284 



ON THE CONNECTION BETWEEN PHRENOLOGY 

 AND PHYSIOGNOMY. 



By J. L. Levison. 



( Concluded from p. 273, vol. v.) 



The practical inference deduced from my preliminary remarks in 

 the eighteenth number of the Analyst was briefly this, that the head 

 is more important to individualize a person than a mere facsimile 

 of the features, if the cranial developments are unheeded. And as 

 the skull receives its form from the brain contained within, it fol- 

 lows that a knowledge of the functions of the brain (Phrenology) 

 must furnish more accurate and certain means to ascertain particular 

 dispositions, tempers, and various kinds of intellectual capacity, than 

 could be obtained by any of the vague rules of Physiognomy. 



I shall, therefore, make a more particular comparison between 

 these two modes of attempting to know something definite of human 

 character ; and I think every candid person will admit that, for this 

 purpose, there is much greater accuracy in the system of Gall and 

 Spurzheim than there is in those of Theophrastus and Lavater. I 

 ask, what rules can be suggested by the most learned physiognomist 

 to ascertain when there exists a natural genius for Music, or Paint- 

 ing, or Poetry, or Mathematics, or History, &c. ? What rules 

 could he furnish to denote any relative degree in which such men- 

 tal qualifications are experienced in the persons with whom we as- 

 sociate } It will be shewn, in the sequel of this paper, that mere 

 length and breadth of the face, or the size and shape of the* nose, 

 chin, and so forth, are imperfect indicators of character, unless in 

 extreme cases. On the other hand, the phrenologist can ascer- 

 tain cases even of mediocrity, without looking at the nose or chin, 

 &c., by the mere inspection of the head. I venture to add that 

 even in such extraordinary instances of early genius as was manifest- 

 ed by Dr. Crotch, the mere inspection of his features would not have 

 indicated his musical capacity : and if his form of face should have 

 been adopted by the physiognomist as typical of great musical capa- 

 city, then the student would have been in a dilemma on examining 

 the features of composers in general. He would find, for example, 

 that there are scarcely two of the composers alike : — what a difference 

 in the faces of a Handel, a Mozart, a Haydn, and a Neukomm ! If, 

 however, the tyro in Physiognomy, instead of applying his fancied 



