OF THE COGITATIVE NOSE.
CLASS III.—THE COGITATIVE, or Wide-Nostrilled Nose, is, as its
secondary name imports, wide at the end, thick and broad, not
clubbed, but _gradually_ widening from below the bridge. The other
Noses are seen in profile, but this in full face.
It indicates a Cogitative mind, having strong powers of Thought, and
given to close and serious Meditation. Its indications are of course
much dependent on the form of the Nose in profile, which decides the
turn the Cogitative power will take. Of course it never occurs
alone, and is usually associated with Classes I. and II. rarely with
IV., still more seldom with V. and VI. The entire absence of it
produces the “sharp” Nose, which is not classified, a sharpness is
only a negative quality, being defect of breadth, and therefore
indicates defect of Cogitative power.
It is manifest that without some portion of the Cogitative power, _i.
e._, the capacity of concentrating the thoughts earnestly and powerfully
in one focus, no character can be truly great. It is therefore a quality
essential to high and durable eminence in every department of life. It
matters not what a man’s natural talents may be, they will be utterly
useless, or worse than useless, if he has not schooled his mind into
habits of concentrated thought. It is the want of this severe training
which causes so many men of fine talents to be a burden to themselves
and others. How frequently have we to lament the humiliating spectacle
of a great genius—as the phrase is—flitting about from pursuit to
pursuit, without any settled end or aim; now attempting this thing, now
dabbling in that; doing all things tolerably well, but nothing
perfectly; aiming at everything, but holding fast to nothing; and merely
from want of steady settled habits of thought! How melancholy is it to
reflect that the want of self-training in early life has converted the
blessing of talents into a curse, and turned the fine wheat of heaven’s
planting into the rank tares of Hell!
It is from beholding this too frequent spectacle that dull-pated
Ignorance repeats with self-complacency the trite proverb, “Geniuses
rarely do any good for themselves,” professes to despise the talents in
which he is consciously deficient, and thanks God that He has not made
him a genius.
Begone, thou muddle-pated imbecile! and learn that it is not his genius
which has made him what he is, but the want of that in which you equally
fail—self-training. Instead of idly despising the noblest gifts of
Heaven, strive, from his example, to avoid the rock on which he has
split, and endeavour, by stern, close, severe mental discipline, to
elevate yourself to a fractional part of the high estate from which he
has fallen. Pull him not down to your debasement, but soar upward
towards the eminence which he has voluntarily (alas!) abandoned; well
assured that though _you_ may never reach it, your labour will not have
been in vain, but that you may yet place yourself far above the level of
the common despisers of genius.
But to our subject—the Cogitative Nose. This Nose long puzzled us. We
found it among men of all pursuits, from the warrior to the peaceful
theologian. Noticing it more particularly among the latter, we were at
one time inclined to call it the religious Nose; but further observation
convincing us that that term was too limited, we were compelled to
abandon it. We were next, from seeing it frequent among scientific men,
disposed to call it the philosophic Nose; but this was found to be too
confined also, as, in the modern acceptation of the term, it seemed to
exclude the theologians, and we moreover traced it accompanying other
and very different conditions of mind. It soon became manifest, however,
that it was noticeable only among very first-rate men (men of the very
_highest_ excellence in their several departments), and that search must
be made for some common property of mind which however directed by other
causes, would always lead to eminence. It appeared to us that this
property was deep, close Meditation, intense concentrated Thought,
eminently “cogitative” in fact; and, therefore, we adopted this term,
which permits to have included in it all serious thinkers, whatever the
subject of their cogitations.
It would be wrong to regard it as a mere coincidence, that, after having
from deduction _à posteriori_ learnt that this common property is
exhibited in the _breadth_ of the Nose, we find that if we were, _à
priori_, to consider in which part of the Nose a _common_ property was
to be looked for, we must decide it to be in the _breadth_, for the
profile is already in every part mapped out and appropriated to
_special_ properties.
May we not hail this as one of the beautiful harmonious truths which
spring up from time to time, the deeper the subject is investigated, to
attest the accuracy of the system? for where by a careful deduction, _à
posteriori_, we discover the common property is, there, _à priori_, we
perceive it must be in order to act in concert with the _special_
properties exhibited by the profile.
To entitle a Nose to rank among the Cogitatives, it should be above the
medium between the very full broad Nose, and the very sharp thin Nose.
The observation is to be confined to the parts _below_ the bridge; what
may be the properties of breadth _above_ the bridge we have not at
present observed satisfactorily. It may be remarked as a general rule,
that the further a Nose recedes from sharpness the better.
We have said that minds of every bias are found accompanying Cogitative
Noses, and this necessarily; for the tendency of the cogitations will be
determined by the profile. Thus the Cogitative acts in concert with the
other Noses, making useful those qualities which would, otherwise, for
ever slumber unknown. The very best Nose in profile may be utterly
worthless from defect of breadth; for, as before observed, no talent is
of any use without Cogitative power; and every Nose, having breadth as
well as length (profile), must be submitted to the test of this Class
before a judgment is pronounced upon it. Being, however, anxious to
simplify the subject, we have not, in our notices of Classes I. and II.,
remarked specially on the Cogitative part of their formation, and have
reserved until this chapter the instances of those Classes partaking
largely of Class III.
In the present brief sketch of the science, however, we shall not
attempt to distinguish our instances under the heads of distinct
profiles, as, Romano-Cogitative, Greco-Cogitative, &c.; but class
together all the compounds partaking sufficiently of the Cogitative form
to entitle them to a place among Cogitative Noses.
The following persons have Noses which largely partake of this important
formation:—
THEOLOGIANS.
Wickliff.
Luther.
Cranmer.
Knox.
Tyndale.
Fuller.
Hall, Bishop
Tillotson.
Baxter.
Bunyan.
Hooker.
Taylor, Jeremy
South.
Warburton.
Paley.
Stillingfleet.
Chalmers.
Priestley.
Wesley.
Hall, Robert
SCIENTIFIC MEN.
Hunter.
Jenner.
Galileo.
Dollond.
Caxton.
Bacon.
Whiston.
Delambre.
Wollaston.
Smeaton.
Newton.
Halley.
Banks, Sir Joseph
Watt.
Cartwright.
Cuvier.
Descartes.
Humboldt, Alex. Von
LAWYERS.
Erskine.
Blackstone.
Mansfield.
Hale.
Coke.
Somers.
ARTISTS.
Angelo, Michael
Hogarth.
POETS.
Homer.
Chaucer.
Tasso.
Jonson, Ben
Shakspere.
Milton (in age).
Molière.
Göethe.
Wordsworth.
Mrs. Hemans.
Burns.
STATESMEN
AND
METAPHYSICIANS.
Cromwell, O.
Grotius.
Burke.
Franklin.
Johnson, Dr. S.
Mackintosh, Sir J.
Walpole.
Colbert.
Talleyrand.
Fox.
Coleridge.
Washington.
Hobbes.
De Witt.
HISTORIANS.
Selden.
Camden.
Usher, Archbishop
Clarendon.
Burnet, Bishop
Buchanan.
Hume.
Robertson.
[Illustration:
HOOKER.
]
In the above instances every one is compounded with Class I, or II, or
both; and would be written I⁄III, or II⁄III, or I + II⁄III, or II +
I⁄III, according to the class or sub-class of profile to which it might
belong.
The list given is more extensive than usual; yet it might be much
extended, and should comprise all the greatest names in Theology,
Science, and Art.
It has been said, that “the form of the Nose in profile, decides the
turn which the Cogitative power will take.” Thus the Romano-Cogitative
will prefer to exercise its cogitativeness in the bustle of active life,
and Washington and Cromwell present remarkable proofs of the truth of
this assertion. Another striking instance is the energetic and fervent
John Knox, who bearded monarchs on their thrones, and lawless nobles in
their strongholds.
But we must again guard the reader against the assumption that energy of
character can only be displayed in physical action.
The energy of the Romano-Cogitative may display itself in a vigorous and
nervous style of literary composition, and so be distinguished from the
beauty and euphony indicated by the Greco-Cogitative. The former will
disregard style, if it interfere with the force and power of expression,
or weakens the vigour and terseness of an important paragraph; while the
latter will labour and polish his style till the sense is almost
obliterated, and little remains but a beautiful and melodious sound.
LUTHER, whose Nose was highly Roman, is an illustrious example that
Power and Energy may be displayed otherwise than in physical action, and
many other examples might be cited, were it necessary to substantiate a
proposition which every reader may confirm for himself by examination of
any accurately illustrated General Biography. But we cite Luther,
because he presents a contrast, both in feature and mind, to many other
men of the same nation, warm friends, ardently embarked in the same
cause, impressed with the same truths, and equally desirous to propagate
them for the enlightenment and salvation of their fellow-men.
In Luther we behold a man of intense Energy and undaunted Firmness;
bold, forward, ever rushing into action; attacking Falsehood everywhere;
volunteering his theses; challenging disputation; ever in wars of words,
regardless of danger; fearless of death, imprisonment, or torture;
reckless whom he offended—rather seeking to offend—careless of other’s
feelings; coarse, violent, and repulsive in language; indifferent in
what terms he propounded truth or exposed error. Thus did the intense
Energy, prompt Decision, and immovable Firmness, with the coarseness and
disregard to his own and others’ physical welfare, indicated by his
Roman Nose, display themselves in Luther, to his own detriment, the
sorrow of his friends, the loss of many adherents, and the
still-continued scoffs of the enemies and the censure of the friends of
the Reformation.
In contrast with the fully-developed Cogitativeness of the Noses of
Luther, Wickliff, Cranmer, and other leaders in the Reformation, may be
placed the Nose of a man who was called to take a prominent part in the
same movement, but whose deficiency in thoughtfulness and serious
determination paralyzed his usefulness, and flung him back into the
abyss of Romanism, from which his soul naturally revolted. We allude to
Erasmus. His nose was a sharp Greek nose, indicative of the refinement
and delicacy of mind which made him a Reformer in heart, and of the want
of cogitative power which disabled him from joining the good cause when
adherence to it called for serious enterprise and thoughtful energy. He
was content to be a Reformer in heart only, and thus became the lukewarm
enemy of both Romanists and Protestants. He lashed the vices and follies
of the monks in sharp satires; but he shrunk from interference when the
intensely energetic and Roman-Nosed Luther would have annihilated them.
The historian of the Reformation thus describes him.[22] “In the result
Erasmus knew not on which side to range himself. None pleased him, and
he dreaded all. ‘It is dangerous to speak,’ said he, ‘and dangerous to
be silent.’ In all great religious movements there are such undecided
characters—respectable in some things, but hindering the truth, and who,
from a desire to displease no one, displease all.” Erasmus, though a
clever and learned man, lacked the wisdom and sagacity necessary to
penetrate the future. He could criticize a Greek historian, and correct
the Greek Testament, but he could not discern the signs of the times.
Timid and retiring by nature, he feared to fail in the contest with the
spirits of darkness; he had no confidence in the righteousness of the
cause of the Reformation, and, knowing his constitutional weakness,
shrunk from the penalties of failure. A sagacity and power of
penetration equal to that of his more cogitative brother-Reformers would
have cured his cowardice by shewing him its causelessness. Luther, on
the other hand, feared nothing; he knew that the truth, if energetically
urged, must prevail,—though it would be crushed, if permitted to lie
quietly dormant. Truth will not conquer of its own force; it must be
promulgated, insisted on, and brought home to men’s minds. They will not
seek it, preferring rather to enjoy the peaceable stagnation of error.
While Luther was respected and admired even by his bitterest enemies,
Erasmus was despised by all parties. His vacillation was aptly hit off
by a cotemporary, who, in one of his works depicting two heavens, the
Papal and the Christian, says, “I find Erasmus in neither; but perceive
him incessantly wheeling, in never-ending eddies between both.”
Certainly a fitting destination for the man who advises his friend to
dissemble his opinions, as a certain dying man eluded the devil. The
devil asked him what he believed? The dying man, fearing to be surprised
into some heresy, answered, “What the Church believes.” “What does the
Church believe?” persisted his Satanic enemy. “What I believe,” replied
the cautious man. Again, the devil, “And what do you believe?” “What the
Church believes.” Whereupon the devil, being unable to convict him of
lax Churchism, left him to the mercy of the Pope, who, he knew, would
deal with him after his—gifts for _pious uses_.
If the pencil of the Artist be the adopted vehicle of thought, the
natural differences of character will be equally betrayed. Thus the
Romano-Cogitative Michael Angelo exhibited the thoughtful energy of his
mind in a fervid and exaggerated opinion of the fiercest passions, and
delighted in representations—not always the most refined—of scenes from
which most minds revolt, to which he even added a horror all his own.
The exaggerated action and muscular development of Michael Angelo’s
figures, the gigantic scale on which he preferred to draw them, and the
stupendous works which he unhesitatingly undertook, betray an energetic
and coarse mind, quite accordant with his Roman profile. The Greek-Nosed
Raffaelle, on the other hand, paid exclusive attention to beauty of
form, and the pourtraying of the gentler and more amiable sentiments,
especially of the female character. He was never betrayed into any
extravagancies of action or passion; but delighted to dwell on the
peaceful holiness and gentle sentiment of the Virgin Mother and the
Infant Jesus, or the graceful virtues of the female saints.
[Illustration:
HOBBES.
]
The major part of our illustrations being taken from purely literary
men, present Greco-Cogitative Noses. It is not our intention to descant
at length on persons whose works are well known, by name at least, to
every one, and whose lives were, for the most part, passed in the usual
monotonous tenour of those of literary men; but Bacon may be referred to
as an important corroborative instance of the shrewd, wily measures by
which the astute Greek prefers to further his ambition. Bacon as a man
presents such a lamentable contrast to Bacon as a philosopher, and the
wretched underhand means by which he attained eminence are so well
known, and so painful to dwell upon, that we refrain from doing more
than referring the reader to the facts for comparison with his profile.
Wretchedly inconsistent as his character appears, it is not inconsistent
with his Nose; and, perhaps, what are termed his inconsistencies, are
only a proof that the intellectual and moral powers are distinct, and
that the most profuse development of the former, cannot compensate for a
deficiency of the latter.
It is unnecessary to dissertate upon the names in the present list in
order to demonstrate their right to appear among the Cogitatives. No one
will deny their title to that most enviable epithet, and it would be by
portraits alone that the identity between their minds and noses could be
exhibited to any who are incredulous on that subject. To such we can
only say, examine for yourselves; the portraits are, for the most part,
easily attainable; and an attentive examination of them will well repay
the labour, and, without doubt, satisfy the most sceptical of the truth
of the hypothesis.
The names on that list are, for the most part, names which are a volume
in themselves: they write their own history; certainly no encomiums of
ours can add anything to their glory. It is undeniable that it was by
close cogitation, serious, hard thinking, that each of them obtained a
place in the rolls of Fame; and it is equally certain that almost every
person may, by the same process obtain, if not an equal, yet certainly
no mean place in the same estimable record.
It is a common and veracious observation, that certain faces prevail in
certain ages; but it may be further added, that this epochal character
frequently arises from the formation of the Nose, more especially of the
Cogitative part.
Up to about the close of the reign of James I. the Greco-Cogitative
prevailed; during the time of Charles I. and the Protectorate, the
Romano-Cogitative was almost universal, and the Cogitative part was much
increased in intensity. The Noses of the time are remarkably broad and
thick, a circumstance which can only be attributed to the serious
religious and political questions which then agitated the minds of all
men. With the careless dissipated days of the second Charles came in the
thin, long Greek, or Greco-Roman Nose, with little or none of the
Cogitative element; and this for the most part prevailed up to the
commencement of the present century. What future ages may determine to
be the form of Nose characteristic of our age it is impossible to say.
_We_ can form no accurate judgment, for time alone can separate the
tares from the wheat, and decide who are the great men of our age.
To an observant mind there is something very remarkable in the striking
contrast between the physiognomies of the leaders in our own Rebellion
(as it is historically termed) and of those of the French
revolutionists. Besides a certain serious determination, a stern,
unflinching, dogged consciousness of right, that nothing could turn to
the right hand or to the left, which is visible in the countenances of
the former, and to be contrasted with the flippant, wicked,
blood-thirsty-looking smirk of the latter, there is a remarkable
contrast in their Noses. The thick, broad, Cogitative Nose is visible in
all of the former, from Old Noll himself to honest Andrew Marvel; while
the void of thought, sharp, captious, _vulpine_ Nose is to be seen in
every one of the bloody tyrants of the French _sans-culotterie_.
The latter look like men who
“Could smile, and murder while they smile.”
The former like men who
“Put their trust in God, and keep their powder dry.”
Wordsworth has so splendidly and truly contrasted the men of either age
that we cannot resist inserting his lines entire:
“Great men have been among us; hands that penned
And tongues that uttered wisdom—better none;
The later Sydney, Marvel, Harrington,
Young Vane, and others who called Milton friend.
These moralists could act and comprehend;
They knew how genuine glory was put on;
Taught us how rightfully a nation shone
In splendour; what strength was, that would not ben
But in magnanimous meekness. France, ’tis strange,
Hath brought forth no such souls as we had then.
Perpetual emptiness! unceasing change!
No single volume paramount, no code,
No master-spirit, no determined road;—
But equally a want of Books and Men!”
In the fifth line, “These moralists could _act_ AND _comprehend_,” we
have a beautiful and exact paraphrase of the Romano-Cogitative, which we
noticed as characteristic of the Cromwellian age—the union of physical
energy with mental power.
It was a remark which we heard made some thirty years ago, by a very
observant man, that there was a wonderful identity of expression in the
countenances of all the men of the French Revolution, and that the same
peculiar expression is to be seen in the faces of the conspirators of
the Gunpowder Plot. Subsequent personal observation has confirmed this
remark, of which it is a curious and recent corroboration, that the same
expression is visible in the countenances of some of the leading
Terrorists of the late French Revolution.[23] The countenance of “bloody
Mary” is an instance of the same peculiar expression.
The old gentleman who made the remark which drew our infantine attention
added, (and it was this perhaps which impressed it upon our memory) that
there was “_blood_” written in all their faces.
We cannot improve upon this definition, though in one word, it might
also be called a _wolfish_ look—lean, cruel, hungry, grinning.
When treating of the Greek Nose, we stated that the Nose of Milton
expanded into the Cogitative form when, in the latter part of his life,
he was compelled to turn his thoughts anxiously and seriously to the
condition of his unhappy country, and when, with a holy and unswerving
determination he devoted his whole soul to the composition of a poem,
whose fame should be co-extensive with the world whose creation it
described. We then claimed this instance of change of form coincident
with change of character, as a proof of the correctness of the
hypothesis. It was however a superfluous precaution, for the coincident
change is equally true in almost every instance of the Cogitative Nose.
No man can alter the profile of his Nose, but he may increase its
latitudinal diameter. As to the former, he must submit to have it what
shape God pleases; as to the latter, he may make it almost any shape he
himself pleases—for the one indicates acquired habits, the other
inherent properties.
The Cogitative Nose expands with expanding thoughts and is therefore
rarely, if ever, much developed in youth; neither, on the other hand, is
the very sharp or Noncogitative Nose frequently visible in early life,
for there are few to whom God has not given the elements of thought. It
is our own faults, therefore, if we throw away the talents bestowed upon
us, and suffer our minds to degenerate into inanity and our Noses into
sharpness.
For this reason, it is a laudable ambition in a young man to cultivate a
Cogitative Nose, for he can only do so by cultivating his mind. And,
forasmuch as it is the only part of the Nose which is under the controul
of the owner, so it is that which can be most distinctly judged of and
its expansion watched; for, though the owner can never see the perfect
profile of his Nose, he may always form a correct estimate of its
_breadth_. We should be quite justified in adding this to the numerous
proofs of design in the adaptation of the human body to the soul, but as
many persons cannot surmount a certain sense of the ridiculous in the
subject before us, we forbear. Those who are impressed with the truth of
our system, will at once admit the inference, and perceive its value in
Natural Theology.[24]
As it has been deemed unnecessary to extend the present chapter with any
biographical or critical sketches of the examples adduced in
corroboration of Class III, we will devote the next to the more useful
task of inquiring how a Cogitative Mind and its certain accompaniment, a
Cogitative Nose, may be acquired.