Mat 1, 1SS5.] 



• KNOWLEDGE ♦ 



379 



been published, let Mr. Taunton refer us to the published accouut, 

 ao that we know that we have the real facts before us before wo 

 bejtin to draw conclusions from them. 



Cool-headed iudeed must have been this party of German doctors 

 who, iu the midst of war and tuirnage, could find leisure and oppor- 

 tunity for an accurate estiuuition of the weiirlit of the brains of 

 their dead fellow-countrymen, and also for a careful inquiry into 

 their intellectual capacity ! 



But granting that ilr. Taunton's facts are of the highest eviden- 

 tial Talue, I see nothing in them which would lead me to withdraw 

 from the position which I have taken up in my former letters. I 

 have never asserted that the weight of the brain is the sole cause 

 of intellectual superiority. 



I might also point out that weight is not necessarily a criterion 

 of size, which was the word nsed by me in my last letter. Two 

 brains which weigh the same after death may have been very 

 different in size during life, owing to one being more largely supplied 

 with blood than the other. 



Mr. Taunton must also remember that the cerebellum has, in all 

 probability, very little to do with the intellectual capacity of its 

 owner ; and, further, that while the anterior lobes of the cerebrum 

 are the instruments of the " attributes that man shares with the 

 higher mammalia," the " posterior lobes are the instruments of attri- 

 butes j>eculiar to man, which we fairly may suppose to consist in 

 ■nch mental operations of a purely intellectual character as do not 

 express themselves in bodily actions." (Carpenter's " Mental 

 Physiology.") 



Hence we should compare the size, not of the brains iu their 

 entirety, but only of the cerebra, or more strictly only of the 

 posterior lobes of the cerebra. 



Can Mr. Taunton say which part of the brain his doctor and pro- 

 fessor were accustomed to weigh ? 



Perhaps Mr. Taunton will ask me why I did not in my former 

 tetter point out that we ought to take account only of the size of 

 the cerebrum, and not of the whole brain. Let me draw his 

 attention to this fact. In my last letter I did not mention the 

 word " intellect." 1 was speaking only of general " mental power." 

 And the " intellect " forms only one of the branches into which 

 mental faculties are divided. 



If Mr. Taunton will take account of the other mental faculties, 

 he will perhaps find that the result of his professor's researches 

 quite accords with my contention. A. F. Osborne. 



WEIGHT OP BRAIN. 



[1691] — I thought it was generally recognised that the weight of 

 the brain had some general relation to the mental powers of the 

 individual, although many instances are shown to the contrary. 



Cuvier's brain weighed upwards of 64 oz., and other brains of 

 talented men have nearly equalled it in weight, while, on the other 

 hand, the brains of idiots are very small. 



Tiedemann found the weight of three, ages sixteen, forty, and 

 fifty years, to be respectively 19J oz., 25joz., and 22 J oz. Dr. Sims 

 fonnd a female idiot, twelve years old, to have a brain weighing 

 27 oz. Dr. AJlen Thomson has found the brain of a female 

 dwarfish idiot girl to weigh, after preservation in alcohol, 18i oz., 

 the average adult male brain weighing 50 oz. and adult female 

 44 oz., with a few drachms over in each case, so the difference in 

 weight, one would think, would account for the difference of an 

 idiot's capabilities and an average man or woman's. 



There is a possibility that the professor's brain may have begun 

 to lose weight, which it is supposed to do after fifty or so, amount- 

 ing to about 1 oz. during each subsequent ten years. I say 

 " supposed," because the age is not agreed upon. 



E. FlTZGER.\LD. 



WOMAN'S INTELLECTUAL CAPACITY. 



[1692] — In ganging the relative mental powers of men and 

 women. H. Taunton (letter 1668) should not compare women of 

 one part of England with men of another part, but the elite of both 

 aexes. 



The arrest of physical development at an earlier age and potential 

 motherhood handicap woman sadly. Nor is a higher education 

 likely to improve her position. " The big chests, the massive brains, 

 the vigorous muscles, and stout frames of the best men, will carry 

 the day, whenever it is worth their while to contest the prizes of 

 life with the best women. And the hardship of it is, that the very 

 improvement of the women will lessen their chances. Better 

 mothers will bring forth better sons, and the impetus gained by 

 the one sex will be transmitted, in the next generation, to the other. 

 The most Darwinian of theorists will not venture to propound the 

 doctrine, that the physical disabilities under which women have 

 hitherto laboured, in the struggle for existence with men, are likely 



to bo removed by even the most skilfiilly-condiioted process of 

 educational selection " (Huxley's " Ulaik and Wiiiio"). 



But thero is a good time coming ! What extomiod education will 

 not effect, the process of eivilisutioii will a<■conl^^li^^ll. lla' tendency 

 of cctehral development is to diiniu.sli ferun<ii!\j (^^pencer'a 

 "Principles of Biology"). In future ages woiniin will compote 

 with man on more equable terms, and may attain tho superiority 

 foreshadowed iu Lytton's "Coming Kaco." F. J. C. 



DRY-EARTH v. HYDRAULIC SYSTEM. 



[1G93] — I am glad to see a discussion opened in your columns 

 in re the above. 1 have had an opportunity of testing both by 

 actual experience, and must say I much prefer tho latter, aud think, 

 when properly carried out, it is quite safe. 



The system at present in use here, and so strongly recommended 

 in your articles on Domestic Economy, is, I grant, perfect in theory, 

 but iu practice many objections arise. 



My objections are: — (1) Their very bad smell. From the fact 

 that in practice they seldom get their jiroper ([uantity uf ashes, and 

 that small qnantities of excrement occasionally find their way to 

 the side of the receptacle — this is very bad ; antl, after a time, the 

 adjacent brickwork seems to absorb tho smell, aud to give it out 

 when stimulated by heat. That this is no fancy picture, a walk 

 along a Manchester back-entry will convince any one. (2) The 

 very objectionable smell arising from tho removal vans of the 

 town, of which I have met as^n-.any as twelve in twenty n^inutes' 

 walk. (.3) Their great inconvenience, owing to the use of a recep- 

 tacle ; they cannot be placed in tho house, tor, although the devices 

 recently shown in Knowlkpce may be right enough in theory, in 

 practice the first objection applies to thoni all, with the additional 

 one of the inconvenience of removing the receptacle every day 

 devolving on some member of the household instead of on the 

 town's men, as at present. 



During a residence of two years here I have never heard a good 

 word said for them by luiy disinterested person, and, so strongly 

 are these objections felt here, that all modern houses are being 

 fitted with w.o.'s, it being found almost impossible to lot them 

 unless so fitted. F. W. B. 



Manchester, April 18, 18S5. 



INSCRIBED MONOLITHS. 



[1694] — The sculpture on 

 the stone shown in letter 

 1671, p. 332, is evidently 

 what is known among 

 Scottish antiquaries as the 

 " spectacle ornament." It 

 is, I believe, peculiar to 

 Scotland. The accompany- 

 ing drawing is taken from 

 a stone in the Mnseum at 

 Edinburgh, which was 

 found imbedded in the 

 " Castle Hill of Kintore." 

 E. C. K. 



[1695] — In reply to letter 1671, it may interest Mr. Thoma* 

 Black to learn that stones inscribed with concentric circles, spec- 

 taclelike figures, crescents, Ac, are not uncommon in Aberdeen- 

 shire, and are most frequently met with along the east coast of 

 Scotland, from Fife to Caithness. They have been sometimes 

 found in connection with the burial-places of our rude forefathers, 

 and the covering slabs of stone-cists have been found inscribed 

 with them. In my rambles I have obtained rubbings of eight or 

 ten within a radius of fifteen miles from the part of Aberdeenshire 

 I write from. The figures are invariably inscribed on rude blocks 

 often weighing several tons, and they show no trace of dressing. 

 Hereabout the rock selected is generally a hard diorite left by 

 drift-ice. 



The meanings of the figures are not known ; but , from the fact that 

 upwards of a huiidred specimens have been found throughout Scot- 

 land, it is inferred that the meanings were not local, but rather 

 symbolised some general belief or ancient mj'th. They evidently 

 form the earliest attempts at sculpturing by the people of this 

 country, and from the fact (among others) that a rude cross has 

 sometimes been found inscribed on the obverse side, they may be 

 ascribed to a period from tho eighth to the tenth century. 



What are known as "cup-markings" are entirely different from 

 the spectaclclike figure drawn by your correspondent; but whether 

 there is any connection between them has not yet been, and may 

 probably never be, determined. In what county is Newtylo,* where 

 Mr. Black's inscribed monolith may be seen ? J. G. 



[* It is in Forfarshire — near Coupar Angus. — Ed.] 



