present, serving for protection and giving notice of injury, is
not very acute. It is not much employed by them for the purpose of
obtaining information respecting external objects; and they can
scarcely be said to enjoy that modification of it which we call the
sense of touch in any high degree. Indeed, the skins of animals have,
commonly, such a covering of thick, horny cuticle, scales, feathers, or
hair, as is incompatible with a fine discriminating sense of touch.
In many of them, however, some other sense is highly developed. The
VULTURE is guided by the smell of carrion for miles and miles; and
the dog will, by the same sense, track game where man cannot detect
the trace of an odour. Some birds can distinguish objects which are
quite out of the range of our sight. The EAGLE, for instance, soars
aloft, till it dwindles to a mere speck or is lost to our view, and,
then, from that great height, will pounce, with unerring certainty,
on an unhappy grouse upon the ground. The sense of hearing is a great
means of protection to animals, and necessitates extreme stillness and
caution on the part of their pursuers. The DEER, when feeding, directs
his eyes upon the ground, and depends for safety, chiefly, upon his
hearing, which is so acute that the huntsman is obliged to approach
with all possible wariness.
In each of these instances, it may be observed, the acuteness of the
particular sense is manifested chiefly in the power it gives to the
animal of distinguishing objects _at a distance_. Whereas, in the
ability to use the several senses for the nice discernment of the
_qualities_ of substances and to derive enjoyment from them, man stands
quite unrivalled. He alone appreciates the perfume of a bouquet, or
takes cognisance of the various shades of colour and of the notes of
music; and the sense of touch, which is of especial service in aiding
us to an accurate knowledge of bodies, is much more highly developed in
man than in other animals.
Fine as the sense of touch usually is in the human hand, it becomes
far more so when an unusual demand is made upon it in consequence of a
deficiency, or absence, of other senses. The rapidity with which blind
persons can read with their fingers is truly astonishing. Some are
said to be able to distinguish colours by the feel. (It should rather
be said that they are capable of recognising the nice differences in
certain substances by which colours are caused; for one can scarcely
conceive it possible to distinguish by feeling the colours in a ray of
light separated by a prism.) I am acquainted with a lady who has been,
not only blind, but deaf and dumb from infancy. The sense of touch is,
therefore, almost her only avenue for impressions from without; and
it is surprising how much information is conveyed through it, and how
quickly. It enables her to hold converse with her relatives, by the
language of the fingers, almost as freely and as briskly as others do
with the tongue. A few touches are sufficient to transmit a series of
thoughts. After one shake of the hand her friends told me that she
would recognise me again; and, true enough, although several days
elapsed before I again saw her, she made the sign for my name as soon
as she touched my hand. At our next meeting I presented my left hand,
but was, again, immediately recognised.
Persons who have had much experience in the instruction of the deaf
and dumb find that the hand, by means of writing and “dactylogy”, or
the language of finger-signs, is abundantly sufficient for all the
intercourse to which a deaf-mute is equal; and they are, therefore,
disposed to discourage the teaching of articulation. Dr Kitto, in his
little book “On the Lost Senses,” which acquires so much interest
from the fact of his being himself deaf and dumb in consequence of an
accident, relates that, after he had, with great difficulty, reacquired
considerable facility of speech, he found it stood him in little stead.
So efficient a means of intercourse had the hand become that, he tells
us, he had not occasion for the use of his tongue ten times in a year.
Not only may the hand thus serve, to some extent, as a substitute
for some of the other senses; it is also a most important auxiliary
to them. Particularly is it so to the sense of sight, by proving, or
correcting, the impressions which we receive through the eye. Without
its aid we should often fail to distinguish between a real object and
a picture or a reflection in a mirror, and should have difficulty in
judging of size, shape, distance, &c.
_Relation of the Hand to the Eye and the Mouth._
You cannot have watched a game of cricket without being struck by the
manner in which the hand acts in harmony with the eye. With what almost
lightning-like rapidity it is in the exact place to catch the ball;
and with what precision the practised cricketer can throw the ball to
a great distance. In this, however, he is surpassed by the wonderful
skill with which the Indian throws the lasso. Again, it is enough for
the sportsman merely to get sight of the bird; he is scarcely conscious
of the process by which the hand directs the gun and pulls the trigger
at the exact moment. Still more remarkable is the successful aim when
taken, as it occasionally is, without bringing the gun to the shoulder.
In estimating the importance of the hand, you must not forget that
the mouth is quite dependent upon it for supplies. In most other
animals the jaws are prolonged, forwards, from the cranium, and the
head is placed in such a position that the mouth becomes an organ of
prehension, and is enabled to provide for itself. But, in man, the head
is carried so high above the ground, and the jaws are so shortened and
compressed beneath the forehead, that the mouth is of little use in
obtaining food. Its abilities and duties are restricted to receiving,
masticating, and swallowing; and, if it had to rely upon its own
efforts for supplies of food, it would, indeed, be in a poor case. When
we look at one of the Sphinxes from Egypt, or at one of the stately
Bulls from Nineveh, in which wisdom and power are represented by
joining a human head to the trunk and limbs of an animal, the question
suggests itself, “How is that mouth to be fed?” In the Centaur and
Mermaid this difficulty is overcome by adding the hands, as well as
the human head, to the trunk and locomotory organs of the horse in the
one instance, and the fish in the other; so that monstrosity does not
preclude the means of sustentation. Sufficient incongruities, however,
still remain to justify the exclamation
“Spectatum admissi risum teneatis amici?”
In the ELEPHANT the mouth is circumstanced, somewhat, as in man; and
the office of feeder is performed by the elongated snout or proboscis.
This organ, with its finger-like extremity, is so sensitive and mobile
as to be able to pick up small bodies--pins or needles--from the
ground, and so strong as to pull down large branches of trees, and
gather the fruit from them. It is interesting, in connection with the
relation of the hand to the will and the intellectual endowments, to
remark that this proboscidean substitute, which fulfils so many of the
purposes of the hand, is furnished to the “half reasoning” elephant.
The natural sagacity and teachableness of this creature, of which such
interesting evidence is given in Sir Emerson Tennent’s book on Ceylon,
seem to render it quite worthy of the privilege of having an especial
organ provided to minister to its will.
_Cheiromancy._
The BEAUTY of the hand does not come in for quite so great a share
of admiration as that of the foot. Perhaps, because we are less
often gratified with the view of the latter. Perhaps, because we are
conscious that the foot is even more decidedly characteristic of
the human form than is the hand; inasmuch as the hand of the monkey
approaches more nearly to the human hand than does the foot of any
animal to the human foot. Still, we are by no means insensible to the
charms of a pretty hand; and we prefer that the glove which envelopes
it should be of a material as thin and pliable as kid, so that it
may adapt itself accurately to the part, and not conceal its form.
A small and delicate hand is thought to be one of the best signs of
high-breeding. Thus, Byron, who was no bad judge of such matters, writes
“Even to the delicacy of her hand
There was resemblance such as true blood bears,”
and again,
“Though on more thorough-bred or fairer fingers
No lips ere left their transitory trace.”
The LINES upon the palm, or creases formed in closing the hand, differ
a little in different persons. In former times, when men were addicted
to the arts of divination, and thought more about the connection
between the physical world and the world of spirits, and strove, by
a close observation of the former, to penetrate the mysteries of the
latter, much attention was paid to these lines. They were named with
the names of the Planets and the signs of the Zodiac; and a science
grew up akin to Astrology and Physiognomy. CHEIROMANCY was the name
given to it; and numerous and voluminous treatises were written upon
it. We are told that Homer was the author of a complete essay upon the
lines of the hand. That something of the kind was practised among the
Romans we learn from a passage in Juvenal, translated, somewhat freely,
by Dryden, as follows:
“The middle sort, who have not much to spare,
To cheiromancer’s cheaper art repair,
Who claps the pretty palm to make the lines more fair.”
You will estimate the value of the science of CHEIROMANCY when you
hear that equal furrows upon the lower joint of the thumb argue riches
and possessions; but a line surrounding the middle joint portends
hanging. The nails, also, came in for their share of attention: and
we are informed that, when short, they imply goodness; when long and
narrow, steadiness but dulness; when curved, rapacity. Black spots upon
them are unlucky; white are fortunate. Even at the present day Gipsies
practise the art when they can find sufficient credulity to encourage
them.
Whether any fancy of the like kind gave origin to the notion still
prevalent that a wound or injury between the thumb and the fore-finger
is peculiarly likely to be followed by LOCK-JAW, or whether the notion
was grounded on some notable instance in which that fearful malady did
actually supervene upon a wound in the situation mentioned, I cannot
tell. You may, however, rest assured, that it is quite a fallacy.
Lock-jaw may result from a wound in any part of the body, or it may
occur without a wound; it is very capricious in its attack; the surgeon
does not know when to look for it; it often shows itself when he least
expects it; but it is not more likely to follow a wound between the
thumb and the fore-finger than a wound elsewhere. I think it well to
mention this, because I have often known persons greatly alarmed when
they have accidentally cut themselves in the dreaded spot.
_Cause of the preferential use of the Right Hand._
Why is man usually <sc>RIGHT-HANDED</sc>? Many attempts have been
made to answer this question; but it has never been done quite
satisfactorily; and I do not think that a clear and distinct
explanation of the fact can be given.
There is no anatomical reason for it with which we are acquainted. The
only peculiarity that we can discern is a slight difference in the
disposition, within the chest, between the blood-vessels which supply
the right and the left arms. This, however, is quite insufficient to
account for the disparity between the two limbs. Moreover, the same
disposition is observed in left-handed persons, and in some of the
lower animals; and in none of the latter is there that difference
between the two limbs which is so general among men.
Is the superiority of the right hand real and natural, that is,
congenital? or is it merely acquired? I incline much to the latter
view; because all men are not right-handed; some are left-handed; some
are ambidextrous; and in all persons, I believe, the left hand may be
trained to as great expertness and strength as the right[9]. It is so
in those who have been deprived of their right hand in early life; and
most persons can do certain things with the left hand better than with
the right.
[9] In the tribe of Benjamin “there were seven hundred chosen men
left-handed; every one could sling stones at an hair breadth, and
not miss.” Judges xx. 16. When David was at Ziklag there came to him
a company of men who “were armed with bows and could use both the
right hand and the left in hurling stones and shooting arrows out of
a bow.” 1 Chronicles xii. 2.
Nevertheless, though I think the superiority of the right hand is
acquired and is a result of its more frequent use, the tendency to use
it, in preference to the left, is so universal that it would seem to
be natural. I am driven, therefore, to the rather nice distinction,
that, though the superiority is acquired, the tendency to acquire the
superiority is natural.
It may be argued that the tendency must be based upon something
physical, and that, therefore, a tendency to superiority implies an
actual superiority. This may be so; but I do not think that we are
quite in a position to assert that it is so. We perceive that there is
a tendency to the preferential use of the right hand; but we do not
know upon what that tendency depends, and have, therefore no right to
assert that the cause of it lies in the construction of the limb or of
the parts which supply the limb with blood and nervous influence, or,
indeed, upon any strictly physical cause whatever.
It may be a tendency like that of certain animals to make their holes
and nests in particular places and in particular ways, to watch for
their prey at particular spots, to migrate in certain directions at
particular periods, and to group themselves in a particular order
during their travels. Such tendencies, or “Instincts” as they are often
called, may possibly be the result of a peculiar conformation of the
several animals; but it is, at present, by no means certain that they
are so.
I have said that man is the only animal in whom a preference in the
use of the limb or limbs of one side is shown. This is a consequence of
the fact that he is the only animal who has occasion to use the limbs
of the two sides separately, or who is in the habit of doing so. Even
in the rudest state of society this habit is engendered in him from a
very early period, as in carrying a stick, throwing a spear, and in
a variety of ways. The habit increases as he becomes more civilized,
owing to the greater number of offices which the hands are called upon
to perform; and the necessity for using the hands separately would, of
itself, lead each individual to the employment of one more frequently
than the other; but that that one should so universally be the right
hand, seems to be accounted for only by reference to some natural
tendency. The imitative propensity in man and the convenience of
uniformity of modes of action are scarcely sufficient to account for it.
I will not detain you by dwelling upon the effect which the
superiority of the right hand has in giving a slight superiority to the
right leg and the right eye, and will content myself with mentioning
a single beneficial result of the preferential use of one hand, viz.
that by it, we acquire a greater degree of skilfulness and dexterity
than we should do if both hands were equally employed. The exclusive
use, for instance, of the right hand in writing, cutting, &c. gives it
a greater expertness than either hand would have had if both of them
had been accustomed to perform these offices. Hence, we usually find
that persons who are left-handed are rather clumsy-fingered, because,
although, in them, the left hand is used for many purposes which are
commonly assigned to the right, yet the conventionalities of life
interfere a good deal. The pen and the knife, for instance, are still
wielded by the right hand. Accordingly such persons are neither truly
right-handed nor truly left-handed; and they do not commonly acquire
so great skill in the use of either hand as do those whose natural
tendency is more in harmony with custom.
* * * * *
The great martyr of our Church, when at the stake, is said to
have held out his right hand into the flames and to have been heard
exclaiming, till utterance was stifled, “This unworthy hand.” This
unworthy hand! Of whom or of what was that hand unworthy? Was it
unworthy of Him who made it? Was it unworthy of him who bore it? Was
it unworthy of the purposes for which it was made? Was it not, on the
contrary, a too worthy hand? a hand worthy of a better usage than to
be made, first, to sign a recantation of faith and, then, to be burned
for having done so? a hand worthy of a better man? No one would have
admitted this more readily than Cranmer. We may be sure that he would
never have thought of proclaiming a hand or any of his members to
be really unworthy of him. Rather would he have willingly confessed
that he had fallen far short of the standard of excellence which the
body presents; and in that excellence, we doubt not, he recognised
an evidence of Divine workmanship. His meaning, therefore, has not
been misunderstood. Nevertheless disparaging remarks respecting the
body, and the use of the word “carnal” in the sense in which it is
usually employed, have some tendency to excuse a shrinking from moral
responsibilities on the ground of the weakness of the flesh. Let us
remember that much of that weakness is of our own engendering, that a
moral obliquity is the source of many of those physical infirmities
which, we flatter ourselves, may cover our delinquencies, and which a
sympathising humanity is wont, perhaps too often, to throw as a shield
over offenders against the laws. In man, and in man alone of created
beings, the physical and the moral grow up together and react upon one
another; and the charge of a body thus capable of influencing and being
influenced demands all our energies to prove ourselves worthy of it.
EXPLANATION OF WOOD-CUTS.
THE HUMAN FOOT.
Fig. page
1 9 Bones of foot, with the lower ends of the two
leg-bones.
2 11 Bones of the hind foot of a seal, with lower ends
of leg-bones.
3 11 The same of the hind foot of a lizard.
4 14 Side view of the pelvis and lower limb of man.
A, the _haunch-bone_. B, the _ischium_, or part upon
which we sit. C, the _thigh-bone_. D, the _knee-pan_.
E, the _tibia_, or larger leg-bone, with the
_fibula_, or smaller leg-bone, alongside it. F, the
_heel-bone_. G, the _metatarsal_ bones. H, I, K, the
_phalanges_, or bones of the toes.
5 14 Similar view of the pelvis and hind limb of a horse.
The letters refer to the same parts as in the preceding
figure.
6 18 Represents a section through the lower end of the
tibia and through the _heel-bone_, the _astragalus_,
_navicular_ bone, inner _cuneiform_ bone, and the bones
of the _great toe_. It shows the arrangement of
these bones in the arch of the foot and the disposition
of the plates of which these bones are composed.
7 25 The same bones as in preceding, with two connecting
ligaments. A, the _plantar ligament_. B, ligament
passing from the heel-bone F to the scaphoid bone
E. D the _Astragalus_. C, one of two small bones,
called _sesamoid_ bones, usually found at the ball of
the great toe.
8 29 A foot, in an aggravated condition of “flat-foot.”
The sole is convex, and so is the inner margin
of the foot. It represents also another common
deformity, inasmuch as the great toe runs athwart
the second toe, which is pressed almost out of
sight.
9 38 Front view of the right _tibia_, or larger leg-bone.
10 38 Right _tibia_ lying on a board. The inner, as well
as the outer edge, of the upper end rests upon the
board; but the inner edge of the lower end is
turned away from the board. In other words, the
bone is so twisted that, though the upper end
lies flat upon the board, the lower end touches
it only by its outer edge.
11 40 Figure sitting upon the heel to draw the bow. It is
one of a beautiful series of statues in the Glyptothek
at Munich. They adorned the pediments
of a temple in Ægina, and are supposed to represent
the noble actions of the Æacidæ.
12 42 Represents some of the muscles and tendons seen
on the inner side of the leg and foot. A, _Gastro-
cnemius_ and _Soleus_ muscles. They are attached,
above, to the thigh-bone and the leg-bones; below,
by means of the _Tendo Achillis_ (_a_) to the heel-bone;
they together form the calf-muscle. B,
_Posterior tibial_ muscle attached, above, to the
tibia, below, by its tendon (_b_) to the scaphoid
bone. D, process of the tibia called the _internal
malleolus_ or inner ankle. F, _Anterior tibial_ muscle
attached, above, to the front of the tibia, below,
to the scaphoid bone. _k_, the _flexor tendon_ of the
great toe.
13 44 Gives a corresponding view of the outer side of the
leg and foot. E, the lower end of the fibula,
called the _external malleolus_, or outer ankle. C,
the _short fibular_ muscle attached, above, to the
fibula; below, by its tendon (_c_), to the outer
metatarsal bone. I, the _long fibular_ muscle. Its
tendon (_i_) runs, behind the outer ankle and under
the instep, to the metatarsal bone of the great
toe; it is not seen in the latter part of its course.
G, the _anterior fibular_ muscle attached by its tendon
_g_ to the outer metatarsal bone. _h_, the _extensor
tendons_ of the toes.
14 47 Foot of a young woman presenting the variety of
“club-foot” called “_Talipes varus_.” The sole is
very much bent, and turned inwards and upwards,
so that the part of the instep which should be above
and in front is directed downwards and comes into
contact with the ground.
15 49 Diagram (from Bell’s _Anatomy_) showing the mode
in which the extensor tendons of the toes follow
the curve of the ankle and are bound to it by
cross straps, instead of taking the direct course
represented by the line _a_.
16 52 Foot and leg from the cast of the Farnese Hercules
in the Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge.
17 52 Foot and leg of a Negro.
18 52 Outline of under surface of foot of an Englishman.
19 52 Outline of under surface of foot of a Negro.
20 55 Skeleton of the foot of a Chinese female. From a
drawing by B. Cooper, in _Phil. Trans._
21–25 57 Sections, from above downwards, through the tarso-metatarsal
joints. A, _metatarsal_ bone. B, _tarsal_
bone. C, C, the _ligaments_ connecting the two.
26–29 59 Figures standing, bowing, stooping, and squatting.
30–32 60 Figures walking.
33–35 62 Position of foot in three stages of a step in walking.
36–38 65 Figures running.
39 86 Bones of the left hind limb of an Elephant.
40 86 Bones of the left hind limb of a Hippopotamus.
41 86 Bones of the left hind limb of a Rhinoceros.
42 86 Bones of the left hind limb of an Ox.
43 86 Bones of the left hind limb of a Horse.
44 89 Hind limb of a Gorilla, showing the length of the
digits, and the strong inner digit diverging from
the others.
45 90 Drawing of stuffed specimen of a Gorilla in the
British Museum.
46 98 Section of a foot, showing the disposition of the fibres
that run from the bones and plantar ligament to
the skin of the sole. At the heel the greater number
of the fibres are seen to run _back_wards from
the heel-bone to the skin. At the end of the
great toe and beneath the ball of the toe they run,
for the most part, _for_wards, from the bones and
plantar ligament, to the skin.
47 103 View of the sole of a foot in its natural state.
48 103 Outline of the sole of a shoe, as commonly made for
a man’s foot.
49 103 Sole of the foot of a girl twenty-two years old, distorted
by the pressure of the shoe, but otherwise
healthy.
50 103 View of the skeleton of a foot so deformed, from
above.
51 105 The proper sole for a shoe laid, for the sake of
comparison, on the symmetrical sole of the ordinary
shape.
52 105 The proper sole pointed at the toes.
THE HUMAN HAND.
Fig. page