Philosophers have puzzled their brains to no purpose in endeavouring to
account for the unnatural formation of animals. The ancients, amongst whom
we may name Democritus and Epicurus, attributing all organization to an
atomic aggregation, fancied that matter was endowed with an elective
faculty and certain volition in attaining this organism; and considered
monstruosities as mere experiments on the part of these atoms to produce
some other species or races. This chimera was of a par with the archeus
and his satellites of the preceding article. There is no doubt, however,
that in the myriads of organized creatures various circumstances may tend
to affect most materially the regularity of these developments, in the
same manner as the properties and peculiar qualities of their organs may
depend in a great measure upon similar influences. Conservation and
reproduction are in the ratio of this perfection and imperfection. It is
true, generally speaking, that the healthy and the best organized are less
liable to engender an ill-conformed offspring; yet parents of this
description have been known to produce monsters. Still the _fortes
creantur fortibus_ of Horace has become a proverbial expression; and some
fanciful wanderers in the mazes of imagination framed rules for their
_megalanthropogenesy_, or the art of creating illustrious men and
distinguished women by uniting the learned and the witty.
Generation is a wondrous mystery. Many casual circumstances may check the
mechanism of its action, (if I may be allowed the expression,) and affect
its results. Any sudden physical or moral impression acting violently
might produce this result; although, despite the theories and experiments
of philosophers, it has not been proved that conception depends in the
slightest degree upon the passions, being an act of nature totally
independent of the control of mental emotions or bodily sufferings. This
fact is clearly proved in cases of brutal violence.
The ideas entertained by several naturalists, that organized beings were
cast in a certain mould, were not altogether visionary, or unfounded in
observation. The great resemblance between children, and their hereditary
mal-conformation and defectuosities in whole families, would seem to a
certain degree to warrant this conclusion; but it is more probable that
imagination may have some influence in this irregularity, although at the
time we may be unconscious of the relative action of moral agency on
physical functions. The supporters of the existence of this plastic mould
in which organized matter is cast, would then maintain that the mind
having once influenced the conformation of the matrix, it would ever after
preserve this deviation from nature's general laws.
It is evident that different species of animals and vegetables have
disappeared on the face of the earth, some within the memory of man. We
neither know how these species have ceased to exist, nor whether all that
possibly can be created has hitherto been brought into being; neither can
we form any idea regarding the perpetuity of the races that surround us.
Perpetuity and eternity (as far as regards this world) are conventional
terms: races were supposed to be perpetuated by the successive evolutions
of germs, as I have observed in a former article. To a certain extent this
doctrine is correct, and is rendered evident in the evolutions of plants
arising from their seed. Preternatural conditions are merely
irregularities in this germination. The doctrine, that at each creation a
true generation and gradual formation of a new conception from the
formless genital matter takes place, does not appear to me reconcileable
with sound physiology, nor supported by observation; for, were this the
case, it is more than probable that preternatural formations would be more
frequent. It was upon this doctrine that the learned Blumenbach founded
his _nisus formativus_, an expression that he thus explains: "The word
_nisus_ I have adopted chiefly to express an energy truly vital, and
therefore to distinguish it as clearly as possible from powers merely
mechanical, by which some physiologists formerly endeavoured to explain
generation. The point upon which the whole of this doctrine respecting the
_nisus formativus_ turns, and which is alone sufficient to distinguish it
from the _vis plastica_ of the ancients, or the _vis essentialis_ of
Wolff, and similar hypotheses, is _the union and intimate co-exertion of
two distinct principles in the evolution of the nature of organized
bodies_,--_of the_ PHYSICO-MECHANICAL _with the purely_
TELEOLOGICAL;--principles which have hitherto been adopted, but
separately, by physiologists in framing theories of generation."
The ingenuity of this hypothesis must be admitted, but it does not
militate against the pre-existence of germs. Germs are visible in the ovum
before fecundation; in these germs the very primordia of future
organization can be distinguished. It is by no means necessary to allow
these germs an exciting power, or a formative power, as has been objected:
they are more or less profuse, and under the influence, as I have already
said, of accidental circumstances. It has been maintained that monsters
are more common in domesticated animals than in wild ones. This is by no
means evident, since we have little opportunity of ascertaining the case
in forests and in wildernesses; but, admitting the fact, it only tends to
corroborate my opinion regarding the influence of accidental causes in
physical development, since domestication must expose animals to many
emotions unknown in their natural condition. It has been said that
monsters are especially observed among sows. There perhaps is no animal
under the subjection of man, excepting, perhaps, the unfortunate donkey,
more exposed to physical injuries during gestation; and as the Portuguese
maintain that a _cajado_ (a stick) springs from the earth whenever an ass
is born, so our bumkins and malicious urchins fancy that every one owes a
kick to a gravid sow. Howbeit, I doubt much whether the swinish multitude
are more subject to bear monstruosities than other animals; and
preternatural conformations are, I believe, as frequent in lambs, and
calves, and chickens; and double-headed and double-legged specimens of
these animals are more frequently exhibited than monstrous pigs.
Monstruosities are of two kinds, and exhibit either an excess of parts or
a defect. Thus, some children are born with more limbs than usual, whilst
others are deprived of their natural proportions. It is not unlikely that
in the former case twins were being developed; whereas, in the other, the
proper nourishment of the parts that are either wanting or stunted in
their growth had somehow or other been impeded in its assimilation. This
opinion seems to be warranted by the facts observed in the artificial
incubation of eggs, the different parts of the chick being more or less
perfect where the heat had been more or less steadily applied; the produce
of those eggs that had enjoyed more warmth being invariably the stronger.
The same remark applies to plants. Eggs and seeds are in most respects
ruled by similar laws in the phenomena of their germination: the arms and
legs grow from the animal foetus, as the branches originate from the
trunk of the tree. These ramifications are frequently as symmetrical as
human limbs. When there are preternatural excesses in formation, it is
probable that twins were intended: thus we see foetuses with double
heads, or with two bodies. The same irregularity is observed in double and
triple cherries, and other fruits. It is probable that this union took
place when these bodies were in a soft state, and the vessels inosculated
in their intricate ramifications with greater facility, until further
development had consolidated the junction.
If a proof were wanting that monstruosities do not arise in the original
organization of the embryo, but from subsequent accidents during
gestation, it might be sought in those preternatural appearances that
arise from frights or longings, and constitute what are called _naevi
materni_. Thus are infants born bearing the marks of some fruit the mother
had desired, or some animal that had terrified her. This phenomenon
plainly shows that there does exist a wonderful sympathy between external
objects and the uterine system; yet this sympathy is not as surprising as
that which is subsequently observed between these marks and the fruit they
represent. It is a well-authenticated fact that they will assume a tinge
of maturity when the fruit is ripening, and become gradually more pale as
it is going out of season. The same observation has been made in regard to
animal marks; for instance, these marks have displayed a deeper colour
when the mouse or the rat that had occasioned them was mentioned. I know a
lady who, during her pregnancy, was struck with the unpleasant view of
leeches applied to a relative's foot. Her child was born with the mark of
a leech coiled up in the act of suction on the identical spot. Mr. Bennett
has published a remarkable instance of this uterine sympathy. A woman gave
birth to a child with a large cluster of globular tumours growing from the
tongue, and preventing the closure of the mouth, in colour, shape, and
size exactly resembling our common grapes, and with a red excrescence from
the chest, as exactly resembling in figure and appearance a turkey's
wattles. On being questioned before the child was shown her, she answered
that, while pregnant, she had seen some grapes, longed intensely for them,
and constantly thought of them; and that she was also once attacked and
much alarmed by a turkey-cock.
Various writers have positively denied these facts. Gerard tells us that
he had known three pregnant women whose minds had been constantly occupied
with the unpleasant recollections of a cripple, of a dancing-dog
fantastically dressed, and a basket of beautiful peaches; yet their
offspring bore no marks of these objects. This is no argument. No rational
person could imagine for a single moment that every impression thus
received is to be transmitted. Buffon, who also doubts this influence,
thus expresses himself: "We must not expect that we shall be able to
convince women that the marks their children may bear have no analogy with
ungratified longings. I have frequently asked them, before the birth of
their infants, what had been their wishes, and consequently what would be
the marks that they might expect? By this question I frequently gave
unintentional offence."
Now, with all due respect to this celebrated naturalist, this argument is
by no means conclusive. We perfectly well know that pregnant women are
frequently alarmed without such consequences, and the most fantastic
phantasies may cross their idle brains, without any such result. It has
been observed on this subject, "that when a circumstance may proceed from
many causes, we do not universally reject any one because it is frequently
alleged without reason." We have too many well-authenticated cases before
us to doubt this strange effect of maternal impressions, so clearly
observed and recorded in Holy Writ in the following passage of Genesis:
"And Jacob took him rods of Green poplar, and of the hazel and chestnut
tree, and pilled white strakes in them, and made the white appear which
was in the rods. And he set the rods which he had pilled before the flocks
in the gutters in the watering-troughs, when the flocks came to drink,
that they should conceive when they came to drink. And the flocks
conceived before the rods, and brought forth cattle ring-straked,
speckled, and spotted."
The sympathy that evidently exists between bodies separated from each
other, but previously connected, has given rise to many absurd stories. It
is told of Taliocotius, that having made a nose for a patient, cut out of
a pig, the poor man's snout fell off the moment the hog was slaughtered. A
similar belief prevails among horticulturists, who assert that the graft
perishes when the parent tree decays. A very singular phenomenon is
observed in wine countries, where the wine in wood enters into a state of
slight effervescence, and even efflorescence, when the vines begin to
throw out their blossoms.
It therefore appears to me more than probable that monstruosities are by
no means original mal-conformations, but arise, during gestation, from
physical or moral influences that affect the mother, however unconscious
she may be of their action. We have frequent instances of violence
occasioning preternatural developements. Mr. Giron Buzareingues mentions
that a violent blow was given to a gravid bitch, who produced eight pups,
all of which excepting one, had the hind-legs wanting, malconformed, or
weak.
A further disquisition would lead me beyond the limits of a sketch. I
shall therefore relate some curious cases of monstruosities, that would
seem to set at nought our ideas regarding the _indispensability_ of
certain organs to the functions of life.
Various instances are recorded of the union of two or more foetuses. We
have lately seen the Siamese twins, and such a preternatural formation is
by no means uncommon. In the Journal de Verdun, 1709, a case is related of
two twin female children who were united at the loins, with only one
intestinal canal. They were seven years old, could walk about, embrace
each other in the fondest manner, and both were proficient in several
languages. Buffon gives the history of two Hungarian girls, who were also
joined together in the lumbar region. Helena, who was the first-born,
became tall and straight; Judith, her sister, was of a diminutive size,
and slightly arched. At six years of age she was attacked with hemiplegia,
and never recovered perfect health. Helena was sprightly and intelligent.
With the exception of the smallpox and measles, under which they laboured
at the same time, their ailments were always distinct. They lived until
the age of twenty-two, when Judith was attacked with a fever, that shortly
terminated her existence. The horror expressed by Helena in beholding her
dead companion, with whom she had been identified in sisterly love for so
many years, cannot be described; but her agonies were of short duration,
for in three minutes she also had ceased to live. On their _post mortem_
examination each was found to have possessed distinct viscera. The aorta
and vena cava were united above the origin of the iliac arteries, so that
no severing operation could have been performed without destroying them
both.
Duverney relates the case of twins united at the lower part of the
abdomen. They only lived six days; the strongest of the two died first,
and was followed by his companion three hours after. Haller records
upwards of thirty cases of a similar nature; and various skeletons of
this description are to be seen in our museums. Munster saw two girls
united by the forehead. They had then attained their tenth year, when one
of them died. It therefore became indispensable to separate them, but the
unfortunate creature did not survive the operation. Daubenton describes
two children united at the back of the head.
Such miserable junctions naturally suggested the idea of effecting a
separation by surgical means; but I believe this operation was only once
performed with a successful result. Two little girls were united from the
xiphoid cartilage to the umbilicus. The uniting substance was an inch in
thickness, six lines in breadth, and five inches in circumference. In the
centre of the junction was the umbilical ring common to both. The
umbilical vessels were separated and tied; the ligature fell at the
expiration of nine days; and then Zwingler, the operator, proceeded to
divide the remaining bonds.
Various monsters have been seen with four arms and three legs, or four
legs and two or three arms. The history of the double-headed infant of
Oxford is curious. This creature had two heads diametrically opposite,
four arms, one body and two lower extremities. These heads were doubly
baptized; one by the name of Martha, and the other Mary. The features were
different; Mary's was smiling, Martha's dejected. The latter died two days
after her birth, and Mary expired a quarter of an hour after.
A curious monster of a similar description is recorded to have lived at
the court of James IV. of Scotland. It had been taught several languages,
and music. One head was intelligent, the other remarkably stupid. This
creature lived twenty-eight years, when one of the individuals died. The
other survived several days, but gradually drooped as the body of his late
companion was decomposing. In olden writers we have many curious cases.
How far they may be entitled to credit I cannot say; although we have no
reason to deny the fact, when we daily witness the most singular
malconformations. Liceti relates the case of a child with two legs, but
seven heads and seven arms. Bartholinus mentions one with three heads,
each of which uttered the most horrible cries, and then expired.
While these unfortunates were visited with several heads, instances have
been known of heads that had attained a most enormous volume. In Tunis,
there was a Moor of thirty years of age, whose head was so large, that
crowds followed him in the streets; and his mouth was of such a capacity,
that he could devour a large melon as easily as an apple. This man was an
idiot. At Lucca, Benvenuti saw a lad, otherwise well-proportioned, whose
head at the age of seven began to increase so rapidly, that when he was
twenty-seven it measured thirty-seven inches eight lines in circumference,
and his face was fifteen inches long.
Singular monstruosities have been seen, where heads and bodies seemed
actually to be growing from or hanging to individuals. Winslow knew an
Italian child, of eight years of age, who carried a little head under the
third left rib, and peeping out as if the body of the one had been
concealed in that of the other. Both heads had been christened; the one
James, the other Matthew. When the ear of little Matthew was pinched, his
host James forthwith began to roar. The Bengal child, whose case is
related by Valentin and Horne, is equally singular. Here one head was
placed above the other, the superior one nearly as well conformed as the
lower; both adhered intimately. The upper face assumed somewhat of an
oblique direction. Each head had its distinct brain: sometimes one head
was fast asleep while his neighbour was wide awake, and one head would cry
most piteously if you pulled the hair of the other; but, what was still
more singular, when the one was fed, its companion expressed its
gratification, and water flowed from its mouth. This monster lived four
years, and probably would have lived much longer, but for the bite of a
venomous reptile.
In a former article I alluded to encephalous and anencephalous cases,
where there were either no heads or heads without brains. Of the first
variety Beclard relates the following: A woman at Angers was delivered of
twins, one of which not only was without a head, but only showed the
inferior part of the body; without arms, a small stump-like excrescence
growing from the upper part of the chest; the feet were turned inwards,
and without toes. The creature was of the male sex. The body presented one
cavity without any diaphragm; nor could any trace of liver, spleen,
oesophagus, or stomach be detected: the intestinal tube commenced at the
upper part of the body, but was impervious; the pancreas and kidneys were
as usual; the umbilical vein arose from the cava, and the umbilical
arteries from the hypogastric. There were ten ribs on each side, and the
spinal marrow threw out its regular nerves.
Brunel has recorded the case of a male infant born without brains. The
frontal bone was thrown back, and flattened on the sphenoid in such a
manner that the eyes appeared above his head. The parietal and the
squamous portion of the temporal were wanting, although the organ of
hearing was well conformed. Not a vestige of brain could be discovered;
yet the carotid and vertebral arteries crossed the basis of the cranium.
The spinal marrow arose from the fourth cervical vertebra. The organs of
sight were perfect. Saviard describes an infant in which all the bones of
the cranium were wanting, and, instead of a brain, the skin merely covered
a cyst, containing a red pulpy substance resembling brain, whence arose
several nerves.
It is, no doubt, to these malconformations that we are to attribute the
various stories of children with heads of monkeys, goats, pigs, &c., or of
that child whose face represented the devil, and who was described as
"Cacodaemonis picturae quam humanae figurae similius," &c. The idle tales of
Cyclopes are also to be sought in such accidental preternatural
appearances, and several instances are recorded of children born with a
single eye in the forehead. It would be useless to dwell longer on this
painful subject. Those who wish for more information may gratify their
curiosity by consulting the works of Haller, Soemmering, and other
writers, who have treated this matter _ex professo_.
In conclusion, it appears to me that monstruosities are purely accidental,
subject to no laws of nature, but deviations from them. We leave to
theologasters the question of their being visitations of divine wrath. The
only theories that can admit of discussion are the following: 1st, The
imagination of the mother; 2nd, Accidental causes; and 3rd, An original
monstrous germ. Maternal marks arising from longings and terror, as I have
already observed, seemed to warrant the first conclusion; yet it is not
tenable. What has imagination to do with the vegetable kingdom, which also
presents monstrous conformations? Are we to attribute the same power of
imagination to the brute creation? and, although we may fully admit the
sympathy that exists between the uterine system and external objects, yet
we cannot refer headless and double and triple embryos to this influence.
The last hypothesis is also fraught with objections. We have every reason
to believe that all germs or seed are perfect in themselves. Were there
monstrous germs, there would ensue monstrous races. That germs may be
accidentally vitiated and impaired there can be no doubt; but such an
adventitious occurrence does not constitute an original monstruosity.
Duverney and Winslow maintained that, in the case of a double monster, the
monstruosity arose in the primitive germ. Lemery and other physiologists,
on the contrary, insisted that double foetuses arise, as I have already
stated, from a junction or fusion between two separate bodies, or, in
short, the union of twins or triple conceptions, &c. Anatomical
investigations confirmed this opinion, since in double-headed foetuses
two distinct sets of organs are generally found.
This subject has occupied the most ingenious philosophers for centuries;
and the result of their experiments and debates seems to warrant the
probability of these melancholy deviations from nature, foolishly
denominated _lusi naturae_, being purely accidental. The experiments of
Jacobi seem to confirm this opinion, since he was able to produce
preternatural fecundation in the eggs of fishes.
This investigation may appear idle; yet, in a physiological point of view,
it is fraught with interest as regarding the generation of animals and
plants. Its study affords a lively illustration of those laws of
attraction and repulsion that regulate the universe, and which seem to
admit that every particle of matter should be endowed with a specific
vitality, a specific individuality. This attraction is daily seen in the
fecundation of the spawn of fish. Myriads of these eggs are accumulated in
ponds and rivers; yet in this mass the fecundating principle solely
selects and impregnates those that naturally claim its vivifying powers.
Wonderful harmony, that man alone endeavours to destroy!--harmony so
perfect, that Aristoxenus and Alcmaeon maintained that it was an emanation
of the diapason of celestial music between the planets, our globe, and our
five senses, forming a diatonic series of seven tones; while Hippocrates
justly denominated these organic laws the CONFLUXUS UNUS, CONSPIRATIO
UNICA, CONSENTIENTIA OMNIA.