46 



NA TURE 



{May 21, 1874 



" Now, in respect to the locality of the power of speech. 

 It has been said that the loss of brain power to express 

 ideas in speech was located in a certain part of the brain. 

 This affection is called aphonia or aphasia. There arc 

 three modes of expressing ideas — by speech, by gesture, 

 and by writing. It is with the first only that we are con- 

 cerned. .Some very bold theorists have tried to locate all 

 these powers in a particular part of the brain. Let us 

 confine ourselves to facts. Dr. Broca of Paris has ad- 

 vanced the view that a certain small portion of some of the 

 convolutions of the brain holds the power of speech. I 

 admit that facts seemed to favour this view. But we find 

 that there is no relation between the degree of aphasia 

 and the extent of the disease of that part, and thei'e are 

 cases where the destruction of those convolutions is very 

 great, and the injury to speech very little. Secondly, we 

 find that disease may have overtaken the anterior, the 

 posterior, and the middle lobes of the brain, the particular 

 convo'ution supposed to invo've speech not being affected, 

 and yet there is marked aphasia. Now, is some one of 

 these lobes the locality of the power of speech ? Such 

 would be the reasoning of my opponents. We should be 

 obliged to concede that in some persons the faculty of 

 speech existed in one part of the brain, in some in another, 

 in others another, and so on ad infinUuin. This is a 

 rediictio ad absurdum. 



" There is the case of the paralysis of the insane, where 

 the grey matter may be diseased on both sides of the 

 brain. In these cases the power of speech does not seem 

 to be involved. There are cases of aphasia where the 

 diseased person has had the power of speech restored 

 during delirium. The speech is coherent though the 

 sense may not be. It is evident, then, that the faculty of 

 speech is not actually lost in such cases ; and yet we find 

 that the third frontal convolution is actually diseased in 

 those aphasiacs who talk in their delirium. But the most 

 decisive argument is found in the cases that 1 have seen, 

 where the third frontal convolution, the alleged organ of 

 speech, has been destroyed, and yet the patients have not 

 lost the power of speech. Therefore the theory is itself 

 destroyed. There are fifty cases on record to show that 

 the question o( right-handedness or left-handedness does 

 not apply in the considerations." The lecturer here cited 

 cases of Jacmet of Montpelier and Mr. Prcscott-Hewitt of 

 London. In the hitter case the patient had suffered a 

 destruction of that part of the brain for twenty years, and 

 yet for twenty years had spoken. 



" We shall now t-ike up the question of the localisation 

 of motion in certain parts of the brain. I am surprised 

 at the avidity with which a certain series of facts has 

 been accepted as proof of this theory in England. A very 

 eminent man, of whom 1 should not like to say anything 

 severe, my friend Prof Carpenter, has accepted those 

 views. I may say that all England has accepted them. 

 Prof Huxley, indeed, has written me, that he only ac- 

 cepted this view in part, but 1 cannot see how he can 

 accept a part without accepting the whole, where even the 

 part is incorrect. The famous experiments of Dr. Ferrier, 

 of Guy's Hospital, must here be considered. As you will 

 see, they are not, however, conclusive. By the app i- 

 cation of galvanism to certain parts of the brain of 

 animals, he produced certain movements. When we do 

 not stop to think, this would seem to prove that there are 

 in the brain certain centres of movement governing cer- 

 tain patts. But it is only a semblance. A part of the 

 facts are taken tor the whole. We should know all the 

 series before we adopt the conclusions. Let us examine 

 the other facts. 



"It is perfectly well known that the cutting away of a 

 large portion of the brain does not produce the least 

 alteration of voluntary movement any where. Suppose 

 that part of the brain, say the anterior lobe, being excited 

 by galvanism, produces a movement in the anterior limb ; 

 now suppose that part of the brain is cut away, then the 



anterior limb should be paralysed, for its voluntary move- 

 ment is gone. Admitting that the other half of the brain 

 should supply the place of the missing part, let us take 

 that away also ; then certainly there should be a paralysis 

 of the anterior limbs. But there is not. This should be 

 sufficient to invalidate the conclusions of Dr. Ferrier. 

 But there are abundant pathological facts of this nature 

 proving the fact beyond question. And then there are 

 the cases of recovery from paralysis. There is no such 

 localisation of power as Dr. Ferrier has assumed. If 

 galvanism be applied to the severed leg of the frog the 

 leg will jump although there is no brain power in the 

 question. 



" What should have been done was to have cut the con- 

 nection of parts, so that a general effect should not have 

 been propagated throughout the brain by the application 

 of galvanism to a part. This would be the cxpeiimcntum 

 cruets. My friend Dr. Duprd of Paris has made this ex- 

 periment. I made it also, before he did, but he publishel 

 his before mine. But there are many other facts almost 

 equally impressive in their character which may be cited. 

 We find many cases where the lesion of part of the brain 

 produces paralysis on the same side of the body, and not 

 on the opposite side, as in the majority of cases is the rule. 

 There is a case recorded wheie a ball passed directly 

 through the brain, and it produced paralysis on the right 

 side, instead of the corresponding side." Here Dr. Bro*n- 

 Sdquard objected to having a certain class of brain affec- 

 tions named after him, stating that diseases should be 

 named from their distinctive features, and not after 

 phvstcians. 



Dr. Br-own-S(fquard then applied a similar course of 

 reasoning to the localisation of sensation in specitic parts 

 of the brain, concluding by statin,' that it is evident we 

 cannot locate the centres of either sensation or motion 

 in specific parts of the nervous system. 



THE LONG PERUVIAN SKULL 



I WISH to place before comparative anatomists and 

 anthropologists a question which has been encumbered 

 by some misleading inaccuracies, in a recent comniuni- 

 1 cation by Dr. J. Barnard Davis to the Anthropological 

 Institute, (" On Ancient Peruvian Skulls" Journ. An- 

 I thi'opol. Inst., vol. iii., p. 94). So early as 1857, in 

 I communications to the British Association, and to the 

 I American Association for the Advancement of Science, I 

 showed, in opposition to the views of Di\ Morton, and of 

 all American ethnologists up to that date, that a dolicho- 

 cephalic type of head is characteristic of certain widely 

 diffused American races. At a later date I set forth, in 

 '■ Prehistoric Man," my r-easons for believing that this, 

 which is now universally acknowledged as true in general, 

 may be specifically asserted of the ancient Peruvians. 

 This latter proposition Dr. Davis undertakes to refute ; 

 it is not a mere matter of personal controversy, but a 

 question of some ethnical significance. As a Canadian, 

 I lie outside of the charmed circles of home science and 

 criticism, and only receive tardy news even of such com- 

 munications as this, in which I have a personal interest. 



Dr. Davis has not himself had an opportunity of examin- 

 ing the evidence on which my opinion was formed ; and, 

 in the communication above referred to, shows that he fails 

 to appreciate its nature or true bearing. He says, Dr. 

 Wilson's view, " which is that the dolichocephalic Peru- 

 vian skulls are of natural form, was combated in the 

 ' Thesaurus Ci-aniorum.' Since that book was printed, I 

 have received ample and satisfactory evidence as to the 

 truth of the proposition that the long skulls owe their 

 quality to artificial means. By the politeness of Dr. J. 

 Aitken Meigs, of Philadelphia, I have obtained two 

 Peruvian skulls which at one period belonged to Dr. 

 Morton's collection, as a specimen of each kind. One ol 



