WHAT IS THERE IN PHYSIOGNOMY? 



I. THE SIZE OF THE NOSE 



Frederick Adams Woods 

 Lecturer on Biology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology 



AS WE go on through Hfe we all 

 acquire a certain amount of criti- 

 cal discernment regarding the 

 human face. Some people, whose occu- 

 pations have naturally brought them in 

 contact with a vast number of varying 

 types, acquire special skill. Hotel 

 clerks, for instance, physicians, lawyers, 

 business leaders, travelling men, etc., 

 become very adept in what is popularly 

 known as "sizing people up." It is 

 probable that girls begin this science of 

 face study much younger than boys 

 since they need it as a matter of defense 

 and protection, and all through life 

 women are perhaps superior to men as 

 physiognomists. This is usually spoken 

 of as woman's intuition, but there is 

 probably nothing more mysterious 

 about it than that women have paid 

 more attention to the subject. 



WHAT DO OUR "LOOKs" SIGNIFY? 



Those who say there is nothing in 

 physiognomy are for the greater part 

 protesting against the extreme and 

 absurd claims of all the cranks and 

 quacks — first cousins and half brothers 

 to the palmists, the astrologers and the 

 phrenologists. For the admission that 

 there is something in physiognomy is 

 necessitated by common everyday ex- 

 perience. Great men certainly do not 

 look like imbeciles, nor do Eskimos 

 and African Bushmen look like cour- 

 tiers and heroes. There is a .line of 

 truth to be drawn somewhere, but just 

 where that line lies has never been 

 determined, even approximately. The 

 true methods of inductive science have 

 not been applied to establishing asso- 

 ciations between facial peculiarities 

 and mental traits. 



It is a fair hypothesis that at 

 least some associations exist. Man 

 has evolved from an ape-like ancestor 

 characterized by a small nose, small 



eyes, retreating forehead and chin. 

 Why should not the most intellectual of 

 men depart more than the "common 

 run" of men from such primitive pro- 

 portions? Indeed, there is a wide- 

 spread popular fancy that a high 

 forehead and long nose are marks of 

 intellect, and a heavy chin is a sign of 

 force of character. In fiction and in 

 the "movies" we see the conventional 

 types, and they are usually represented 

 in accordance with these time-honored 

 beliefs. 



Whether different proportions of the 

 face have or have not any significance, 

 there is one way in which the human 

 countenance certainly expresses men- 

 tal differences, and that is through its 

 fluctuating expressions. There is per- 

 haps no branch of knowledge which a 

 human being begins to study so early 

 in life as facial expression. Little ba- 

 bies soon know the difference between 

 a smile and a frown. An intelligent 

 dog will watch its master's face for 

 every change of mood, hanging on the 

 slightest indication of approval or en- 

 couragement. The knowledge of the 

 meaning of the face is very important, 

 since the need for the commendation of 

 one's fellow men is almost universal 

 and begins very young, for it harks 

 back to earliest origins. Indeed the 

 desire to be well thought of by the other 

 members of one's own circle is a curious 

 human peculiarity and is almost a 

 prime distinguishing mark between 

 men and brutes. It is probable that 

 not many of the lower animals care at 

 all what the others of their species 

 think of them. Running horses and 

 trotting horses very likely have some- 

 thing of this feeling. They appear to 

 exhibit pride and emulation. So do 

 fox hounds; and perhaps all the gre- 

 garious animals have in a crude way the 

 basis for the evolution of this important 



301 



