Page images

eyes; yet we universally conclude of them all they were given us for the purposes of hearing and walking.

These varieties by no means prevent our believing that the eyes, ears, and feet, are the expressions, the organs of seeing, hearing, and walking; and why should we not draw the same conclusions concerning all features and lineaments of the human body? The expressions of similar dispositions of mind cannot have greater variety than have the eyes, ears, and feet, of all beings that see, hear, and walk; yet may we as easily observe and determine what they have common as we can observe and determine what the

eyes, ears, and feet, which are so various, among all beings that see, hear, and walk, have also in common. This well considered, how many objections will be answered, or become insignificant !

Various Objections to Physiognomy Answered.

Objection 1. “ It is said we find persons who, from youth to old age, without sickness, without debauchery, have continually a pale, death-like aspect; who, nevertheless, enjoy an uninterrupted and confirmed state of health.”

Answer. These are uncommon cases. A thousand men will shew their state of health by the complexion

and roundness of the countenance, to one is whom these appearances will differ from the truth.—I suspect that these uncommon cases are the effect of impressions made on the mother, during her state of pregnancy. Such cases may be considered as exceptions, the accidental causes of which may, perhaps, not be diffieult to discover.

To me it seems we have as little just cause hence to draw conclusions against the science of physiognomy, as we have against the proportion of the human body because there are dwarfs, giants, and monstrous births.

Objection 2. A friend writes me word, "He is acquainted with a man of prodigious strength, who, the hands excepted, has every appearance of weakness, and would be supposed weak by all to whom he should be unknown.”


I could wish to see this man. I much doubt whether his strength be only expressed in his hands, or, if it were, still it is expressed, in the hands; and, were no exterior signs of strength to be found, still he must be considered as an exception, an example unexampled. But, as I have said, I much doubt the fact. I have never yet seen a strong man whose strength was not discoverable in various parts.

Objection 3. “We perceive the signs of bravery and heroism in the countenances of men, who are, notwithstanding, the first to run away.”

Answer. The less the man is, the greater he wishes to appear.

But what were these signs of heroism ? Did they resemble those found in the Farnesian Hercules?--Of this I doubt: let them be drawn, let them be produced; the physiognomist will probably say, at the second, if not at the first, glance, quanta species ! Sickness, accident, melancholy, likewise, deprive the bravest men of courage. This contradiction, however, ought to be apparent to the physiognomist.

Objection 4. “We find persons whose exterior appearance denotes extreme pride, and who, in their actions, never betray the least sympton of pride.”

A man may be proud and affect humility.

Education and habit may give an appearance of pride, although the heart be humble; but this humility of heart will shine through an appearance of pride, as sunbeams through transparent clouds. It is true, that this apparently proud man would have more humility had he less of the appearance of pride.

Ohjection 5. “We see mechanics, who, with incredible ingenuity, produce the most curious works of art, and bring them to the greatest perfection; yet who, in their hands and bodies, resemble the rudest peasants and wood-cutters; while the hands of fine ladies are totally incapable of such minute and curious performances.'


I should desire these rude and delicate frames to be brought together and compared.-Most naturalists describe the elephant as gross and stupid in appearance; and according to this apparent stupidity, or rather according to that stupidity which they ascribe to him, wonder at his address. Let the elephant and the tender lamb be placed side by side, and the superiority of address will be visible from the formation and flexibility of the body, without farther trial.

Ingenuity and address do not so much depend upon the mass as upon the nature, mobility, internal sensation, nerves, construction, and suppleness of the body and its parts.

Delicacy is not power, power is not minuteness. Apelles would have drawn better with charcoal than many miniature painters with the finest pencil. The tools of a mechanic may be rude, and his mind the very reverse:

Genius will work better with a clumsy hand than stupidity with a hand the most pliable. I will indeed allow your objection to be well founded if nothing of the character of an artist is discoverable in his countenance ; but, before you come to a decision, it is necessary you should be acquainted with the various marks that denote mechanical genius in the face. Have you considered the lustre, the acuteness, the penetration of his eyes; his rapid, his decisive, his firm aspect; the projecting bones of his brow, his arched forehead, the suppleness, the delicacy, or the massiness of his limbs? Have you well considered these particulars? “I could not see it in him," is easily said. More consideration is requisite to discover the character of the man.

Objection 6. “There are persons of peculiar penetration who have very unmeaning countenances.”


The assertion requires proof.

For my own part, after many hundred mistakes, I have continually found the fault was in my want of proper observation.-At first, for example, I looked for the tokens of any particular quality too much in one place; I sought and found it not, although I knew the person possessed extraordinary powers. I have been long before I could discover the seat of character. I was deceived, sometimes by seeking too partially, at others, too generally. To this I was particularly liable in examining those who had only distinguished themselves in some particular pur

« PreviousContinue »