals the functions of those portions of the encephalon, surely the size of portions of the hemispheres, taken in correspondence with energy of mental manifestation, indicates the functions of those portions, and proves the law of energy=size. Hence it must be conceded to the phrenologists that the law, within the limits and under the conditions laid down, is founded on both facts and general principles.
Laws of Action of the Brain as the Organ of Mind.—The phrenologists do not differ from neurologists in general as to the laws and modes of action of the nervous system, except in so far as they differ on points of anatomy or organology. Gall and Spurzheim had the duty of combating errors as well as of developing truths. In this particular they were of great service to neurology, inasmuch as by uprooting errors they cleared the ground for the more accurate views of the functions of the nervous system recently promulgated. It is certain, however, that being so fully occupied with their new views as to the anatomy and organology of the encephalon, they neglected any deep inquiries into its laws of functional activity, and in particular omitted to apply the general laws of nervous action, first lucidly developed by Unzer, then summarized and extended by Prochaska, and in more recent times resuscitated, and very ably applied by Marshall Hall to the pathology of the medulla spinalis and encephalon, as far as the tubercula quadrigemina. The early cultivators of phrenology, however, taught the important general doctrine, that the modes of action of the organs are instinctive in their nature. In September 1844 Dr Laycock read a paper before the British Association for the Advancement of Science, in which he showed that the laws of reflex action were not limited to the sensorium commune, as held by Prochaska, nor to the spinal system as Dr Marshall Hall then taught, but were the laws of action of the instincts and of every por- Dr Laycock subsequently developed his doctrines so as to demonstrate their application to the fundamental laws of consciousness and thought. In 1845 Mr Combe applied Dr Laycock's discoveries to an elucidation of the modes of action of the cerebral hemispheres, according to the phrenological doctrines, but more especially showing their capability of explaining the production of the natural language of the faculties, and the nature of the various forms of impulsive insanity. Some years subsequently (1853) Dr Carpenter also adopted Dr Laycock's views, and gave them a special application to those various states which agree in the common characteristic of mental activity without volitional control, and which he designated by the unfortunate phrenological term of unconscious "cerebration." Dr Carpenter has, however, added to the doctrines the theories of Willis and Lamarck as to the so-called "sensory ganglia." Later psychological writers of great eminence have referred to Dr Laycock's views, and noted their value in explaining the laws of cerebral action in mental operations. On the doctrines thus put forward by Dr Laycock, Mr Morell remarks:— "We certainly see in them the most complete co-ordination established between psychology and physiology in the widest extent." Now, since the very foundation of phrenology is mental organology, this exhaustive co-ordination between physiology and psychology is of fundamental importance to its further development; and that, whether we consider phrenology as a new system of philosophy or of cerebral physiology. This new field of mental dynamics the scientific phrenologist should therefore cultivate.
Phrenological Psychology and Physiognomy.—The middle and close of the eighteenth century, until the outbreak of the French Revolution, was a period remarkable for the culture and development of neurology and physiological metaphysics. Stahl had given the latter a great impulse by his revival of the Aristotelian doctrine of the soul, and his application of it to the phenomena of healthy and morbid action, and the treatment of disease. After the promulgation of the Stahlian doctrines, neurological anatomy and physiology were widely cultivated, especially in Germany. During the period named, Pfeiffer, Haase, Lobstein, Metzger, Sommering, Meckel, Hirsch, Wrisberg, Boehmer, Asch, Bang, Andersch, Murray, Bose, Platner, Brunn, Heineken, Behrends, Ludwig, Ebel, Isenflamn, Thaer, Plouquet, Baur, Zinn, and others, investigated the anatomy, physiology, and pathology of the nervous system, some of whom have left their names connected with their discoveries. Very distinguished systematic writers also flourished during this period, as Albinus, Winslow, Vieussens, Haller, Bonnet, Unzer, Prochaska, Vicq d'Azyr, and others. Gall pursued his medical studies in the midst of all this struggle after a knowledge of the anatomy and physiology of the nervous system, for, being born in 1757, he would probably be at the university of Vienna about 1777. His first attempts at observation were purely physiognomical. He found himself excelled in powers of memory of words by fellow-students and schoolmates who had prominent eyes. After much reflection, he conceived that if a memory for words was indicated by an external sign, the same might be the case with the other intellectual powers; and thereafter all persons distinguished by any remarkable faculty became the object of his attention. He thus became acquainted with 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 affections. Gall at first therefore endeavoured to establish a cranial physiognomy, and in this respect was a follower of Lavater, then popular: it was only after a more extended study that he was convinced of the need to investigate the anatomy and physiology of the brain. "In every instance," says Mr Combe, "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 duramater, presented a form corresponding to that which the skull had exhibited in life." This general principle being established, it necessarily followed that, if the mental character corresponded to a particular form of skull, or a predominant faculty to a special development of a portion of it, the character or the faculty was manifested in connection with a particular development of the brain; and the solution of the problem put by philosophers and physiologists, from Aristotle downwards, became possible. Thus, by the method of observation and induction, Gall built up his physiognomical system, which professes to supply the elements for determining the mental character from the form of the head. His psychology was perhaps the weak point in his doctrines; for he had to shake off the trammels of the old philosophy in which he had been educated. This led in particular to a less definite application of the conclusions to be drawn from pathological phenomena, as local diseases or injuries of the brain, and morbid developments of it in idiots, imbeciles, the insane, and incorrigible criminals.
Psychological Arrangement of Phrenology.—Gall's psychology, as well as his first physiognomical conclusions, although founded upon researches continued through many years, were subsequently modified to a great extent; in the first instance by himself, on the acquisition of fresh data, afterwards by his disciples, more especially Spurzheim. Individual phrenologists differ to the present day as to the number of the faculties and the locality of the corresponding organs; and it is acknowledged by all that more remain to be discovered. There are certain general principles, however, which appear to be settled. The term faculty is used by them "to denote a particular power of feeling, thinking, or perceiving, connected with a particular part of the brain." (Combe.) "A faculty is admitted as primitive—1. Which exists in one kind of animal, and not in another; 2. Which varies in the two sexes of the same species; 3. Which is not proportionate to the other faculties of the same individual; 4. Which does not manifest itself simultaneously with the other faculties,—that is, which appears or disappears earlier or later in life than other faculties; 5. Which may act singly; 6. Which is propagated in a distinct manner from parents to children; 7. Which may singly preserve its proper state of health or disease." Spurzheim largely modified Gall's arrangement of the primitive faculties (which was almost wholly empirical), and from time to time altered his own, until finally, in 1825, he fixed upon the psychological arrangement now generally adopted by phrenologists of the present day, although admittedly imperfect. He placed the faculties in two orders, corresponding to the feelings and the
---
1 See this essay, "On the Reflex Functions of the Brain," in Brit. Med. Review, Jan. 1845, vol. xix., p. 298. 2 Further Researches into the Functions of the Brain," Brit. and For. Med. Review, 1845, vol. xvii., p. 155. 3 Elements of Phrenology, 6th ed., 12mo, 1845. 4 First used by Dr Engeldein, and with disastrous results to phrenology. (Phren. Journ., vol. xv., p. 295, &c.) 5 Human Physiology, 4th ed., pp. 769-800, note, and 811, sqq. 6 On Modern English Psychology," Brit. and For. Med. Review, vol. xvii., April 1856, p. 256. Compare also Mr Morell's Elements of Psychology, part I., p. 99. 7 Scriptores Neurologici Minores Selecti, &c., editis Chris. Fred. Ludwig, tom. iv., Lipsiae, 1785. 8 Spurzheim apud G. Combe, System of Phrenology, vol. i., p. 171. Phrenology intellectual powers of metaphysicians in general, and termed them the affective and the intellectual faculties. The feelings were arranged in two genera,—those of the propensities and the sentiments. A propensity is an "internal impulse," which impels only to certain actions; in common language, is an instinct. A sentiment is an internal impulse or inclination to action, with an emotion superadded; in common language, an emotional instinct, emotion, or passion. Acquisitiveness, for example (a propensity), is the mere impulse to acquire. Veneration (a sentiment) gives a tendency to worship, accompanied by a particular emotion, which latter quality is the reason of its being denominated a sentiment. The intellectual faculties make us acquainted with objects which exist, and their qualities and relations. Sparzheim divided them into four genera: "The first includes the external senses and voluntary motion; the second, those internal powers which perceive existence, or make man and animals acquainted with external objects and their physical qualities; and the third, the powers which perceive the relations of external objects. These three genera are named perceptive faculties. The fourth genus comprises the faculties which act on all the other powers—which compare, judge, and discriminate; these are named the reflective faculties." Complex faculties, sentiments, and propensities arise out of combinations (in excess or defect) of the primitive. Veneration, Hope, and Wonder in normal combination constitute the sentiment of religion; if in excess, of superstition. Large Acquisitiveness and Secretiveness will constitute the propensity to steal, if Conscientiousness and the reflecting faculties be defective; if these be large, they will constitute good elements in a noble character. This psychological arrangement may be considered as the basis of a system which is wholly independent of organology, or even of cerebral physiology. Considered as simply a system of metaphysical nomenclature, many are disposed to agree in opinion with Archbishop Whately, who thinks that, as such, it is "far more logical, accurate, and convenient, than those of Locke, Stewart, and other writers of their school."
Physiognomical Arrangement of the Organs of the Faculties.—Each faculty, or group of faculties, has a corresponding portion of cerebral matter allotted to it. With the exception of the sexual instinct, this consists in certain convolutions of the hemispheres. The skull being moulded upon the convolutions in youth and middle age (though not in old age or in cerebral atrophy, when the convolutions shrink, but the cranium remains unchanged), it is practicable at these ages to mark out on the surface of the head the size and extent of the organs of the faculties,—i.e., to form a chart of the development of the various convolutions. We subjoin a phrenological chart of this kind, as well as a psychological arrangement of the organs, the numbers of which correspond to the numbers of the chart—
ORDER I.—Feelings.
GENUS 1.—Propensities common to Man with the Lower Animals.
1. Amativeness. Sexual love, instinct, feeling.—2. Philoprogenitiveness. Parental affection for young, affection for young and tender beings. Abuses—Pampering and spoiling children, foolish affection for pet animals.—3. Concentration. Gives the desire of permanence in place, renders permanent emotions and ideas in the mind. Abuses—Aversion to move abroad, morbid dwelling on internal emotions and ideas to the neglect of external impressions.—3 a. Inhabitiveness. A modification of the preceding and following, but the organ doubtful.—4. Affection. Attachment to persons, friendship, love of society; generally strong in women. Abuses—Attachment to worthless individuals, union for worthless ends.—5. Combativeness. Courage to meet danger and to overcome difficulties; propensity to oppose and attack whatever excites opposition, and to resist injustice; enables man to meet difficulties and dangers. Phrenology Abuses—Love of contention, and propensity to provoke and assault.
6. Destructiveness. Desire to destroy noxious objects, or for the well-being of the individual (as to food, clothing, &c.) Abuses—Cruelty, murder, anger and severity in conduct and language.
6 a. Alimentiveness, or appetite for food. Uses—Nutrition. Abuses—Gluttony and drunkenness. This is also the supposed site of the organ of Love of Life.—7. Secretiveness. Propensity to conceal the person, or the thoughts, words, and actions; an ingredient in prudence. Abuses—Lying, deceit, duplicity, cunning.—8. Acquisitiveness. The desire to possess, and propensity to accumulate articles of utility, to provide against want. Abuses—Selfishness, avarice, theft.—9. Constructiveness. Desire to build and construct.
GENUS 2.—Sentiments.
(a) Sentiments common to man and the Lower Animals.—10. Self-Ennui. Self-conceit, self-interest, love of independence, personal dignity. Abuses—Pride, disdain, love of dominion, overweening conceit, great selfishness.—11. Love of Approbation. Desire to obtain the esteem of others, to acquire fame, praise. Abuses—Ambition, vanity, thirst for unmerited praise.—12. Caution. The desire to shun danger, circumspection, prudence. Abuses—Undue fear, excessive timidity, unfounded apprehensions, despondency.—13. Benevolence. Desire to give happiness to others, mildness of disposition, universal sympathy and charity. Abuses—Profusion, injurious indulgence of the appetites and fancies of others, facility of temper.
(b) Sentiments proper to Man.—14. Veneration. Tendency to respect whatever is great and good, gives origin to religious adoration. Abuses—Superstition, love of antiquated customs, object
---
1 Mr Combe, A System, &c., vol. i., p. 180. 2 Testimonial to Mr Geo. Combe, Fires Journal, vol. x., p. 109. 3 Mr Combe, loco cit. 4 Prefixed to Mr Combe's Elem. of Phren., 12mo, 6th ed., 1845. Phrenology subservience to authority.—15. Firmness. Determination, steadfastness of purpose, perseverance. Absence—Stubbornness, infatuation, tenacity in evil.—16. Conscientiousness. Sentiment of justice, respect for the rights of others, openness to conviction, the love of truth. Absence—Ignorant adherence from conscientious motives to noxious principles, excessive refinement in views of duty and obligation, excessive remorse or self-condemnation.—17. Hope. Tendency to expect future good, sentiment of faith. Absence—Credulity as to attainment of things desired, absurd expectations.—18. Wonder. Desire of discovery of extraordinary facts, feelings of the surprising. Absence—Love of the marvellous and occult, belief in false miracles and supernatural absurdities.—19. Ideality. Love of the beautiful and splendid, desire for excellence; the poetical feeling. Absence—Absurd enthusiasm; preference of the fanciful, showy, and glaring, to the neglect of the duties of life.—19 a. The function of these convolutions is not yet determined.—20. Wit. The sentiment of the ludicrous, feeling of mirth.—21. Imitation. Disposes to copy the manners, voice, actions of others, and the appearances in nature generally.
Order II.—Intellectual Faculties.
Genus 1.—The External Senses.
Genus 2.—Knowing Faculties.
(a.) Knowing Faculties which perceive the Existence and Qualities of External Objects.—22. Individuality. Takes cognisance of existence and simple facts. 23. Form. Recognises magnitude, form of objects.—24. Space. Gives the idea of space, and the power to appreciate division and distance.—25. Weight. Communicates the perception of momentum, weight, and resistance; aids equilibrium.—25. Colouring. Takes cognisance of colours and their harmonies.
(b.) Knowing Faculties which perceive the Relations of External Objects.—27. Locality. Gives the idea of direction in space.—28. Number. Gives the talent for calculation.—29. Order. Communicates the love (or the power) of physical arrangement.—30. Eventuality. Takes cognisance of occurrences or events.—31. Time. Is the faculty of perceiving duration.—32. Tune. Is the source of melody and harmony.—33. Language. The faculty of acquiring a knowledge of arbitrary signs to express thoughts, of inventing and recollecting them, and of readily using them.
Genus 3.—Reflecting Faculties, which Compare, Judge, and Discriminate.
34. Comparison. The faculty of discovering analogies, resemblances, and differences.—35. Causality. Traces the dependencies of phenomena, and the relation of cause and effect.
Phrenologists are not all agreed as to the details of this arrangement, and have proposed others. Dr Vimont criticises it on some points; Mr Robert Cox has published a very able and interesting essay on its defects; Mr Sidney Smith, in his Principles of Phrenology, has some acute remarks; Mr Joshua Toumlin Smith gives an almost entirely new arrangement in his Synopsis of Phrenology, based on philosophical views more advanced than those of Spurzheim. It is improbable that, in the present state of knowledge, any arrangement can be made complete. The difficulties inherent in the subject itself are perhaps insurmountable. But imperfect though these conclusions may be, they are worthy of respect, as being well-tried deductions from observations made on many fields of research by numerous observers. The collections of crania, casts, drawings, and the like, in the possession of private persons or public societies, may be taken as some slight index of the extent and industry with which these observations have been made. Gall's own collection contained 354 skulls, casts of skulls, brains, &c., illustrating the phrenology of man; 120 heads of quadrupeds; and 138 heads of birds. A manuscript descriptive catalogue of this collection is amongst the MSS. in the museum of the Phrenological Society of Edinburgh. It is a copy of that drawn up by Dr Dauncey, the pupil and friend of Gall, and contains the record of the facts and correspondence of each subject, as observed by the latter. The Edinburgh museum is remarkably rich in crania and casts of crania illustrative of characteristics of nations and Phrenology races. Of these there are 313, besides 150 miscellaneous skulls, many of great interest. It contains also 280 busts and 100 masks of eminent or notorious individuals.
In 1817 a Mr Deville, a lamp-manufacturer of London, was a member of the Institution of civil engineers. He had been originally a pot-boy, then a journeyman plasterer, and afterwards kept a shop for the sale of plaster figures, which he cast. He had risen to a respectable position simply by the force of his natural powers. Mr Bryan Donkin, a civil engineer, was an early auditor of Gall at Vienna, and subsequently a friend of Spurzheim. He was also, like Mr Deville, a member of the Institution of civil engineers; and when, in 1817, he with others determined to make a collection of casts as records of phrenological facts, Mr. Deville was applied to for his assistance, which he rendered as a matter of business for three or four years. In 1821 he became interested in phrenology, and began to form a collection of casts on his own account. Already, in 1826, Spurzheim said it was finer than any he had seen elsewhere. At Mr Deville's death in 1846, this collection consisted of about 5450 pieces; of these 3000 were crania of animals, and the remainder (2450) illustrations of human phrenology. There were 200 human crania, and 300 casts of crania; amongst the latter, those which Baron Cuvier permitted Mr Deville to take from all the authenticated human skulls in the Museum of Comparative Anatomy of Paris. Mr Deville was a practical observer, and possessed the large number of 1500 casts of heads taken by himself from persons while living. Amongst these were 50 casts of persons remarkably devoted to religion; 40 of distinguished painters, sculptors, architects, &c.; 30 of eminent navigators and travellers; 80 of poets, authors, and writers; 70 of musicians, amateurs, and composers of music; 25 of pupils; 150 of criminals; 120 pathological cases illustrative of insanity, &c. Perhaps the most interesting of all are 170 casts which illustrate the changes caused in the cranial conformation of from 60 to 70 individuals by age, special devotion to one pursuit, and the like. Mr Deville's account of some of these has been published. Other instances of this kind may be mentioned. Dr Vimont, a disciple of Gall, and the author of an important work (Traité de Phrénologie Humaine et Comparée), saw that the illustrations which Gall drew from comparative anatomy and psychology were too few and too imperfect. He therefore resolved to develop this branch of phrenology; and in 1827, when competing for the prize for physiology of the French Institute, sent in a "few fragments" of his researches in this direction. His Memoir was accompanied by 2500 crania of animals; 1500 of these belonged to animals the manners and habits of which were well known to him. In addition, there were 400 wax models of cerebra, and an Atlas of more than 300 drawings. This Memoir was the basis of his great work; and the Atlas of 120 plates (folio) which accompanies it contains 600 separate drawings, all beautifully done. Again, Dr S. G. Morton of Philadelphia has a collection of skulls, human and comparative, made for the purpose of comparing the characters of the skulls of the different races of men, and these again with the skulls of lower animals, more especially with reference to the internal capacity of the cranium, as indicative of the size of the brain. This collection contained in 1841 above 1000 crania, of which more than five hundred were human skulls. One hundred of these belonged to ancient Egyptians, the same number to native-born Africans, and a still greater number to ancient Peruvians, Mexicans, and nomade Indians of the American continent. It was this collection which sup- plied the materials for Dr Morton's magnificent work, *Crania Americana*.
**Modes of Determining the Size and Activity of the Organs.**—In practically determining whether the organs thus indicated externally are present in any person, the phrenologist depends primarily upon the size of the cranium, or extent of certain portions of it—considering that the bony covering corresponds (with certain recognised exceptions) to the contained viscus in its subdivisions, both in magnitude and form. Various instruments have been invented, and rules are laid down, both for measuring the size of organs and for avoiding the fallacies into which the observer may fall, in consequence of anatomical or pathological conditions interfering with the determination of size, or the universal application of the general law of size-power. Thus the development of the frontal sinuses, the differences coincident with age and size in the development of the skull and the thickness of the bony parietes, the influence of morbid states of the organ, as in hydrocephalus and the like, are examples of sources of fallacy against which the phrenological observer must guard.
Nor, when he has at last accurately determined the dominant size of an organ, does the practical phrenologist draw absolute conclusions therefrom. The organ is but living tissue, liable to be influenced in power and functional activity by various vital conditions, of which he takes a due estimate. The following are the points to be attended to phrenologically in estimating the value of size of a cerebral organ with reference to functional activity:—(a.) The temperament of the individual modifies the power or activity, so that in a person of lymphatic temperament there will be no more manifestation of a faculty with a large organ, than in a person of a neuro-bilious temperament (more active) with moderate or even small organ. It is therefore necessary to mark well the difference between power and activity in reference to both size and temperament. (b.) Conditions of the organ as regards health have great influence. In mania, very forcible manifestations may proceed from a brain or an organ unusually small. In old age, atrophy or disease is not uncommon. (c.) Education or activity increases the size, and therewith the power of an organ; it may also increase the activity by improving or modifying the condition independently of size. (d.) The combination of two or more organs may increase the power or force of manifestation of a faculty. (e.) The combination of temperament or quality, of size, and of exercise, may have a greater effect than each singly, or any two in combination; and this effect is still further intensified if two or more organs so modified act together.
Thus, in playing on a musical instrument, the organ of Time co-operates with the organ of Tune; and the music will be good or bad in proportion to the perfection of both organs in point of constitution, size, and exercise." (Mr Combe)
There are circumstances as yet unknown which modify the condition of the brain. "We are not at present acquainted with the external signs of the highest of all qualities of brain which, when combined with adequate size, constitutes genius; whether it consists in an extraordinary development of the gray matter, in a peculiar fineness of constitution, or in some other form of endowment of the brain, we are uncertain." There are also other circumstances, as habits, age, sex, race, and the like, which must be taken into account in estimating the relations of organ to manifestation of faculty.
Every faculty of the mind, and every state of consciousness, is represented in the facial movements, or in the general movements of the head, trunk, limbs; i.e., it is signified in expressions and attitudes. If then, these be considered as a language, and duly read, or, in other words, if phrenognomy proper be brought in as an aid, the observer may be directed in his observations by the predominant attitudes, &c. These are termed by phrenologists the natural language of the faculties. "The laugh of Destructiveness is bitter, and that of Self-Esteem is scornful; that of Benevolence is soft and pleasing, that of Love of Approbation is insinuating, that of Secretiveness is sly." The crying of a child animated by an injury which has roused its Destructiveness is quite different from that of one excited to cry by mortified Love of Approbation.
When the organ of Self-Esteem predominates in size over all other organs, it gives a cold, selfish, imperious air to the individual. He carries his head high, his look is full of disdain, and his walk and speech are solemn and pretentious." This natural language is also used for determining the locality of organs, because, according to Spurzheim and his disciples, "the motions are conformable to the seat of the organs. If, for instance, a faculty, the organ of which is situated in the posterior part of the brain, be active, the general motions are backward; and if its organ be in the forehead, then the motions are forward." In the portraits of Sterne, this principle of the phrenologists is said to be illustrated by the attitude in which that humourist is painted; he sits leaning on his hand, with his fore-finger resting over the organ of Wit.
**Combinations of the Faculties.**—These occur in varying extent in all forms of mental action; two or several may be predominantly active or powerful; few, if any, act singly. The action of the faculties or organs in combination is a very important branch of phrenology. Gall divided men into six classes, with leading characteristics founded on the combinations of organs or faculties into groups. For example,—1. Individuals with the organs of the highest faculties and qualities completely developed, while those of the faculties man has in common with lower animals (the mere animal organs) are small, present a high type of moral character. Their conduct is in accordance with reason and justice. 2. Men with a converse development are more allied to the animal; they are the slaves of sensuality and error. 3. If the organs of both groups are large, the man often manifests the most opposite qualities; there is often a struggle between the higher and lower sentiments and motives of human nature: "the flesh lusteth against the spirit." 4. Certain organs are sometimes highly developed, while others are at par or a maximum. This class includes men of great but partial genius, or of great strength of character. 5. Or there may be men of general ability, but with some marked deficiency of mind or feeling. 6. And lastly, in the sixth class are the average of mankind, with a moderate and nearly equal development of all the organs. There are also combinations in activity as well as of size. It is evident that these combinations of organs may vary almost ad infinitum. The six classes above given Dr Gall allows "are subject to thousands of modifications."
Mr Combe tried to state in methodical order the effect of the combinations so far as observed, but found it to be so difficult that he contented himself with setting forth three rules to be followed, appending copious illustrations to each. "The reader," Mr Combe observes, "in whom the reflecting organs are amply developed will not only easily comprehend the rules here laid down, but be able greatly to enlarge the sphere of their application."
**Regional Phrenology.**—Now, this phrenognomy of groups of allied or related organs is one of some special interest, not only because certain modifications of the doctrine of Gall have been founded on it, but also because of its important bearings upon ethnology. Observers finding that the discrimination of special organs is far more difficult, Phrenology and the results much more unsatisfactory than that of groups of organs, have turned their attention to a few large regions of the head. Many who oppose phrenology as it is in its details, admit freely that the development of certain cranial regions is coincident with certain definite manifestations of character, both individual and ethnic. They admit the connection, e.g., of intellectual power with well-developed anterior convolutions—of the higher sentiments and emotions with the middle convolutions—of the instincts and propensities with the posterior and basic; or, more definitely (with a distinguished anatomist and physiologist, Dr Carus of Dresden), they divide the head into distinct regions rather than organs, and assign faculties, feelings, instincts, to the corresponding regional portions of the encephalon. This may be termed regional phrenology. Dr Carus' views attracted a good deal of attention at the time he published his New Cranioscopy, in opposition to that of Gall and Spurzheim. They are founded mainly upon the laws of development of the nervous system in vertebrates, or rather upon comparative psychology in relation to the comparative anatomy of the brain. He divides the head from before backwards into three regions, making the auditory foramen the starting-point of each line of demarcation. Mr Combe rejects Dr Carus' doctrine, but, like him, also divides the head into three regions. The first includes the organs of the intellectual faculties (vide chart); the second, the moral and religious sentiments peculiar to man; the third, the sentiments and propensities manifested by him in common with the lower (vertebrate) animals. Mr Combe has laid down rules for measuring these regions. Mr Morton proposes, and has followed another method.
Ethnographical Phrenology.—Phrenology has investigated the coincidences between the natural talents and dispositions of nations and the development of the organ of mind. These ethnological researches are, indeed, amongst the most interesting of phrenology, and have an important bearing upon diplomacy, legislation, and the art of government. Regional physiognomy has been most used in this department. As we have no space for the examination of the questions mooted, we simply refer the reader to the works of Gall, Spurzheim, Combe, Vimont, &c.
Comparative Phrenology.—We have seen that the same method of research has often been applied to the higher vertebrate animals (mammals and birds) as to man. A comparative phrenology supplementary to, and corroborative of, human phrenology, has been the final result. Dr Spurzheim states that the heads and skulls of birds which sing and of those which do not sing, and the heads of the different individuals of the same kind which have a greater or less disposition to sing, present a conspicuous difference at the place of the organ. The heads of males, for instance, and those of females of the same kind of singing birds are easily distinguished by their different development.
Gall seems to have compared the skulls of animals of different species, with a view to determine the situation of an organ. His disciples have objected to this method as unphilosophical,—animals of the same species should alone be compared. Dr Vimont of Paris is the most recent and able investigator of the cranial physiognomy of animals, and is justly regarded by phrenologists as the highest authority. He has been led by direct observations to the opinion, that the cranial conformation is as indicative of the feelings, instincts, and faculties of mammals and birds, as it is of those of mankind. In the Atlas to his elaborate work already noticed, Dr Vimont gives cranioscopic charts of dogs and birds. Birds, of all vertebrates, he states, have the most regular cranioscopical development.
Applications of Phrenological Doctrines.
In his lucid and acute criticism of phrenology, Mr G. H. Lewes remarks that it has two distinct aspects. "It is a doctrine of psychology, and it is an art of reading character. The scientific doctrine is based on the physiology of the nervous system, to which is added psychological analysis and classification. The art is based on empirical observation of coincidences between certain configurations of the skull and certain mental phenomena." These two aspects comprise two corresponding groups of applications of phrenology, which are really independent of each other. The scientific doctrines are capable of application deductively, although no special observations be made as to the configuration of the skull; they may be held to constitute the basis of a system of moral and mental philosophy, with its a priori truths, in which the physiognomical element is secondary. On the other hand, the art may be, and most usually is, practised without much, and sometimes with very little, knowledge of the scientific doctrines. Hence it is necessary to distinguish clearly between these two applications.
1. Applications of Phrenology to Philosophy and Mental Science.—To phrenology may be fairly conceded the grand merit of having forced the inductive method of inquiry into mental philosophy, and thus laid the permanent foundations of a true mental science. For two thousand years or more philosophy had ignored in all its various systems the great fact, that in the order of nature there is no consciousness manifested without a material organ. Two principles of inquiry arose out of this circumstance, and still continue their influence:—(a.) It is denied that the phenomena of consciousness are dependent at all upon organization. No physiology ever can explain, or help to explain (it is held), one purely mental phenomenon. Its analogies may sometimes suggest a mental law, but that at most is all it can do. Thought and the laws of thought can only be studied in self-knowledge. This is the actual teaching of an existing sect of philosophy; and all who attempt to investigate the necessary connection of mental and vital phenomena are stigmatised and repudiated by it as "materialists"—a term implying, in their vocabulary, not only scepticism as to their philosophy, but heterodoxy as to the principles of sound morals. (b.) Another sect admits that mind is in some way or other connected with organization; but they hold, either that the nature of that connection is much too difficult and mysterious for investigation, or they admit the principle to be only partially true, and that the higher mental phenomena of man have no necessary connection with organization. Hence the practical result of both classes of doctrines has been to exclude the anatomy and physiology of the brain from the science of Thought. Now Gall and his disciples, in starting from their fundamental generalization that the phenomena of consciousness have all, necessarily and without any exception whatever, their corresponding phenomena in the living organism, established the other principle, that psychological and neurological researches, to be successful, must be inseparable. Deductions from the mere phenomena of consciousness, they affirm, can never establish singly a science of mind, because these phenomena are ever changing from moment to moment with the ever-varying conditions of the living organism, and especially of the encephalon. A knowledge, therefore, of the physiology of the encephalon is absolutely necessary to a knowledge of mind. This is the primary and fundamental application of phrenology to mental philosophy. We may point to Gall," Mr Lewes therefore justly observes, "as having formed an epoch in the history of philosophy by inaugurating a new method." This new method soon
---
1 Grundzüge einer neuen und wissenschaftlich begründeten Cranioskopie, von Dr Carl Gustav Carus, &c., Stuttgart, 1841. 2 In Morton's Crania Americana, p. 278. 3 Biographical History of Philosophy, p. 634. 4 Op. cit., p. 645. Phrenology cleared away some of the useless questions of speculative philosophy. It established the principle, that there are connate tendencies or faculties, both affective and intellectual, which are inseparably connected with the structure that serves as the organ of mind. But it also established that other principle, that if the organ is not developed, or, if developed, not rendered functionally active by the appropriate stimuli, the faculty is not manifested. Hence, while phrenology taught the plurality of organs and of faculties, it also taught that the fundamental faculties cannot be created by education; they can only be evolved or developed by it.
Phrenology, as we have seen, founded upon these great principles a new theory and classification of the faculties. It attempted to discriminate between those which are simple and fundamental, and those which are complex or secondary—the result of two or more of the fundamental faculties acting in combination; and it pointed out what states of consciousness were attributes of all the faculties. Thus, pain or pleasure is an attribute of all the faculties; memory of all those that are intellectual, and dependent wholly upon the condition of the respective organs; judgment is the same. With this new classification a new but imperfect terminology was constructed, the terms of which have penetrated into the literature and language of the present day. As a system of practical philosophy, or of practical mental science, phrenology teaches those laws by which man exists and acts as a rational being, and maintains that he can only be governed and educated in accordance with those laws. It professes to discover the varying capabilities of races of men for civilization; or, in other words, their innate capacity for instruction and development, and thereby indicates the general principles of government as applicable to races. It maintains that men must be educated with reference to the connate predominance or defect of this or that organ or faculty; that is to say, that which is naturally defective must be developed, that which is in excess repressed; so that a harmonious balance of all the powers (the summum bonum of mental development) may be attained. External circumstances of parents or of offspring involving the health, or a long persistence in the exercise of some or one of the faculties,—such as minister to theft, licentiousness, gluttony, and the like,—will lead to the disturbance of this balance. These circumstances must be anticipated and obviated by society; and when individuals are plainly governed by an over-mastering faculty, and thus led into crime, they must be restrained by society, and put into circumstances such that they may be enabled to exercise a self-control. In other words, an enlightened prison discipline can only be based safely on phrenological doctrines. Healthy action of the organs is necessary to healthy manifestation of the faculties. Hence the laws of hygiene, deduced from an accurate physiology and the facts of experience, must be applied to man's corporeal wellbeing, if we would elevate him as a thinking and moral agent. For this reason, the phrenologists are amongst the most strenuous advocates for such an education of the people as shall put every man in the position to know and apply the laws of healthy existence to the wellbeing of himself and his offspring. Such culture, they also argue (and on the most irrefragable grounds), is as essential to the welfare of a nation as to the wellbeing of individuals. Without it, civilization can never advance beyond a limit which it is not impossible to trace out; with it, to fix a limit to man's progressive development would be difficult.
We will not here specify more particularly the applications of the doctrines of phrenology to theology, the arts, medicine, and domestic life. The whole subject is one beyond our plan, if it were not beyond our limits. We can only refer the reader to the systematic works of Gall, Spurzheim, Mackenzie, Andrew and George Combe, Viment, Broussais, Caldwell, Friedrich, Bray, Brigham, Sampson, and others, in which social questions are treated phrenologically. The general principles of the science thus applied are based upon an admitted science of human physiology, or on the common-sense of mankind; while the physiognomy that is used is of that regional character which few intelligent men question. It is mainly, therefore, in the conflicts of phrenology with dogmatic theology and speculative philosophy that doubts have been raised as to the soundness of its general principles and of its practical applications. With these at present we have no concern.
2. Phrenology as an Art.—Many animals are instinctive physiognomists. Every passion or emotion has its language, and this language can be read more or less accurately by the organism or being concerned in the reading. This, for obvious reasons, is markedly true of social animals, and most particularly of man. The history of a man's mental life is often written so ineffaceably on his features that no efforts of his can conceal from his fellow-men those lines which the workings of bad passions and of evil propensities have left. We have seen that phrenology, as a physiognomical science and art, originated in the strong desire which Gall had to read by external signs the characters of those about him. Many of his disciples—the large majority perhaps—have been attracted to his doctrines with the hope of gratifying a similar desire. It is not surprising, then, to find that what has been termed practical phrenology, or the art of reading character, has been the main object of culture and research since Gall, and has become, in the eyes of the public and of literary men, the principal department of phrenology,—nay, phrenology itself. Now it cannot be doubted that, amongst those persons thus attracted to phrenology, there is a large proportion who have a natural bias to physiognomical observation and research, and who therefore are endowed with those faculties which are necessary to constitute a successful physiognomist. Thus endowed, it is not surprising that they can practise the art of reading character with results for the most part so striking, as to impress both themselves and others with a strong conviction of the truth of the principles upon which the art is founded, and of the value of the methods by which it is practised. Their instinctive powers of perception, naturally great, are developed by exercise, and their conclusions corrected by the cranioscopical experience of those who have preceded them. Besides, they do not neglect, when practising their art, those other physiognomical characteristics by means of which persons, not phrenologists, can often discover with surprising accuracy the character and ruling motives of those about them. While examining the configuration of the skull, the phrenologist also observes the habit of body, gait, gestures, features, tones of voice, and facial expression of the subject of his inquiry; and it is from the results of all these observations that he determines the character. Thus the elements of a successful art of physiognomy—not necessarily phrenological—are numerous, and a higher value is placed upon phrenological physiognomy as an art, than can be fairly conceded to it if estimated independently of the skill of the artist and of the collateral aids he uses to help his conclusions.
The practice of phrenology having mainly fallen into the hands of a sort of professional body, the members of which claim for it and for themselves, without any special education, a larger share of public confidence than they are entitled to have conceded to them, its pretensions have undergone every form of criticism and attack. Now, it is not a difficult task to show that, apart from the follies and frauds of ignorant charlatans, the phrenological art of reading character, however useful, is, and always must be, a conjectural art. At every step of the process there are sources of uncertainty, some of which are wholly irremoveable. 1. It is a fact, that the determination of the fundamental faculties is as yet incomplete. 2. The organs of some of the faculties re- The discovery of the functions of certain convolutions is impeded by the circumstance that their relative size cannot be detected. This is confessedly applicable to those convolutions which correspond to the inner longitudinal surface of each hemisphere, to the superior surface of the cerebellum (upon which they rest), and to the wings of the sphenoid bone at the base of the skull. Now these surfaces may be roughly estimated to constitute from one-fifth to one-sixth of the entire surface of the convolutions. 3. Changes in the cranial bones give rise to varying thickness or thinness of the bony parietes, not easy, if not sometimes impossible, to detect during life. 4. This source of difficulty is increased when we remember that this condition of the bones is often the effect of obscure morbid states of the brain itself or of its membranes, or both; which states, although not easily recognised, profoundly modify the mental manifestations.
We say nothing of minor sources of error provided against by phrenological rules, such as the varied size of the frontal sinuses, the development of the hair and of the muscles attached to the cranium, and the condition of the other soft parts; nor of the difficulties afforded by atrophy of the convolutions, by age and sex, and by combinations of organs. But even were these difficulties overcome, greater remain behind, in the varying vital conditions which influence the manifestations of the organs independently of size. Some of these of the highest importance—e.g., those connected with genius—are confessedly unknown; others require for their due estimate an amount of knowledge we are far from possessing. The connate powers of the blood and tissues generally known as temperaments vary greatly. Rules have been set forth for estimating their influence on the health and vigour of the body and mind far from satisfactory to those who have studied the physiology and pathology of "temperaments." In truth, there is no one branch of medicine which is more imperfectly developed; none in which there is a larger amount of floating, crude, indefinite knowledge. We feel we may be permitted to speak with some authority on this point, since we have made these innate conditions of the blood and tissues the subjects of special observation and inquiry for several years past, with a view to both the practice and teaching of medicine. But, besides the temperaments, there are diatheses, or constitutions predisposed to particular forms of diseased action which are often grafted on the former, often arise out of them, and always modify them greatly. Then these temperaments and diatheses are hardly ever met with in the typical form, but are commingled with each other in ever-varying proportions; so that the most practised observer may be at fault in his diagnosis.
But the condition of each organ, as regards health and disease, in the same individual, modifies its manifestation. Thus an active small organ may be in the same individual more powerful than an inactive large one. But this question of condition of special organs involves a knowledge of some of the most abstruse problems in the physiology and pathology of the nervous system. Certain faculties and organs, for example, are intimately associated, as to function, with the condition of certain viscera. A weak fatty heart or a diseased colon are not unfrequently in direct relation with various forms of melancholia. An aberration in the functions of the ovaria is sometimes the immediate cause of moral insanity in women; so that the very qualities for which the individual was remarkable are reversed.—e.g., truthfulness and candour are changed into habitual falsehood and dissimulation, affection for relatives into malice, and the like. The physiological influence of certain viscera upon the natural activity of organs, or groups of organs, is very remarkable. Thus, when the ovaria or testes are removed, various faculties are exalted or weakened; when they are developed or brought into unusual functional activity, various faculties are correspondingly weakened or exalted. This is particularly seen to be the case with animals in which the reproductive function is periodic. In birds, especially of the social or gregarious kinds, the development of the ovaria and testes is accompanied with a manifestation not of amative-ness or philoprogenitiveness only, but of combativeness, cunning, constructive-ness, time, tune, conscientiousness, &c. Further, changes in the composition of the blood have a direct influence upon special organs in the same individual. Thus, certain poisons introduced therein excite special faculties into action. We may mention alcohol, opium, haschich, henbane, and belladonna as striking examples. In some diseases, similar elective affinities are observed. In certain forms of pulmonary phthisis the patient is gay and hopeful to the last, even when the most extensive and most fearful disease is present—not in the lungs only, but in the liver, spleen, intestines. The moteries morbi of gout seems to stimulate the organs of Combativeness and Destructiveness; for the gouty patient is so often irrepressibly irritable that a fit of the gout has been termed a fit of madness.
These are some of the many modes in which the condition of special organs may be influenced dynamically, and both power and activity be developed irrespectively of size. Of the whole of the latter class, it may be said that we have hardly attained to so much knowledge as even to discover the extent of our ignorance. It is not surprising, therefore, that with so many and such great sources of fallacy, cautious physiologists and pathologists, while granting its uses, hesitate to practise seriously the art of reading character, and feel indisposed to place more confidence in the professors of it than they feel in themselves.
But a weightier source of objection to the art, in the opinion of many, is to be found in the fact, that those least qualified by culture to practise it have most commonly exercised themselves therein. Persons without any education in physiology and pathology, or with little more than scraps of information gathered at random, do not hesitate to profess their capability to solve the most important practical questions in mental science. To the intelligent and instructed they are but mere charlatans, whose ignorance and pretensions would curse with fatal blight any science or art, however well established or noble. We are bound to add that Mr Combe (the great loss of whom by death while these pages were being written we have to lament), and others, frankly acknowledge that applied phrenology is an estimative art only—such, in fact, as is applied medicine itself. But then every accomplished physician finds, as his knowledge and experience increase with his years, that his youthful confidence in the certainty of medicine was not well founded; he becomes more and more convinced of its conjectural character as a science, more cautious and prudent, therefore, in the application of its principles, and more reliant on a learned experience. If, then, doubts, or at least a hesitating caution, be a duty of the physician as to the art of medicine, based on the experience of ages, how much more are they justifiable as to an art confessedly imperfect in important details, and hardly half a century old? It is not difficult to understand from these considerations why the young and enthusiastic followers of Gall and Spurzheim cool in their estimate of phrenology as they get older, and even pass over to the ranks of its opponents. Thus, by not a few medical science and art are treated; and so, a fortiori, must phrenology be, since it is only a department of the great science of medicine, resting, as medicine itself rests, upon the great but imperfect science of life.
---
1 Dr Vimont says he has examined the frontal sinuses in more than five hundred human crania, and has not found them alike in two. (Traité de Phrénologie, &c., tom. I., p. 83.) 2 Mr Combe, On the Functions of the Cerebellum, &c., p. 190.