also accompanied the memoir. The work in which he now sets forth his observations, has an atlas of 120 exquisite plates, containing about 600 figures. The accuracy of dimensions is said to surpass any thing before attempted in anatomy; and if the immense mass of proofs of phrenology from the human head, and the facts pointed out by Gall in brutes, were not sufficient to convince the most prejudiced, the additional multitude amassed by Dr. Vimont will overwhelm them. No one can pretend to a perfect knowledge of comparative anatomy and physiology, without a knowledge of his labours; and to impress their importance upon my readers, I shall quote a long passage.

“« • In animals of the lower class, to begin with fish and reptiles, the number of cerebral faculties is small; their acts generally of short duration—all have a spinal cord. In the apparatus of the senses, they have, externally, a multitude of shades of form and structure, calculated to facilitate their actions. The most prominent cerebral faculties are conservation, alimentation, and reproduction. If there are any per

, ceptive faculties, they are, except in some species, very limited.

• • What a difference, in this respect, between them and birds ! How must we be struck with admiration on observing, that with the more energetic and complicated actions of birds, the cerebral system becomes more ample! Is it not still more surprising to see the combination and energy of the faculties perfectly coincide with the wants of the species ? How can we, on the other hand, refuse to be convinced of phrenology, when it proves to us, by the inspection of many thousands of skulls, that if birds, whatever be their class, order, genus, or species, or even their peculiar habits, have a faculty in commonfor example, that of migration or recognising places--their skulls will always resemble one another at one point; and, as this truth applies to all the faculties discovered by observation, to deny the existence of these facts, is to deny that the eye is the external apparatus of sight, the ear of hearing, the nose of smelling, &c.

• • In quadrupeds and quadrumana, in which the cerebral operations, generally considered, are more numerous and present a more continued action than in birds, we find the cerebral system more developed. Some organs which were but rudimentary in the two first classes, are very prominent; and the acts dependent upon them, being more energetic, confirm the general law of nature—the relation between the extent and force of the acts of the nervous system with its volume or developement. .... Full and perfect reliance may be placed on my observations ; for they are the result of a scrupulous and conscientious examination of many thousand skulls of brutes, and the dissections of their brains, subsequent to the study of their most striking manners and habits.'"

[ocr errors]




There is probably nothing in cranioscopy which is more frequentiy misconceived by amateurs than the effect of cerebral developement upon the position of the eye. The frequency of erroneous suggestions upon this subject is such, that a few explanatory remarks cannot but be beneficial. The salient eye is generally considered indicative of a fine memory of words, and capacity for the acquisition of languages. So far is this from being true, the very reverse of this proposition might be maintained with equal propriety.

The eye, resting in its socket, is in contact with the ethmoid, sphenoid, frontal, and malar bones. Its position, therefore, depends upon these four bony walls, with which, but for a small quantity of muscular and adipose matter, it would be in immediate contact. The six muscles of the eye, having no other duty than that of turning the ball in a well lubricated socket, are too delicate to have any sensible influence on its position by their magnitude. The filling up of the socket with adipose matter, which occurs to some extent in cases of obesity, when the face is fleshy, changes materially the prominence of the eye, as we see in plethoric persons whose tissues are distended with blood and lymph. When the system is wasted by disease, and the face partakes of the general emaciation, we witness a slight recession of the eye within the socket, owing to the absorption of the substance in which the eye is usually cushioned. In cases of diseased action and fungous growth at the basis of the brain, the eye is sometimes protruded from the socket, while the functions of the neighbouring organs are deranged. But all these causes are of little importance, compared with the arrangement of the bones which constitute the socket, and by which the position of the eye is generally determined.

In proportion as these bones are influenced by cerebral developement, and moved at their points of contact with the eye, the position of the latter becomes indicative of the developement of the brain. To what extent, and in what manner, this occurs, we propose to inquire.

Of the four bones of the socket, it is through the frontal and sphenoid alone that the eye is brought into apposition with the brain. Through the frontal, with the base of the front lobe, and through the sphenoid, with the anterior extremity of the middle lobe. The middle lobe lying at the back of the socket, its developement must necessarily move the eye directly forward, tending to push it horizontally out of

the socket, so as to overhang the face and project beyond the brow. The upper part of the socket (more than one third of the whole) is formed by the frontal bone. This portion (the super-orbitar plate) of the frontal bone supports the convolutions at the base of the front lobe, which constitute the perceptive organs and the organ of Language. Being very thin, its form shows with correctness the developement of those organs. The organs, then, which may affect the position of the eye, are Individuality, Form, Size, Weight, Colour, Order, Number, Language, Tune, Alimentiveness, and Gustativeness. I say Alimentiveness and Gustativeness, because the faculties of alimentation and gustation are distinct, and must be inanifested by distinct organs. The organ of Gustativeness lies in the anterior and internal portion of the middle lobe, near the fissure of Sylvius, and that of Alimentiveness, in its basilar portion, touching the temporal bone.*

The position of the eye, as we have seen, is affected by the deve lopement of ten or eleven different organs, instead of the single organ of Language; and of these, the only one which tends directly to project the eye, is the compound organ called Alimentiveness. The developement of the organ of Language being in an oblique line downwards and forwards, it tends, when very large, to project and also to depress the eye; but the convolution constituting this organ is entirely too small to have the amount of effect which is usually ascribed to it, and a very slight additional developement of the middle lobe, projecting the sphenoid bone, would have more effect in producing the salient eye than the largest developement of the organ of Language. If, then, we consider the salient eye as an indication of developement, it is rather the developement of the middle than of the front lobe, and

We often have cases in which the alimentary function is morbid, suspended, or increased, without any affection of the gustatory power. In the following case, the organ of Gustativeness was injured by a tumour. The case is given in the London Medical and Physical Journal, for December, 1827, by T. W. Chevalier. A robust female, aged thirty-nine, having been severely burned at the age of four. teen, "ever since complained of an unusual sensation, which she described as a shaking movement in her inside.” " In May, 1827, she was afflicted with a strange sort of headache, and a sensation of burning in her stomach." Her sight became impaired, occasionally her memory failed, and she was liable to falling for. ward. She spoke of heat in her mouth, and of a loss of taste, which she attributed to that cause. She soon became comatose, and died. The brain had a firm, healthy appearance, but a tumour, of the size of a large walnut, was attached to the sella tursica and pia mater. Its base filled the sella tursica, and its form was nearly spherical, so situated as “lo separate the corpora albicantia and the optic nerves more than an inch and a quarter from the posterior clinoid processes." The situation of the tumour thus was such as to interfere greatly with the anterior internal portion of the middle lobe, and we observe the loss of taste was the effect.

therefore has more to do with epicurism, or with destructive violence, than with the faculty of Language.

Without referring to the living, I may mention Darteneuf, the famous epicure, whose portrait we may see among others of the KitCat Club. His epicurism was even alluded to in the polished verse of Pope. The head of Darteneuf does not show the breadth over the cheek bone, for which we are accustomed to look in seeking Alimentiveness. The head appears to have a narrow base, but presents the salient epicurean eye. A more convenient illustration may be found by referring to Spurzheim's Physiognomy for the head of the sensualist Godoi. In that, we see the same salient epicurean eye.

If we are to infer the developement of Language from the position of the eye, it must be from the depression rather than the prominence. The heads of Count Loupede, Charles Bonnet, Count de Buffon, distinguished naturalists, and those of Milton, Locke, Cervantes, George Buchanan, Descartes, Montaigne, Voltaire, John Knox, &c. exhibit this position. At the same time we must remark, that if the perceptive organs are largely developed, the brow and the anterior part of the vault, or super-orbitar plate, will be so much depressed as to diminish the apparent defect of any depression made by the organ of Language; whereas, if the perceptive organs are of a moderate size, the brow being comparatively elevated, the eye appears more depressed. The apparent depression of the eye, then, shows the comparative developement of the posterior, or of the anterior parts of the socket of Language, or of the oculo-perceptive organs, and of the superciliary ridge.

As to the prominence of the eye, I have already shown that it. depends chiefly upon the developement, at the back of the sockets, in the region of Alimentiveness. But prominence must be estimated comparatively; and when we speak of the prominence of the eye, we mean in comparison with the nose, cheeks, and forehead—especially the latter. No matter how much the eye may be projected by the middle lobe, we would not call it prominent if it was still greatly overhung by the front lobe. The brow is the part to which we reser by comparison, when we speak of the eye. Now, as the developement of the intellectual organs projects the whole forehead and brow, it is impossible that there could be a prominent eye in this sense, when the intellectual organs are very largely developed, as in the head of Mr. Webster ; whereas, if we cut off from the extremity of the front lobe half an inch of the length of the intellectual organs, we leave the eye uncommonly prominent, as we often find it in the heads of congenital idiots. I have a specimen of this in the skull of a stupid negro woman, who had a remarkably small front lobe. Her low fore

lectual organs.

head was absolutely farther back at its most prominent portion than the cornea of the eye. The socket projected much beyond the intel

This form is incompatible with intellect, unless it results from the excessive developement of the middle lobe.

It appears, then, that the prominence of the eye is chiefly indicative of the comparative projections of the front and middle lobes. If the front lobe is large or long, and the middle lobe small or receding, the eye is deep sunken. If the middle lobe is extremely prominent, and the front lobe deficient, making a coarse or idiotic character, the eye is very prominent. The prominent eye, then, is frequently to be considered an indication of intellectual deficiency; for it is manifest, cæteris paribus, that the more we take from the front lobe, the more prominent the eye becomes.

In estimating the developement of the intellectual organs by the prominence of the front lobe, a comparison of its prominence with that of the eye, though not a precise criterion, will often be of material assistance. There are many high broad foreheads which belong to persons defective in intellect; and if the extremity of the front lobe be cut off, the forehead remaining may be even higher and broader than what appeared before. The fine expansive perpendicular forehead, beneath which we find the salient eye, may be the very mark of stupidity, because it may show a deficient length of the front lobe. This fact has been observed by many, and physiognomists have published it as one of their most certain truths.

Aristotle, and afterwards Rhoses, declared the prominent eye to be indicative of stupidity, like that of the ass. J. B. Porta, in presenting . the same idea, near three centuries ago, gives as the explanation the opinion of the physicians, that the salient eye was caused by the moisture or debility of the ventricles of the brain! which must be enfeebling to the mind, as they made the ventricles its organs. Polemon also mentions the prominence of the eye as one of the most unequivocal signs of stupidity, and sometimes of entire imbecility. Moreau endorses these opinions, and Lavater agrees with them

'To show the prevalence of these ideas, I would refer to other writers of less distinction. An old French book, bearing the title of Physiognomy and Chiromancy, says, “ Too large a forehead indi


a . cates a character at once lazy, timid, and stupid.” Another, published at Lyons, in 1549, under the title of Natural Physiognomy, says that those who have the forehead very large and broad, are dull of spirit and understanding.” Peuschel, a German writer on phy. siognomy, says that—"A very voluminous front, announces a man difficult of conception, but apt to retain well what he has learned Slow and dull to acquire ideas, it is equally difficult for him to carry

« VorigeDoorgaan »