Pagina-afbeeldingen
PDF
ePub

Dr. Spurzheim mentions the case of a milliner of Vienna, who was remarkable for constructive talent in her art, and in whom the organ is large. A cast of her skull is in the Phrenological Society's collection, and it presents two small round eminences at the situation of the organ. ANCIENT GREEK. NEW HOLLANDER.

[graphic]

These figures represent the skulls of an ancient Greek and a New Hollander. In the New Hollanders the skull at Constructiveness falls greatly. within the line of the cheek-bones; while in the Greek the skull swells out at that organ. "The natives of New Holland," says Sir Walter Scott," are, even at present, in the very lowest scale of humanity, and ignorant of every art which can add comfort or decency to human life. These unfortunate savages use no clothes, construct no cabins nor huts, and are ignorant even of the manner of chasing animals or catching fish, unless such of the latter as are left by the tide, or which are found on the rocks." When Dr. Spurzheim was in Edinburgh in 1817, he visited the workshop of Mr. James Milne, brass-founder, (a gentleman who himself displays no small ingenuity in his trade, and in whom Constructiveness is largely developed,) and examined the heads of his apprentices. The following is Mr. Milne's account of what took place upon the occasion:

"On the first boy presented to Dr. Spurzheim, on his entering the shop, he observed, that he would excel in anything he was put to. In this he was perfectly correct, as he was one of the cleverest boys I ever had. On proceeding farther, Dr. Spurzheim remarked of another boy, that he would make a good workman. In this instance also his observation was well-founded. An elder brother of his was working next him, who, he said, would also turn out a good workman, but not equal to the other. I mentioned that, in point of fact, the former was the better, although both were good. In the course of farther observations, Dr. Spurzheim remarked of others, that they ought to be ordinary tradesmen, and they were so. At last he pointed out one, who, he said, ought to be of a different cast, and of whom I would never be able to make anything as a workman, and this turned out to be too correct; for the boy served an apprenticeship of seven years, and, when done, he was not able to do one-third of the work performed by other individuals, to whose instruction no greater attention had been paid. So much was I struck with Dr. Spurzheim's observations, and so correct have I found the indications presented by the organization to be, that, when workmen, or boys to serve as apprentices, apply to me, I at once give the preference to those possessing a large Constructiveness; and if the deficiency is very great, I would be disposed to decline receiving them, being convinced of their inability to succeed."

The organ of this faculty is very largely developed in Mr. Brunel, the celebrated engineer of the Thames Tunnel, and the inventor of machinery for making blocks for the rigging of ships, by means of steam; and who has, besides, shown a great talent for mechanics in numerous departments

of art. It is large in Edwards, an eminent engraver; in Wilkie, Haydon, and J. F. Williams, celebrated painters; in Sir W. Herschel, whose great discoveries in astronomy arose from the excellence of his telescopes, made by his own hands; and in Mr. Samuel Joseph, an eminent sculptor. Masks of all these individuals are to be seen in the Phrenological Society's collection. In the late Sir Henry Raeburn, who was bred a goldsmith, but became a painter by the mere impulse of nature, without teaching and without opportunities of study, I observed it large. It is large also in Mr. Scoular, a very promising young sculptor, who displayed this talent at a very early age. I have noticed it large in all the eminent operative surgeons of Edinburgh, in distinguished engravers, and also in cabinetmakers and tailors who excel in their art. It and Form are large in children who are fond of clipping and drawing figures. The organ is well developed in many of the Esquimaux, who show considerable constructive talent.* It is large in most of the ancient Greeks. The busts also of eminent artists of former ages display a great developement of this organ; in particular, in that of Michael Angelo, in the church of Santa Croce, at Florence, the breadth from temple to temple is enormous. reflective organs, situated in the forehead, and likewise Ideality, are in him very large; and these add understanding and taste to the talent and love of constructing works of art.

The

On the other hand, I possess a cast of the head of a very ingenious friend, distinguished for his talents as an author, who has often complained of so great a want of constructive ability, that he found it difficult even to learn to write; and, in his head, although large in other dimensions, there is a conspicuous deficiency in the region of Constructiveness. Among the negative instances are the casts and skulls of the New Hollanders, in the Phrenological Society's collection, which are remarkably narrow in the situation of this organ; and their low condition in the constructive arts has been already mentioned. Contrasted with them are the Italians and French. An accurate and intelligent phrenologist anthorizes me to state, that, during his travels in Italy, he observed a full developement of Constructiveness to be a general feature in the Italian head; and the same holds, but in a less degree, in the French. Both of these nations possess this organ and constructive ingenuity in a higher degree than the English.

These are positive facts in regard to the organ of Constructiveness. I shall now advert to a few circumstances illustrative of the existence of a talent for construction, as a distinct power of the mind apart from the general faculties of the understanding; from which the reader may form an opinion of the extent to which the phrenological views agree or disagree with the common phenomena of human nature. This is the more necessary, as metaphysical philosophers in general do not admit a primitive faculty of Constructiveness, and hold the mechanical arts to be the result exclusively of reflection.

Among the lower animals, it is clear that the ability to construct is not in proportion to the endowment of understanding. The dog, horse, and elephant, which in sagacity approach very closely to the more imperfect specimens of the human race, never, in any circumstances, attempt a work of art. The bee, the beaver, and the swallow, on the contrary, with far less general intellect, rival the productions of man. Turning our attention to the human race, we observe that, while, among children of the same family or the same school, some are fond of a variety of amusements unconnected with art, others constantly devote themselves, during their leisure hours, to designing with chalk various objects on the boards of books, walls, and paper; or occupy themselves with fashioning in wax

* Phren. Journ., viii., 425.

or clay, or clipping in paper, the figures of animals, trees, and men. Children of a very tender age have sometimes made models of a ship of war, which the greatest philosopher would in vain strive to imitate. The young Vaucanson had only seen a clock through the window of its case, when he constructed one in wood, with no other utensils than a bad knife. A gentleman with whom I was intimately acquainted constructed, at an early age, a mill for making pot-barley, and actually set it in operation by a small jet from the main stream of the Water of Leith. Lebrun drew designs with chalk at three years of age, and at twelve he made a portrait of his grandfather. Sir Christopher Wren, at thirteen, constructed an ingenious machine for representing the course of the planets. Michael Angelo, at sixteen, executed works which were compared with those of antiqity.*

The greater number of eminent artists have received no education capable of accounting for their talents; but, on the contrary, have frequently been compelled to struggle against the greatest obstacles, and to endure the most distressing privations, in following out their natural inclinations. Other individuals, again, educated for the arts, and on whom every advantage has been lavished, have never surpassed mediocrity. Frequently, too, men whom circumstances have prevented from devoting themselves to arts to which they were naturally inclined, have occupied themselves with mechanics as a pastime and amusement. An eminent Scotch barrister, in whom Constructiveness is largely developed, has informed me, that occasionally, in the very act of composing a written pleading on the most abstruse questions of law, vivid conceptions of particular pieces of mechanism, or of new applications of some mechanical principle, dart into his mind, and keep their place so as to interrupt the current of his voluntary thoughts, until he has imbodied them in a diagram or description, after which he is able to dismiss them, and proceed with his professional duties. Leopold I., Peter the Great, and Louis XVI. constructed locks. The organ of Constructiveness was largely developed in the late Lord President Blair of the Court of Session, as appears from a cast of his head, his statue, and also his portraits: and it is said that he had a private workshop at Avondale, in Linlithgowshire, in which he spent many hours during the vacations of the court, constructing pieces of mechanism with his own hands. The predilection of such individuals for the practice of mechanical arts cannot reasonably be ascribed to want, or to their great intellectual faculties; for innumerable objects, more directly fitted to gratify or relieve the understanding, must have presented themselves to their notice, had they not been led by a special liking to the course they followed, and felt themselves inspired by a particular talent for such avocations. Not only so, but examples of an opposite description are met with; namely, of men of great depth and comprehensiveness of intellect, who are destitute of manual dexterity. Lucian and Socrates renounced sculpture, because they felt that they possessed no genius for it. M. Schurer, formerly Professor of Natural Philosophy at Strasburg, broke every article he touched. There are persons who can never learn to make a pen or sharpen a razor; and Dr. Gall mentions that two of his friends, the one an excellent teacher, the other "grand ministre," were passionately fond of gardening, but he could never teach them to ingraft a tree. Montaigne says of himself "I cannot handsomely fold up a letter, nor could ever make a pen, or carve at table worth a pin, nor saddle a horse." As a contrast to these, men of conside* Gall Sur les Fonctions du Cerveau, tome v.

† A striking case of this nature is reported in The Phrenological Journal, i., 509. Essays, B. ii., ch. 17, Cotton's Transl,

rable mechanical dexterity are frequently found to be remarkably destitute of talent for every other pursuit, and to possess very limited understandings. Cases of disease also tend to prove that Constructiveness is a special faculty, and not the result merely of general intellect. Dr. Rush mentions two cases in which a talent for design had unfolded itself during a fit of insanity; and he adds, that there is no insane hospital in which examples are not found of individuals who never showed the least trace of mechanical talent previously to their loss of understanding; but who have subsequently constructed the most curious machines, and even ships completely equipped.*_Fonderé, in his Traité du Goitre et de la Cretinisme, p. 133, remarks, "That, by an inexplicable singularity, some of these individuals, (Cretins,) endowed with so weak minds, are born with a particular talent for copying paintings, for rhyming, or for music. I have known several who taught themselves to play passably on the organ and harpsicord; others who understood, without ever having had a master, the repairing of watches and the construction of some piece of mechanism." He adds, that these powers could not be attributed to the intellect, for the individuals in question not only could not read books which treated of the principles of mechanics, "mais ils etaient deroutés lorsqu'on en parlait, et ne se perfectionnaient jamais.”

In the lower animals Nature has implanted a propensity to construct, but in them it is always specific; while in man a similar tendency is found, but general in its application. For example, nature inspires the beaver not only with a desire to build, but also with an instinctive and unerring impulse, independent of acquired knowledge and experience, to construct a dwelling of a particular form; and the power of the animal to build is confined entirely within the limited sphere of its intuitive inspiration. Man, on the other hand, has received from Nature a propensity to construct, but not a limited instinct to build a house or a ship, or to weave a coat or a vest, or, in short, to fashion any particular object. The beaver possesses no general reflecting powers to direct its propensity, and hence it was necessary to inspire not only with a desire to build, but with a plan of architecture. To man, on the contrary, reflection and the power of amassing knowledge are given; and the faculties of the understanding enable him to invent plans, and to employ his impulse to construct in a great variety of ways.

Constructiveness, then, confers only the love and power of constructing in general; and the results which it is capable of producing are influenced by other faculties. For example, intellect alone, with extreme deficiency of Constructiveness, will never enable an individual to become an expert handicraftsman; but, if the developement of Constructiveness be equal in two individuals, and the intellectual organs be large in the one and small in the other, the former will accomplish much higher designs than the latter. And the reason is obvious. The primitive talent for construction is the same in both; but the one, by means of his intellect, is endowed with the perception of the relation of means to an end, and hence is able to select, from the wide circle of nature and of art, every object and appliance that may extend and elevate his conceptions and aid their execution; while the latter is limited to a mere mechanical talent, never stretching beyond the imitation of objects previously existing.

The word Constructiveness has been objected to as not sufficiently comprehensive. To construct is to take detached materials and put them together, so as to form a single object out of the whole. Thus we may

be correctly said to construct a house, a machine, or a ship. The faculty, however, goes farther than this; it seems to be a tendency to fashion in

Rush's Medical Inquiries and Observations on the Diseases of the Mind. Philadelphia, 1812. P. 153.

general-in other words, to alter the shape or appearance of objectswhether by combining detached materials, or by chipping off fragments, or by drawing lines and laying on colours. It is not the province of this faculty to invent, but merely to fashion or configurate. Invention is an act of the understanding alone; so that we find ingenious inventors who are destitute of mechanical skill, and excellent handicraftsmen without any power of invention. It is probable, however, that Constructiveness, when powerful, stimulates the understanding to invent what will give itself agreeable employment in the process of construction. When the organ of Weight large, machinery is the department preferred.†

Dr. Gall mentions, that it is difficult to discover the position of this organ in some of the lower animals, on account of the different arrangement of the convolutions, their small size, and the total absence of several of those which are found in man. The organ of Tune in the lower creatures is situated toward the middle of the arch of the eyebrow, and that of Constructiveness lies a little behind it. In the hamster, marmot, and beaver, of whose crania he gives plates, it is easily recognised; and at the part in question the skulls of these animals bear a close resemblance to each other. In the beaver and other rodentia, the organ will be found immediately above and before the base of the zygomatic arch, and the greater the talent for construction the more this region of their head projects. The rabbit burrows under ground, and the hare lies upon the surface; yet their external members are the same. On comparing their skulls, this region will be found more developed in the rabbit than in the hare. The same difference is perceptible between the crania of birds which build nests, and those of such as do not build. Indeed the best way to become acquainted with the appearance of the organ in the lower animals is, to compare the heads of animals of the same species which build, with those of such as do not manifest this instinct; the hare, for example, with the rabbit, or birds which make nests with those which do not. Between the brains of animals of different species it is impossible to make a very accurate comparison.

The organ is established.

GENUS II. SENTIMENTS.

THIS genus of faculties embraces certain feelings which correspond to the "emotions" of the metaphysicians. They differ from intellectual perceptions, in being accompanied with a peculiar vividness, which every one understands, but which it is impossible to express by any verbal definition. They may be excited by the presentment of the external objects naturally related to them, as danger is to fear, and august appearance to reverence; or by the spontaneous activity of the organs, Dr. Spurzheim has named these faculties Sentiments, because they produce an emotion or feeling of a certain kind, joined with a propensity to act; but, as shown in the Appendix No II, the detail of his classification is here by no means accurate. Several of them are common to man and the lower animals; others are peculiar to man. The former, styled the Inferior or Lower Sentiments, shall be first treated of.

+

Mr. Richard Edmondson, of Manchester, in an essay, "On the Functions of the Organs called Weight and Constructiveness," published in the ninth volume of The Phrenological Journal, p. 624, views the elementary function of the organ in a new light, but I am not yet satisfied of the accuracy of his analysis.

+ See Phrenological Journal, ii., 415; and iii., 190. Lectures by Dr. Thomas Brown. Lecture 52.

« VorigeDoorgaan »