Phrenology: The Provocation of Progress

de Giustino David , Conquest of mind. Phrenology and Victorian social thought (London, 1975); Parssinen T. M. , “Popular science and society: The phrenology movement in early-Victorian Britain”, Journal of social history, vii (1974), 1–20; McLaren Angus , “Phrenology: Medium and message”, Journal of modern history, xlvi (1974), 86–97; Cantor G. N. , “The Edinburgh phrenology debate: 1803–1828”, Annals of science, xxxii (1975), 195–218; Shapin Steven , “Phrenological knowledge and the social structure of early nineteenth-century Edinburgh”, Annals of science, xxxii (1975), 219–43; Cantor G. N. , “A critique of Shapin's social interpretation of the Edinburgh phrenology debate”, Annals of science, xxxii (1975), 245–56.

This is not intended to deride the work of the authors, many of whom are eminent in their field and whose studies display considerable scholarship, but it is intended to underline the fact that most work on phrenology has been conducted from narrow disciplinary bases by persons usually unqualified to discuss phrenology within the full context of nineteenth century science and society. Boring Edwin G. , “Phrenology and the mind-body problem”, in A history of experimental psychology (2nd ed., New York, 1957), 50–60; Carlson Eric T. , “The influence of phrenology on early American psychiatric thought”, American journal of psychiatry, cxv (1958), 535–8; Carlson E. T. and Noel Patricia S. , “Origin of the word ‘phrenology’”, American journal of psychiatry, cxxvii (1970), 694–7; Clarke Edwin and Dewhurst Kenneth , “The new ‘science’: Phrenology”, in An illustrated history of brain function (Oxford, 1972), 91–98; Collins Philip , “When morals lay in lumps: The pretensions of phrenology”, The listener, xc (16 August 1973), 213–15; Critchley Macdonald , “Phrenology in medicine”, Lancet, ii (5 December 1964), 1227; Dallenbach K. M. , “The history and derivation of the word ‘function’ as a systematic term in psychology [attributing it to Gall and Spurzheim's usage]”, American journal of psychology, xxvi (1915), 473–84; Denton George B. , “Early psychological theories of Herbert Spencer”, American journal of psychology, xxxii (1921), 5–15; Emblem D. L. , “The Encyclopaedia Britannica and phrenology”, in Peter Mark Roget; the word and the man (London, 1970), 132–52; Fink Arthur E. , “Phrenology”, in Causes of crime. Biological theories in the United States 1800–1915 (Philadelphia and London, 1938), 1–19; Garnett R. G. , “E. T. Craig: Communitarian, educator, phrenologist”, The vocational aspect, xv (1963), 135–50; Gribben Alan , “Mark Twain, phrenology and the ‘temperaments’: A study of pseudoscientific influence”, American quarterly, xxiv (1972), 45–68; Harris Marvin , “Raciology, phrenology, and the cephalic index”, in The rise of anthropological theory (London, 1968), 99; Hearnshaw L. S. , “Mesmerism and phrenology”, in A short history of British psychology 1840–1940 (London, 1964), 15–19; Hungerford Edward , “Poe and phrenology”, American literature, ii (1930), 209–31; idem, “Walt Whitman and his chart of bumps”, American literature, ii (1931), 350–84; Jack Ian , “Physiognomy, phrenology and characterisation in the novels of Charlotte Brontë”, Brontë Society transactions, xv (1970), 377–91; Jefferson Geoffrey Sir , “The contemporary reaction to phrenology”, in Selected papers (London, 1960), 94–112; idem, “Variations on a neurological theme—cortical localization”, British medical journal, ii (1955), 1405–8; Johnson Maurice L. , “George Eliot and George Combe”, Westminster review, clxvi (1906), 557–68; Lewis David W. , On phrenology and nineteenth century penology, in From Newgate to Dennemora. The rise of the penitentiary in New York, 1796–1848 (Ithaca, 1965), 232–50; McDonald W. U. , “Notes to Hazlitt's writings against the phrenologists”, Notes and queries, ccv (1960), 263–4; McDonald W. U. , “Scottish phrenologists and Scott's novels”, Notes and queries, ccvii (1962), 415–17; McFie John , “Recent advances in phrenology”, Lancet, ii (12 August 1961), 360–3; Price Alan , “A pioneer of scientific education, George Combe (1788–1858)”, Educational review, xii (1959–60), 219–29; Riegel Robert E. , “The introduction of phrenology to the United States”, American historical review, xxxix (1933), 73–78; Schwartz Harold , “Samuel Gridley Howe as phrenologist”, American historical review, lvii (1952), 644–51; Sensemen W. M. , “Charlotte Brontë's use of physiognomy and phrenology”, Transactions of the Brontë Society, xii (1957), 286–9; Starkman Miriam K. , “Quakers, phrenologists, and Jonathan Swift”, Journal of the history of ideas, xx (1959), 403–12; Stern Madeleine B. , “Mark Twain had his head examined”, American literature, xli (1969), 207–18; Stern M. B. , “Poe ‘the temperament’ for phrenologists”, American literature, xl (1968), 155–63; Williams Harley , “John Elliotson (1791–1868) [founder and president of the London Phrenological Society] his triumph and defeat”, in Doctors differ. Five studies in contrast (London, 1946), 23–91; and Wilson John B. , “Phrenology and the transcendentalists”, American literature, xxviii (1956–57), 220–5.

Morell John Daniel , An historical and critical view of the speculative philosophy of Europe in the nineteenth century (London, 1846), i, 411–26; ii, 529ff.; Lewes George Henry , “Phrenology”, in Biographical history of philosophy (revised ed., London, 1857), 629–45, said to have been included at the suggestion of George Eliot; [ Lewes ], “Phrenology in France”, Blackwoods magazine, lxxxii (1857), 655–74; and Lange Frederick Albert , History of materialism and criticism of its present importance, translated by Thomas Ernest C. (London, 1881), iii, 113–25.

Bentley Madison , “The psychological antecedents of phrenology”, Psychological monographs, xxi (1916), 102–15; Temkin Owsei , “Gall and the phrenological movement”, Bulletin of the history of medicine, xxi (1947), 275–321; and Ackerknecht Erwin and Vallois Henri V. , Franz Joseph Gall, the inventor of phrenology and his collection , translated by St. Léon (Madison, Wis., 1956).

The impression is well conveyed in such works as Belloc Hilaire , “On skulls”, in The silence of the sea and other essays (London, 1941), 32–36; Gardner Martin , Fads and fallacies in the name of science (New York, 1957), 292–8; Selling Lowell S. , “‘Quack’ number one—Gall”, in Men against madness (New York, 1940), 121–72; and Shafer Elizabeth , “Phrenology's golden years”, American history illustrated, viii (1974), 36–43.

Dallenbach Karl M. , “Phrenology versus psychoanalysis”, American journal of psychology, lxviii (1955), 511–25.

Phrenology goes unindexed in such standard texts as Briggs Asa , The age of improvement 1783–1867 (London, 1959); Burn W. L. , The age of equipoise. A study of the mid-Victorian generation (London, 1964); Cole G. D. H. and Postgate Raymond , The common people 1746–1946 (4th ed., London 1949; University Paperpacks, 1961); and Woodward Llewellyn Sir , The age of reform 1815–1870 (2nd ed., Oxford, 1962). Among historians of Victorian life and manners, Young G. M. , Portrait of an age (Oxford paperback, 1960) and Dodds John W. , The age of paradox. A biography of England 1841–1851 (London, 1953), mention phrenology in passing, while among social historians only J. F. C. Harrison has repeatedly shown it to be a subject of importance. See Harrison , Learning and living 1790–1960 (London, 1961), 114–17; Robert Owen and the Owenites in Britain and America (London, 1969), 30–31, 86–87, 239–43; and The early Victorians 1832–51 (London, 1973), 202. Appropriately , Conquest of mind is the outcome of a doctoral dissertation under Professor Harrison's supervision and the book forms a part of a series under his general editorship.

Merz John Theodore , A history of European thought in the nineteenth century, 4 vols (Edinburgh and London, 1896–1906, also in Dover edition).

Flugel J. C. , “Phrenology”, in A hundred years of psychology 1833–1933 (3rd ed., London, 1964), 31–38.

McLaren , “Phrenology: Medium and message”, (ref. 1), 95.

[ Brown Thomas ], “Villers, sur une nouvelle theorie de cerveau”. Edinburgh review, ii (1803), 147.

Davies John D. , Phrenology, fad and science: A 19th-century American crusade (New Haven, 1955; reprinted 1971); Bynum William F. , “Time's noblest offspring: The problem of man in the British natural historical sciences, 1800–1863” (Ph.D., Cambridge University, 1975), 165–227. Many of the works cited above (ref. 2) have contributed to the revival of interest in phrenology. The following are some of the more important recent contributions not cited elsewhere in this paper: Bakan David , “The influence of phrenology on American psychology”, Journal of the history of the behavioral sciences, ii (1966), 200–20: de Giustino David , “Reforming the commonwealth of thieves: British phrenologists and Australia”. Victorian studies, xv (1972), 439–61; Grant Alastair Cameron , “George Combe and his circle: With particular reference to his relations with the United States of America” (Ph.D., University of Edinburgh, 1960); idem, “Combe on phrenology and free will: A note on nineteenth-century secularism”, Journal of the history of ideas, xxvi (1965), 141–7; idem, “George Combe and the 1836 election for the Edinburgh University Chair of Logic”. The Book of the Old Edinburgh Club, xxxii (1966), 174–84; idem, “New light on an old view”, Journal of the history of ideas, xxix (1968), 293–301; Lanteri-Laura Georges , Histoire de la phrenologie. L'homme et son cerveau selon F. J. Gall (Paris, 1970); Lesky Erna , “Gall und Herder”, Clio medica, ii (1967), 85–96; idem, “Structure and function in Gall”, Bulletin of the history of medicine, xliv (1970), 297–314; Nott John William , “Science and phrenology”, in “The artisan as agitator: Richard Carlile, 1816–1843” (Ph.D., University of Wisconsin, 1970), 156–9; Smith Roger , “The background of physiological psychology in natural philosophy”. History of science, xi (1973), 75–123; Walsh Anthony A. “The American tour of Dr. Spurzheim”. Journal of the history of medicine and allied sciences , xxvii (1972), 187–205: idem, “George Combe: A portrait of a heretofore generally unknown behaviorist”, Journal of the behavioral sciences, vii (1971), 269–78; see also the references to Gall and phrenology in the chapter, “The preoccupation with physical characteristics and its significance”, in Chavalier Louis , Labouring classes and dangerous classes in Paris during the first half of the nineteenth century, translated by Jellinek Frank (London, 1973), 409–17.

Young R. M. , Mind, brain and adaptation in the nineteenth century: Cerebral localization and its biological context from Gall to Ferrier (Oxford, 1970); idem, “The functions of the brain, Gall to Ferrier”, Isis, lix (1968), 251–68, especially note 24; idem, “Franz Joseph Gall”, in Gillispie C. C. (ed.), Dictionary of scientific biography , v (New York, 1972), 250–6; on the place of phrenology in the behavioural sciences see idem, “Scholarship and the history of the behavioural sciences”, History of science, v (1966), 1–51; and for its location in the wider debate on man's place in nature, see idem, “The role of psychology in the nineteenth-century evolutionary debate”, in Henle Mary Jaynes Julian and Sullivan John (eds), Contributions to the history of psychology (New York, 1973), 150–204; and Young , “The historiographic and ideological contexts of the nineteenth-century debate on man's place in nature”, in Teich Mikulás and Young Robert (eds), Changing perspectives in the history of science (London, 1973), 344–438, especially 368, 381 and 407.

Turner Frank Miller , Between science and religion: The reaction to scientific naturalism in late Victorian England (New Haven and London, 1974), see ch. 4, pt ii, “Deviation from natural selection: The phrenological basis”, 73–84.

Smith Roger , “Alfred Russel Wallace: Philosophy of nature and man”, British journal for the history of science, vi (1972), 177–99.

Greene John C. , “Biology and social theory in the nineteenth century: Auguste Comte and Herbert Spencer”, in Clagett Marshall (ed.), Critical problems in the history of science (Wisconsin, 1959; paperback ed., 1969), 419–46. On Comte and phrenology see also Blondel Charles , “Le positivisme de Gall”, in La psycho-physiologie de Gall (Paris, 1913), 116–27.

Peel J. D. Y. , Herbert Spencer, the evolution of a sociologist (London, 1971), 10ff., 108ff.

Young R. M. , “The development of Herbert Spencer's concept of evolution”, Actes du XIe congrès international d'histoire des sciences, ii (Warsaw, 1967), 273–8; and the references in Mind, brain and adaptation (ref. 13). ch. 5.

One needs to allow room for works such as Stern Madeleine B. , Heads and headlines, the phrenological Fowlers (Oklahoma, 1971) which, though more popular than scholarly, nevertheless fill important gaps in phrenology's history.

Bynum (1975) (ref. 12), 224, and Cooter R. J. , “Phrenology and British alienists, c. 1825–1845”, Medical history, xx (1976), pt i, 1–21, pt ii, 135–51.

Parssinen , “The phrenology movement in early-Victorian Britain” (ref. 1), 14.

De Giustino , Conquest of mind, 39, 60, 74.

Parssinen , 14.

The constitution of man considered in relation to external objects first appeared as a privately printed essay of 125 pages in 1827. It was published in June of the following year and nine subsequent editions had been published in Britain (including ‘People's editions’ since 1836) by 1860. The twentieth American edition appeared in 1854. By 1860 upwards of 100,000 copies had been sold in Britain (i.e., twice the number of copies sold of the Origin of the species by 1900). Translations into every major language (in Swedish the book was entitled The doctrine of happiness on earth), a schools' edition and one in Braille further increased the sales.

Collins Philip , “The first science of mind”, Times literary supplement (25 April 1975), 455–6.

Profitable insights on the meaning of ‘reform’ can be gained from Genovese Eugene D. , Roll, Jordan, roll. The world the slaves made (London, 1975), particularly “In the name of humanity and cause of reform”, 49–70.

Giustino De , Conquest of mind, 5. It is endemic to this type of history that ‘bad’ action or inconsistent behaviour must necessarily be explained away as idiosyncratic.

McLaren , “Phrenology: Medium and message” (ref. 1), 87.

McLaren , 87.

McLaren , 88, 90, 92.

McLaren , 96.

McLaren , 96.

Cantor , “The Edinburgh phrenology debate: 1803–1828” (ref. 1), 196.

Cantor , 217.

Shapin , “Phrenological knowledge and the social structure of early nineteenth-century Edinburgh” (ref. 1), 220.

Shapin , 222.

Shapin , 220.

Shapin , 229–230. Like most statistics, these are open to question at several points. See Cantor , “A critique of Shapin's social interpretation” (ref. 1), 250–1. All the same, the statistics indicate in a general way the different social position of phrenologists relative to the academic elite—a difference that might be further qualified and quantified by looking at phrenologists elsewhere in Britain.

Shapin , 233.

Shapin , 240.

See Cantor , “A critique”, 253.

Cantor , “A critique”, 254. The ceteris paribus clause, which meant that other factors being equal the size of any mental organ could be taken as a measure of its associated faculty or power, is connected in Shapin's mind with the premise that man's faculties are innate. He thus sees the modifications to the clause as associated with environmentalism. However, in increasingly emphasizing the role of environment on the mental organs, phrenologists were not altering the principle that size is a measure of power, but were merely elaborating a point made by Gall himself, that education and training could, over time, influence the development and eventual size of the mental organs.

Shapin , 243.

Cantor , “A critique”, 256.

Cantor , “A critique”, 247.

Cantor , “A critique”, 256.

By the third decade of the nineteenth century this threat was obvious to even the most casual observer. The liberal Examiner, for example, noted on 30 October 1831: “Inasmuch, as at this moment, the phrenologists appear to be the most strenuous advocates for putting society on an improved footing, we must say that all haters of the present unequal and unnatural distribution of power and knowledge must feel indebted to them for their exertion”.

Cf. Parssinen , “Phrenology movement”, 6.

Ellis Daniel , Memoir of the life and writings of John Gordon (Edinburgh, 1823), 37–99.

Shapin , 243.

McLaren , 97. Ideas for future work on popular phrenology as a handmaid to radicalism and as an exploiter of Nature for social and political purposes can be gained from the brilliant study by Darnton Robert , Mesmerism and the end of the Enlightenment in France (Harvard, 1968; Schocken paperback, 1970).

Rosenberg Charles E. , “The bitter fruit: Heredity, disease, and social thought in nineteenth-century America”, Perspectives in American history, viii (1974), 214–5.

The reference often made to the similarity between the names of the faculties in Gall's system and those employed by Thomas Reid and Dugald Stewart does not answer this question, not least of all because it has been convincingly argued that the resemblance between Gall's terms and those of the Scottish psychologists is entirely superficial and that Gall was most likely unaware of Reid and Stewart's work when he drew up his list. Spoerl Howard Davis , “Faculties versus traits: Gall's solution”, Character and personality, iv (1935–36), 216–31. See also, de Giustino , Conquest of mind, 37–38.

Young R. M. , “The historiographic and ideological contexts of the nineteenth-century debate on man's place in nature” (ref. 13), 369.

De Giustino , Conquest of mind, 51.

Millhauser Milton , Just before Darwin. Robert Chambers and Vestiges (Middletown, Conn., 1959), 137.

De Giustino , Conquest of mind, 50 (my italics), 54.

On the popular corruption of the term ‘natural law’ as an invocation of moral authority in a legalistic sense see Mill John Stuart , “Nature”, in Nature, the utility of religion and theism (2nd ed., London, 1874), 1–65. Mill singles out the writings of George Combe as chiefly perpetrating the confusion between natural and legal law “from whence it has overflowed into a large region of popular literature, and we are now continually reading injunctions to obey the physical laws of the universe, as being obligatory in some sense and manner as the moral” (14).