ARTICLE VI. THE HEADS OF OUR GREAT MEN.[4]
Reading edition
ARTICLE VI. THE HEADS OF OUR GREAT MEN.[4]
—— —— ——“And his pure brain, Which some suppose the soul’s frail dwelling-house.” Shakspeare.
We have just alighted upon a most curious and interesting document, and propose to base upon it a phrenological article.
The late lamented Dr. Lovell, Surgeon General of the U. S. Army, set himself about investigating the claims of phrenology in what seems to us the only fair and philosophical manner, viz. taking measurement of the heads of all persons of his acquaintance, particularly those who were distinguished for any talent.
Below is a paper drawn up by that gentleman and Dr. Brereton; a document of incontestable genuineness, giving the measurement of more than fifty distinguished individuals, among whom are Van Buren, Webster, Calhoun, Clay, Marshall, M’Duffie, John Quincy Adams, &c.
We insert the document entire, sure that it will be examined with care by all who are examining phrenology, and regarded with interest by general readers, who can thus place head by head our great men.
Occipital Spine to Lower Individ. Occipital Spine to Ear. Ear to Individuality. Ear to Firmness. Destructiveness to Destruct. Cautiousness to Cautiousness. Ideality to Ideality. Ear to Comparison.
No. 1 J. Q. Adams, 7,8 4,2 5,3 6,0 6,1 6,1 5,6 5,6
” 2 J. C. Calhoun, 8,0 4,2 5,0 6,0 6,0 6,0 5,1 5,4
” 3 Henry Clay, 7,9 4,8 5,0 5,3 6,0 6,0 5,8 5,3
” 4 James Barbour, 8,2 4,2 5,2 6,0 6,3 6,2 5,3
” 5 Samuel L. Southard, 7,9 4,3 5,1 5,5 6,3 5,4 5,2
” 6 William Wirt, 8,1 4,6 5,2 5,9 6,0 5,4 6,0 5,5
” 7 John M’Lean, 8,1 5,0 5,1 6,3 6,2 6,1 6,1 5,7
” 8 Martin Van Buren, 7,8 4,3 4,7 5,6 6,4 6,1 6,0 5,1
” 9 Wm. T. Barry, 7,5 3,5 5,0 6,0 6,0 6,0 6,2 6,1
” 10 Judge John Marshall, 8,0 4,5 5,0 5,7 6,2 6,3 5,6 5,4
” 11 ” Johnson, 7,8 4,8 5,1 6,0 6,3 5,8 6,0 5,2
” 12 ” Trimble, 7,9 4,5 5,1 5,7 6,4 6,2 6,1 5,7
” 13 Gov. L. Woodbury, 7,6 4,5 5,0 6,0 6,2 6,0 6,1 5,7
” 14 Mr. Tazewell, 7,7 4,5 5,0 5,8 6,1 6,0 5,7 5,7
” 15 ” M’Duffie, 8,2 4,3 5,1 6,0 6,0 6,0 5,8 5,4
” 16 ” Cheeves, 8,2 4,1 5,2 6,1 6,1 5,9 6,1 5,7
” 17 ” Webster, 8,2 4,4 5,0 6,1 6,3 6,0 6,4 5,6
” 18 Judge M’P. Berrien, 8,0 4,7 4,8 5,8 6,3 6,1 5,2 5,1
” 19 Mr. Bradlee, senator, Vt. 8,1 4,5 5,1 5,8 5,9 6,0 6,0 5,1
” 20 ” Whipple, ” N. H. 8,2 4,5 5,1 5,6 6,0 5,8 5,8 5,5
” 21 ” Hamilton, ” S. C. 7,8 4,8 4,7 5,6 6,0 5,9 5,7 5,1
” 22 ” Stewart, ” Pa. 8,0 5,0 5,1 6,0 6,0 5,7 5,8 5,7
” 23 Judge Henry Baldwin, 8,0 5,0 5,3 6,0 6,2 6,0 6,0 5,8
” 24 Gen. D. Parker, 7,4 4,0 5,3 5,8 6,4 6,1 6,2 6,0
” 25 Col. Roger Jones, 7,8 4,5 4,8 5,3 5,6 5,8 5,7
” 26 Mr. Mitchell, 7,9 4,7 5,0 6,2 6,2 6,2 7,1 5,4
” 27 Col. Geo. Bomford, 7,9 4,6 5,0 5,6 6,2 6,2 5,7 5,4
” 28 ” N. Towson, 7,4 3,9 4,9 5,5 5,5 5,2 5,3
” 29 ” Geo. Gibson, 7,5 4,5 4,8 5,7 5,9 5,3 5,4
” 30 Maj. W. Wade, 7,8 4,1 5,1 5,8 5,9 5,0 5,5 5,4
” 31 ” Jas. Kearney, 7,4 4,0 5,1 5,6 5,6 5,3 5,6 5,3
” 32 Capt. John Smith, 7,6 4,1 4,8 6,0 5,9 5,6 5,6 5,0
” 33 ” Maurice, 8,0 4,6 5,1 5,4 6,0 5,8 5,6 5,3
” 34 Rev. J. N. Campbell, 7,4 4,4 4,8 5,4 5,6 5,3 5,6 3,3
” 35 George Todsen, 7,5 4,4 4,8 5,9 6,6 5,4 5,9 5,3
” 36 Dr. Richard Randall, 7,2 3,4 5,0 6,0 6,0 5,4 5,7 5,9
” 37 ” Cutting, 7,9 4,2 5,4 5,8 6,0 5,2 5,6 5,9
” 38 Maj. Vandeventor, 7,0 3,8 4,8 5,7 5,6 5,5 5,3 5,3
” 39 Lieut. John Farley, 7,2 4,0 4,9 5,7 5,9 5,1 5,5 5,3
” 40 ” Graham, 7,5 4,3 5,0 5,7 5,9 5,3 5,3 5,2
” 41 ” Martin Thomas, 7,4 4,7 4,8 5,3 6,1 5,6 5,9 5,3
” 42 Dr. E. Cutbush, 7,5 4,5 5,1 5,3 5,6 6,0 5,2 5,6
” 43 I. Inman, 8,0 5,0 5,1 6,0 6,1 6,0 5,2 5,2
” 44 James H. Henshaw, 7,6 4,4 4,9 5,7 6,2 5,8 5,7 5,4
” 45 Charles Hill, 7,6 4,3 5,3 5,9 6,2 6,2 6,5
” 46 Nathaniel Frye, 7,5 4,3 5,0 5,9 6,0 5,0 5,9
” 47 Lieut. Simonson, 7,3 4,3 5,0 5,2 5,1 5,4 6,0
” 48 Col. J. L. M’Kenney, 7,0 3,0 4,9 5,5 6,0 5,7 5,6 5,4
” 49 Dr. J. Lovell, Sur. Gen. 7,6 4,6 5,0 5,4 5,6 5,0 5,5
” 50 R. Johnson, 7,3 4,0 4,6 5,5 5,7 5,4 5,2 5,1
” 51 Lieut. James Macomb, 7,7 4,3 4,8 5,7 5,9 5,5 5,2 5,2
” 52 Wm. Lee, 2d Auditor. 8,0 4,0 5,0 6,1 6,2 5,8 5,8 5,9
For the benefit of the uninitiated, we will explain the principles of these admeasurements, and then give the inferences to be drawn from them.
The occipital spine is the lump or knob which every person may feel on the back of his own head, just in the centre of the skull, a little above the nape of the neck; lower Individuality is just between the eyes, where the root of the nose springs from the forehead; this measurement gives the whole length of the head. The average length of men’s heads is seven inches five-tenths; the average length of the fifty-two heads in this table, is seven inches seven-tenths, being two-tenths of an inch more than common heads. Now, this may seem at first a small matter, but two-tenths of an inch added to the length of a man’s nose, would make a very different proboscis, and added to the length of the fibre of his brain, might make him longer headed than his neighbours in more than one sense of the word. But, n’importe, we are looking at the facts; the longest heads are those of Daniel Webster, Langdon Cheeves, James Barbour, and Mr. M’Duffie, each measuring eight inches two-tenths; or seven-tenths of an inch more than the average measure of men’s heads.
Next come John M’Lean and William Wirt, measuring eight inches one-tenth; then John C. Calhoun, Judge Marshall, Attorney General Berrien, and Judge Baldwin, each eight inches; next come Henry Clay, Samuel L. Southard, Judge Trimble, John Quincy Adams, and Martin Van Buren. These are all longer headed men than the average of the list; while Levi Woodbury is smaller by one-tenth; and the last postmaster, Barry, by two-tenths. The shortest head in the list is that of Col. M’Kenney.
The next measurement is from the cochile, or hollow of the ear, to the occipital spine on the bump felt in the back of the head. It is asserted by some phrenologists, that this measurement gives the development of Inhabitiveness, or in the vernacular, the disposition to stay at home, attachment to place; but others, schismatics, say it indicates Concentrativeness, or power of fixing and concentrating thought. Be this as it may, among those on our list, John M’Lean and Judge Baldwin are the longest in this direction; next Henry Clay, Judge Johnson, &c. The smallest, and very small, (the average being in common men four inches two-tenths,) is Col. M’Kenney, who, (Heaven help him) is tied to home by a fibre of only three inches. No wonder he has trotted all over the world, and received the appointment of U. S. Indian Agent.
The next line of the table gives the measurements from the ear forward to Individuality, on the centre of the forehead between the eyes. This measurement, when taken in relation to the other measurements of each individual’s head, is much relied on by phrenologists as a test of the strength of the perceptive faculties; men who perceive and remember a multitude of individual facts and things, should belong here.
The longest in the list are J. Q. Adams, Judge Baldwin, and Gen. D. Parker. The average length of men’s heads in this direction, is less than five inches; the above measure five inches three-tenths; James Barbour, William Wirt, and Langdon Cheeves, each measure five inches two-tenths; Judge M’Lean and Mr. M’Duffie measure five inches one-tenth. Webster, Clay, and Calhoun, are a little longer than the average; Van Buren falls considerably short of the mark.
Col. M’Kenney should be well endowed in the perceptive faculties, for although his fibre measures but four inches nine-tenths, we must recollect that his head is small. The shortest in the list is R. Johnson. Now, among all men we ever met, no one can match John Q. Adams for minute and varied knowledge, save and except Lord Brougham.
The next measurement is from the ear to the top of the head, where, it is said, is the organ of Firmness; and the height of the head should indicate the strength of this quality. And here we used to think we had the phrenologists on the hip, judging from some of our own eye measurements; but we were told it must be taken in relation with other qualities; a man may be firm in vice’s cause as well as virtue’s, but then he is called stubborn; or his firmness may be qualified by caution or cowardice—he may be a confirmed coward, &c. But no matter, we proceed to the measurements. The average of Firmness of these men, measured by Gunter’s scale, is five inches seven-tenths. We find Judge M’Lean overtops them all, and has a mountain of Firmness, measuring six inches three-tenths; next comes Mr. Mitchell, of South Carolina, then Messrs. Webster and Cheeves—six inches one-tenth; then lower, but yet high, John Quincy Adams, Calhoun, Barbour, Johnson, M’Duffie, Baldwin, Barry. Van Buren’s Firmness would never be in his way, being a tenth lower than the average; Mr. Clay’s is three-tenths; and one person, Lt. Simonson, is only five inches and two-tenths! The small Firmness, alias, small obstinacy, of Clay, perhaps qualifies him so well for mediator—pacificator.
Now let us apply the rule and compass the other way, and look at the measurements through the head; that is, from ear to ear, or rather along the ear from Destructiveness to Destructiveness, which indicates, also, the size of Secretiveness; it is said to be necessary to statesmen, players, and thieves.
Men generally measure five inches six-tenths in this direction; but the average measure of this list gives seven inches seven-tenths; from whence phrenologists would infer, that our worthies destroy and secrete only in the ratio of one-tenth more than the rest of the people; a very charitable conclusion, truly! The longest is Dr. Todsen, of the United States Army; who, horribile dictu! measures six inches and six-tenths! No wonder he was afterwards cashiered for theft; how could he help it, with such a bump! Next to this unfortunate worthy—and, as if to mark the contrast, and note the folly of phrenological predictions, comes—who? why, our present magnanimous and open-hearted president, who was then (nine years ago) the innocent and unsophisticated Martin Van Buren!
We feel almost indignant at the insinuation implied in this measurement; not that we doubt its correctness, or the motives of Doctors Lovell and Brereton, but they should have put in as a salvo the measurement of our president’s Conscientiousness, which, we think, must be enormous, in order to counterbalance this Secretiveness; for we are confident that nine years ago he had no fixed plans and determinations which he secreted from the world.
To be sure Judge Trimble is placed in the same category, and following close after, comes Daniel Webster, whose Destructiveness, measuring a tenth less than the president’s, is, nevertheless, enormously developed, and probably is
—— “the direful spring Of woes unnumbered,”
to the feathered and finny tribes which are so unfortunate as to frequent his neighbourhood. He is rather apt also to attack and destroy the arguments of his opponents. Barbour and Southard also are set down as destructives to the extent of six inches and three-tenths; while M’Lean, Marshall, Woodbury, and Baldwin, go the length of six inches two-tenths; John Quincy Adams and Tazewell, six and one-tenth; even Clay cannot be called a conservative, for he, with Calhoun, M’Duffie, and others, go the length of three-tenths of an inch more than the average of men in the destructive line.
The next measurement is from Cautiousness to Cautiousness; that is, the breadth of the head about four fingers above the ears at the broadest part. Some heads run up in a regular slope from above the ears to the crown; of course there can be little of the organ of caution there, and phrenologists maintain that this is the characteristic of French skulls; while other heads bulge out above the ear, having what they call large Cautiousness, and they point to the well-known bulge in Hindoo skulls.
Cautiousness, however, we believe, is not now considered by phrenologists to be merely a negative quality, as was taught by Gall, but a positive one, and more like fear. When this organ is deficient, the individual should be rash and precipitate; when full, cautious and circumspect; when very large, irresolute and wavering. Too much in a judge would be a failing, “which leans to virtue’s side;” too much in a soldier would oftener prove his disgrace than his honour; for one Fabius, who gained the name of Great, we have a thousand Marcelli; the glitter of the sword dazzles the multitude, but the virtue of the shield is known only to a few.
The first thing which strikes one on examining this part of the table, is the great difference between the measurements of caution in military men, and in the statesmen and judges; the latter are all large—some of them very large—the former are small; the average measurement of the judges and statesmen is six inches, while that of the officers is but five inches and three-tenths!
For instance, Judge Marshall has the enormous measurement of six inches and three-tenths in the organ of Cautiousness—that of the average being only five inches seven-tenths; Judge Trimble and Mr. Barbour measure 6-2; Messrs. Van Buren and Adams, Judges M’Lean and Berrien, 6-1; Messrs. Clay, Calhoun, Webster, Tazewell, &c. six inches. On the other hand, Major Wade measures only five inches; Lieut. Farley 5-1; Col. Towson 5-2; Col. Gibson, Major Kearney, and Lieut. Graham, 5-3. Most of the rest are below the average; and only two, General Parker and Col. Bomford, measure over six inches.
The last measurement we shall notice, is from Ideality to Ideality, that is, through the head, just above and behind the temple. Phrenologists suppose that this organ is essential to the poet, though it alone will not make a poet; he must have, besides, Language, Time, Tune, &c. Ideality in the common man may show itself in his good taste, in dress, furniture, &c.; in the orator or writer, in his tropes and figures; in all men, by the conception of, and aspiration to, something finer, better, superior to what it actually is.
In our list, it is largest, and enormously large, in Charles Hill, who was, we believe, an elegant dresser, quite a Corinthian; he measures six inches five-tenths, the average being five inches seven-tenths; Webster is 6-4 [Qy. 6-2?]; next Messrs. Barry, Parker, Woodbury, Cheeves, Van Buren, Wirt, &c., all of whom have it large. On the other hand, Judges Berrien and Marshall, Adams, Barbour, Southard, fall below the average; and Calhoun measures only five inches one-tenth. The remarkable diminutiveness of this organ, taken with the terseness of his language, which never shows a trope or figure of any kind, is a “coincidence” at least.
The measurements of this paper correct some erroneous impressions which the public generally have. We always supposed, for instance, that the heads of Judge Marshall and Mr. Calhoun were unfavourable to the phrenological doctrine, as being quite small; but it seems they are actually large; and, though narrow, the region of Ideality capable of containing a more than usual quantity of brain.
The largest head in the list is that of Daniel Webster, but it is not most to our liking, for there is a goodly share in the animal region; and though he has “most brains of the bunch,” they are not of the very choicest kind.
Phrenologists, looking over these measurements, and without regarding the names, would say that the best head was No. 7, belonging to Judge M’Lean, because it is full in the upper or moral region; Firmness, and its neighbouring Veneration, are large; they would call it a well-balanced head, and conclude that its great intellectual power would not be made a pander to the animal propensities. (We ourselves should prefer it; but, lest we should be suspected of a political bias in favour of the latter, we avow that our vote is for Daniel, malgré, his occiput.) The next heads, in the order of size, are Judges Baldwin, Marshall, Trimble, and Johnson; Messrs. Cheeves, M’Duffie, Wirt, Adams, (a quartetto of the same size); next, Clay, Van Buren, Calhoun, and Southard.
We have stated that we are candid enquirers into the nature of phrenology; we believe we are so; and if the facts shown in this paper are favourable to its pretensions, the fault is not ours, but nature’s; we admire and we adopt the motto of one of its lights, “res non verba quæso.”
It would have been as easy for us to seek for, and to set forth, opposing arguments and facts; and we should have done it in the spirit of the motto just quoted; but as the vast majority of men of learning, and almost all writers, are opposed to phrenology—as it is assailed every day by argument and ridicule—as its opponents are rather uproarious whenever it is seriously mentioned—we deem it but fair audire alteram partem.
In plain truth, we are all, to a certain extent, phrenologists; and the disciples of Gall and Spurzheim have no right to claim for their masters the credit of originality, or for themselves the credit of peculiar and new views of nature. No age, since Aristotle, has been without its philosophers, who pointed out the brain as the organ by which the mind carried on its operations; and it is now generally admitted to be its primary and essential instrument.
A shrewd and practical English philosopher, and an uncompromising anti-phrenologist, writes thus: “Mind, connected with body, can only acquire knowledge slowly through the bodily organs of sense, and more or less perfectly according as these organs and the central brain are perfect. A human being, born blind and deaf, and therefore remaining dumb, as in the noted case of the boy Mitchell, grows up closely to resemble an automaton; and an originally misshapen or deficient brain causes idiocy for life. Childhood, maturity, dotage, which have such differences of bodily powers, have corresponding differences of mental faculties; and as no two bodies, so no two minds, in their external manifestations, are quite alike. Fever, or a blow on the head, will change the most gifted individual into a maniac, cause the lips of virgin innocence to utter the most revolting obscenity, and those of pure religion to speak horrible blasphemy; and most cases of madness and eccentricity can now be traced to a peculiar state of the brain.”
What the nature and the powers of the human soul may be, we know not, nor can we know, until it is disembodied and disenthralled; until this mortal shall put on immortality, and time and space shall be no more; then, doubtless, the power of ubiquity, and a searching vision to which the diameter of the globe will present no more of an obstacle than does the thinnest glass to the mortal eye, will be among the least of the spiritual powers; but, until then, if we would study the nature of the spirit, we must consider it as trammeled by, and operating through, a corporeal organisation.
The difference between the vast majority of thinking men and ultra-phrenologists, we believe to be narrowed down to this; all admit that the spirit of man, manifesting itself through corporeal organisation, is influenced and modified by, and indeed entirely dependent upon, the nature and state of that organisation, particularly of the brain and nervous system; while phrenologists go farther, and say, that according to the length and breadth of certain bundles of fibres in certain compartments of the brain does the spirit manifest its different faculties with different degrees of activity and power.
We all of us admit, that even the giant mind of a Newton, or a Napoleon, would struggle in vain against the finger of an infant pressing upon the brain; but phrenologists maintain, that as the finger should be pressed upon one or another organ, so would one or another of the mental powers be immediately affected. Perhaps the truth is beyond the extremes; and while we should strive to attain the juste milieu, we should not be deterred by any fears of what may be the inferences from searching for truth in observations upon nature.
S. G. H.