(_Continued from page 32._)
Is there anything miraculous or extravagant in believing that this
invisible potentiality, which has such magical transforming and
developing power, but which has never been known to arise from
combinations of matter, has an origin which is, like itself,
spiritual? For we can obtain matter from matter, and spirit from
spirit, but never obtain spirit or life from dead matter.
The genesis of the human brain is therefore a microcosmic epitome of
the macrocosmic evolution, controlled by the "over-soul"--the Divine
power, of which we know so little.
To return to the embryo brain, which gives us visibly the epitome of
the evolution of vertebrated animals,--why is it not also an epitome
of the entire animal kingdom, from the radiata, articulata, and
mollusca to the vertebrata, instead of representing the evolution of
vertebrates alone? It may be so. It may be that man and other animals
in germination pass through _all_ stages, from the lowest to the
highest; but the microscope cannot reveal the fact, for the jelly-like
or fluid conditions of the nervous system during the first month after
conception do not enable us to discover any organization or outline
from which anything can be learned. And yet, from certain interesting
experiments in sarcognomy which have never been performed except by
myself or my pupils, I am disposed to believe that the germinal
process of man goes beyond the beginning of the animal kingdom, and
that he retains in his constitution spiritual elements which might not
improperly be called, not a photograph, but a psychograph of the
entire animal kingdom,--yea, of everything that lives, and even of the
mineral elements that have no life.
These things are wonderful and grand indeed, but the self-sufficient
powers that rule the world of human society have no desire to know
them, and hence I have been content to enjoy them alone, or with a few
enlightened friends.
It is in the second month of life in the womb that the fish form of
brain is distinctly apparent, as shown by Tiedemann. The fish form is
that in which we have only a rudiment of the cerebrum, which is so
large in man. Behind the little cerebrum, which is smaller than the
bulb of the olfactory nerve, we have the middle brain or optic lobes,
which give origin to the optic nerves, and behind them the cerebellum.
Let it be understood that the cerebrum is the psychic brain, the
cerebellum the physiological brain, and the optic lobes the
intermediate or psycho-physiological brain, not sufficient to give the
animal its character and propensities, but sufficient to guide it in
swimming about.
[Illustration]
What the cerebrum is when fully developed in man has already been
shown; what it is in the fishy stage of development, when it is the
smaller portion of the brain, may be understood by a dissection given
in Serres "Anatomie Comparee du Cerveau," representing the brain of
the codfish dissected or opened from above. In this figure H is the
spinal cord, E the cerebellum, C the optic lobes divided, and B the
cerebrum divided, showing the radiating fibres of the corpus striatum,
m, from which the cerebrum begins its development.
When animal life reaches a high development, the functions which are
diffused become concentrated into special organs. Intelligence or
psychic life is concentrated in the cerebrum, and entirely removed
from the spinal cord. The physiological energy apart from the psychic,
is concentrated in the cerebellum, and thus the intermediate
psycho-physiological organ, the optic lobes or quadrigemina, being no
longer important, dwindles to become the smallest part of the brain.
[Illustration: EXPLANATION.--In the codfish, roach, and flounder, II
is the cerebellum, n the optic lobes, in front of which is the
cerebrum, from which the olfactory nerve extends forward. Behind the
cerebellum is the superior end of the spinal cord. The letter c is
placed on the restiform bodies or posterior part of the medulla
oblongata of the cod. The engravings show the upper surfaces of the
brains, as we look down upon them.]
If the reader will look at the sketch of the brains of the codfish,
flounder, and roach, as figured by Spurzheim, he will see in each a
very small cerebrum, a larger cerebellum, and still larger middle
brain or optic lobes. This is the model on which the human brain is
first developed, when in the second month it becomes possible to study
it with the microscope. It presents to view in the third month three
vesicles of soft neurine, the one which is to form the cerebellum
being larger than that which is to become the cerebrum.
These are three brains of different grades, formed alike on the same
vesicular plan. The resemblance of the optic lobes to the cerebrum is
very striking, and when we open them we see what corresponds to the
lateral ventricles of the cerebrum, with a structure at the bottom
corresponding in position and character with the inferior ganglion of
the cerebrum. The subdivision of function is similar to that of the
cerebrum, the anterior portion of these lobes being of an
intellectual, perceptive character, and the posterior the seat of the
impulses. This has been demonstrated also in the experiments of
vivisectors, in which the irritation of the posterior part has
produced a vocal utterance or bark. Spurzheim gives a view of the
brain of the pike with an optic lobe partially opened, to show the
ventricle.
The cerebellum or physiological brain is formed on the same general
plan, having its energetic or forcible functions in the posterior
inferior regions, and its more sensitive functions located anteriorly.
In the embryo of twelve weeks a great advance has taken place; the
optic lobes or quadrigemina are still large, but the cerebrum is
larger than all the remainder. Still, it has not yet developed what
might be called frontal and occipital lobes. The basis of the middle
lobe, which is the most physiological portion of the cerebrum, being
devoted to the sensibility, appetites, and muscular impulses, is that
which first presents itself, being the first outgrowth from the great
inferior ganglion or summit of the spinal system. As human brains
degenerate to a lower type they approximate this form. The frontal and
occipital lobes dwindle and the principal mass remaining is that in
the basis of the skull between the ears. We see this form distinctly
in congenital idiots. The embryo cerebrum here represented measures
but three lines vertically, four lines in length, and five lines in
thickness. (The line is the twelfth of an inch.) The nerve membrane of
this hollow cerebrum is barely a fourth of a line thick. The
cerebellum, formed in the same way by projection from the summit of
the spinal cord, making two leaves that come together on the median
line, has also a cavity contained between them, and just behind the
medulla oblongata, which is finally reduced to the little space called
the fourth ventricle, when the cerebellum grows to become a solid
body.
[Illustration: 12 Weeks]
The growth of the cerebrum and cerebellum into solid bodies instead of
vesicles is effected by the folding together of the primitive membrane
as furrows appear upon its surface, by which it is changed into folds
or convolutions, each of which (like the fold of a ruffle) may be cut
out from its neighbors and opened from its inner side, like a book. It
resembles a book also in the fact that it contains innumerable ideas
or psychic elements, and the psychometer might read from each
convolution as a book the impressions recorded in it. In its place in
the brain it is like a book in a library; and as the book offers on
its back a title expressive of its contents, so we label each
convolution with its proper title.
In addition to the folding process, a complex growth of fibres uniting
in the corpus callosum completes the solidification, but not so
thoroughly as to prevent our reopening and spreading out the
convolutions by exercising a little dexterity. This was a puzzle to
some of the anatomists in the time of Gall, but I have found no
difficulty in opening out the convolutions to the extent of five or
six inches square. The cerebellum, too, though its ventricle is
obliterated, is susceptible also of a manipulation, showing that it
has some traces of its original formation.
From the twelve weeks embryo to those of twenty-one weeks and of seven
months we trace a progressive development and a commencement of the
furrows that form the convolutions.
Thus we perceive in the essential plan of the brain its two organs,
cerebrum and cerebellum, are hollow spheres which grow gradually into
solid bodies, filling their interior cavities, of which the lateral
ventricles in the cerebrum, which have been explained, are the
remnants.
The great importance of these anatomical details arises from the fact
that they show us the true central region of the brain from which its
development must be determined; and although this work, designed for
the general reader, cannot say much of the brain, it is necessary to
show its true conformation to enable us to estimate the living brain
correctly, so as to describe accurately living men, study the forms of
crania, and derive some profit in ethnological studies from the forms
of crania which to the ethnologists of the present time are of very
little value or significance, since they neither have nor claim a
knowledge of the psychic functions of the brain. I trust, therefore,
my readers will not neglect these anatomical memoranda, which they
will find very valuable.
[Illustration: 21 Weeks 7 Months;
In the brain of seven months, the right hemisphere is out open
horizontally, showing the ventricle.]
I am not aware that any anatomical, physiological, or phrenological
writer has given the exposition of the principles of cerebral
development which I have been presenting for nearly half a century,
although the anatomical facts are patent to all who choose to examine
cerebral embryology, and think of what dissection reveals, instead of
being thoughtlessly occupied in the mere details of dissection without
rising to a comprehension of the Divine plan. Indeed, the
phrenological school have positively misconceived and misstated the
principles of cerebral development. We can hardly be said to have had
any phrenological anatomists since the time of Gall and Spurzheim
sufficiently interested in comparative human development to trace its
basis in anatomy, for the able work of Solly presented the brain
solely as seen by the science of dissection, and not by the science of
development and psychic function.
Gall and Spurzheim, understanding cerebral structure themselves,
failed to state certain principles which were necessary to guard
against misconception; and they did not realize its necessity, because
their methods did not include the functions of the base of the brain.
Mr. George Combe, who has been the great popular exponent of their
system, for which he was well qualified by his clear, philosophic
mind, adopted the erroneous idea, in which he has been followed by all
subsequent writers on the subject, that the cerebral organs were to be
regarded as so many cones, starting from their apex at the medulla
oblongata and extending to their base at the surface of the skull.
Hence their development was to be estimated by measuring the distance
(with a pair of callipers) from the cavity of the ear (which
corresponds very nearly to the medulla oblongata) to the locations of
the organs on the frontal superior and posterior surfaces of the head.
In my first study of phrenology over fifty years ago, I adopted this
method, and diligently measured heads with callipers, relying on the
results, until I found them decidedly erroneous. I came upon the
astounding fact that the head of a prominent citizen of New Orleans,
when measured in this way, indicated by the height of the upper region
a character entitling him to rank among the saints, when in fact he
was notorious for the unrestrained energy of his violent and vicious
propensities. Engaging then in more careful study and dissection of
the brain, I found why the rule was so deceptive; as the basilar
region is developed below the ventricles, giving depth, while the
coronal region developed above gives height, and the measurement from
the ear to the top of the head included both depth and height, it
might be a very large measurement from animal predominance or basilar
depth alone, as it was in the case that first revealed the error of
Mr. Combe.
In such cases of animal predominance we find that the moral region
does not rise above the forehead, but runs back flat without
elevation, while the depth of the ear below the level of the brain and
the massiveness of the base of the brain running into a large neck
show plainly that the animal organs rule.
In the more noble characters, the rounded elevation of the coronal
region, combined with the moderate depth and thickness of the base of
the brain, make it easy to see that their vertical measurement is due
to height and not to depth. The great error of the phrenological
school has been in estimating moral development by the total vertical
measurement, and estimating animal development without regard to
depth, which is its chief indication.
[Illustration]
In a profile view, a line drawn from the middle of the forehead
backward, horizontally, is sufficiently near the line of the lateral
ventricles to enable us to compare the upward and downward development
of the brain. In the two profiles here presented we see a marked
difference of character illustrated by drawing a line back
horizontally from the brow. The head in front, which is that of a
private citizen of excellent character, named Smith, I obtained in
Florida nearly fifty years ago. At the same time I obtained the other,
which is that of a French count who lost his life on the coast of
Florida by wreck when engaged in a contraband slave trade with Cuba.
In the count we observe much less elevation and much greater depth. He
is especially deficient in Benevolence.
In proportion as men or animals rise in the scale of virtue the brain
is developed above the level of the face, and in proportion as they
incline to gross brutality the development falls behind the face; and
there is no exception to this law, either in quadrupeds, birds, or
reptiles. Indeed, notwithstanding the smallness of the brains of
fishes, their portraits show that this law applies also to them--as if
nature had determined to warn mankind of the character of every
animal. Alas for the dulness of human observers! Our naturalists and
anatomists have said not one word of the most conspicuous fact that
may be seen in the general survey of the animal kingdom.[3]
[3] The reader may naturally ask why have I not demonstrated
this assertion before the scientific world. The reason is,
that dogmatism rules in the sphere of natural science, and no
communication would receive fair treatment which contravened
the opinions of editors or the mass of prevalent opinion in
colleges and scientific societies. It would be peremptorily
rejected from our leading scientific magazine, the _Popular
Science Monthly_.
To return to the theory of cerebral development: The reader will
understand by referring to the last chapter that the summit of the
spinal system or great inferior ganglion of the brain, bearing the
names of optic thalami and corpora striata, is the true beginning of
the cerebrum, instead of the medulla oblongata, which _does not_
contain the fibres of the cerebral organs. And as this beginning is a
little in front of the ear and its first radiating fibres are nearly
on the horizontal line just mentioned, it follows that we may locate
accordingly a centre from which cerebral development may be estimated;
and when we take this true centre we may describe around it a circle,
and find that the circle singularly coincides with the outline of the
cranium, so that if we add to that circle the outlines of the nose,
mouth, and chin, we have sketched a well-developed head of strong
character, and ascertained the method of studying the development of
the brain, which has so remarkably been overlooked.
[Illustration]
No one can begin the study of brain development in men and animals
guided by a correct system without being delighted with the uniform
accuracy of the science; for even the incomplete and inaccurate
science of Gall and Spurzheim, marred in its application by
misconceptions of anatomy, has proved sufficiently correct and
instructive to maintain its hold upon the minds of all students of
nature, by giving them more truth than error, and _sometimes_ giving
the truth with marvellous accuracy. The errors they did not attempt to
investigate.[4]
[4] I would merely mention, as a familiar example of such
errors, that an enlightened student of phrenology called upon
me yesterday, to whom phrenologists had given the character of
avaricious selfishness and an incapacity for friendship, which
indeed was the correct application of the old system, but was
the reverse of his true character. The old system did not
explain friendship correctly, and entirely mislocated the
organ of avarice by placing it in the temples. The gentlemen
had never before received a correct description from
phrenologists he had visited.