Online Encyclopedia

Search over 40,000 articles from the original, classic Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th Edition.

PHYSIOGNOMY

Online Encyclopedia
Originally appearing in Volume V21, Page 552 of the 1911 Encyclopedia Britannica.
» Make a correction to this article.
» Add information or comments to this article.
Spread the word: del.icio.us del.icio.us it!

PHYSIOGNOMY , the See also:

English See also:form of the See also:middle See also:Greek ¢uowyvwµfa, a contraction of the classical /vtnoyvwiaovia (from Oats, nature, and yviaµwv, an interpreter), (r) a See also:term which denotes a supposed See also:science for the " See also:discovery of the disposition of the mind by the lineaments of the See also:body " (See also:Bacon); (2) is also used colloquially as a synonym for the See also:face or outward See also:appearance, being variously spelled by the old writers: fysenamy by See also:Lydgate, phisnomi in Udall's See also:translation of See also:Erasmus on See also:Mark iv., physnotnie in See also:Bale's English Votaries (i. 2. p. 44), and fisnomie in All's well that ends well, iv. 5 (first See also:folio). Physiognomy was regarded by those who cultivated it as a twofold science: (1) a mode of discriminating See also:character by the outward appearance, and (2) a method of See also:divination from form and feature. On See also:account of the abuses of the latter .aspect of the subject its practice was forbidden by the English See also:law. By the See also:act of See also:parliament 17 See also:George II. c. 5 (1743) all persons pre-tending to have skill in physiognomy were deemed rogues and vagabonds, and were liable to be publicly whipped, or sent to the See also:house of correction until next sessions.' The pursuit thus stigmatized as unlawful is one of See also:great antiquity, and one which in See also:ancient and See also:medieval times had an extensive though now almost forgotten literature. It was very See also:early noticed that the See also:good and evil passions by their continual exercise See also:stamp their impress on the face, and that each particular See also:passion has its own expression. Thus far physiognomy is a See also:branch of See also:physiology. But in its second aspect it touched divination and See also:astrology, of which Galen2 says that the physiognomical See also:part is the greater, and this aspect of the subject bulked largely in the fanciful literature of the middle ages. There is See also:evidence in the earliest classical literature that physiognomy formed part of the most ancient See also:practical See also:philosophy.

See also:

Homer was a See also:close observer of expression and of appearance as correlated with character, as is shown by his description of See also:Thersites' and elsewhere. See also:Hippo-See also:crates, See also:writing about 450 B.C., expresses his belief in the See also:influence of environment in determining disposition, and in the reaction of these upon feature," a view in which he is supported later by See also:Trogus. See also:Galen, in his See also:work liepl rwv rrys ~/ivXi)s i/Owv, having discussed the nature and See also:immortality of the soul, proceeds in ch. vii. to a brief study of physiognomy (ed. See also:Kuhn iv. 795). In this passage he deprecates current physiognomical speculations, saying that he might criticize them but feared to See also:waste See also:time and become tedious over them. In See also:chapter viii. he quotes with approbation the Hippocratic See also:doctrine referred to above; and The Act 39 See also:Elizabeth c. 4 (1597—1598) declared " all persons fayning to have knowledge of Phisiognomie or like Fantasticall Ymaginacious " liable to " be stripped naked from the middle up-wards and openly whipped until his body be bloudye." This was modified by 13 See also:Anne c. 26 (1713), still further by 17 George II. c. 5, which was re-enacted by the See also:Vagrancy Act 1824. This last act only specifies See also:palmistry. 2 Galen.

Mgt ,caraxalocws xpayeworucb (ed. Kuhn xix. 53o). 3 Iliad, ii. 214. See also See also:

Blackwell's Inquiry, (2nd ed. 1736), p. 330. A physiognomical study of the Homeric heroes is given by See also:Malalas, Chronogr. ed. See also:Dindorf, v. Io5. 4 IIepi 8~pwr, Sblcrwv, rbtrwv (ed.

Kuhn, i. 547).in a later work, Heal KaraKXt 7eo1s 7rpoyvwvrtKa, he speaks of the See also:

advantage of a knowledge of physiognomy to the physician." We learn both from See also:Iamblichus" and Porphyry7 that See also:Pythagoras practised the diagnosis of the characters of candidates for pupilage before admitting them, although he seems to have discredited the current physiognomy of the See also:schools, as he rejected Cylo, the Crotonian, on account of his professing these doctrines, and thereby was brought into some trouble.' See also:Plato also tells us that See also:Socrates predicted the promotion of See also:Alcibiades from his appearance; and See also:Apuleius 9 speaks of Socrates recognizing the abilities of Plato at first view. On the other See also:hand, it has been recorded by See also:Cicero'" that a certain physiognomist, Zopyrus, who professed to know the habits and See also:manners of men from their bodies, eyes, face and forehead, characterized Socrates as stupid, sensual and dull (bardus), " in quo Alcibiades cachinnum dicitur sustulisse." See also:Alexander Aphrodisiensis adds that, when his disciples laughed at the See also:judgment, Socrates said it was true, for such had been his nature before the study of philosophy had modified it. Zopyrus is also referred to by See also:Maximus Tyrius" as making his recognitions " intuitu See also:solo." That one's occupation stamps its impress on the outward appearance was also noticed at an early See also:period. In the curious poem in the Sallier See also:papyrus (II.), written about 1800 B.C., Duan, son of Khertu, expatiates on the effects of See also:divers handicrafts on the workmen as compared with the elevating influences of a See also:literary See also:life.12 See also:Josephus tells us that See also:Caesar detected the pretence of the See also:spurious Alexander by his rough hands and See also:surface.'3 The first systematic See also:treatise which has come down to us is that attributed to See also:Aristotle,'4 in which he devotes six chapters to the See also:consideration of the method of study, the See also:general signs of character, the particular appearances characteristic of the dispositions, of strength and weakness, of See also:genius and stupidity, of timidity, impudence, anger, and their opposites, '&c. Then he studies the physiognomy of the sexes, and the characters derived from the different features, and from See also:colour, See also:hair, body, limbs, gait and See also:voice. He compares the varieties of mankind to animals, the male to the See also:lion, the See also:female to the See also:leopard. The general character of the work may be gathered from the following specimen. While discussing noses, he says that those with thick bulbous ends belong to persons who are insensitive, swinish; See also:sharp-tipped belong to the irascible, those easily provoked, like See also:dogs; rounded, large, obtuse noses to the magnanimous, the lion-like; slender hooked noses to the See also:eagle-like, the See also:noble but grasping; See also:round-tipped retrousse noses to the luxurious, like barndoor See also:fowl; noses with a very slight notch at the See also:root belong to the impudent, the See also:crow-like; while snub noses belong to persons of luxurious habits, whom he compares to See also:deer; open nostrils are signs of passion, &c. The practice of physiognomy is alluded to in many of the Greek See also:classics." See also:Apion speaks of the metoposcopists, who See also:judge by the appearance of the face, and See also:Cleanthes the Stoic says it is " Op. Cit., xix. 530.

9 IIepl ,p+lov IIuOayopu of See also:

Myra, i. 17, 59 (See also:Amsterdam, 1707). ' De vita Pythagorae, p. 16 (Amsterdam, 1707). This author tells us that he applied the same See also:rule to his See also:friends. See also Aulus See also:Gellius, i. ix. Iamblichus, p. 49. 9 De dogmate Platonis, i. 567, p. 34 (See also:Leiden, 1714). '' Tuscul. quaestionum, iv.

37. De fato, v. 'See also:

Diss., xv. 157 (See also:Cambridge, 1703). 12 Select Papyri, Pl. xv., xix., and (Anastasi) ibid., cxxviii., cxxxiii. " 3 See also:Ant., xvii. 12, 2. " Authors differ in their views as to its authenticity, but See also:Diogenes Laertius (v. 22) and See also:Stobaeus (Serm. clxxxix.) both believe it to be genuine. The See also:chief difficulty is the reference to a certain sophist, See also:Dionysius, but this is probably an See also:interpolation. There are physiognomic references in other writings of Aristotle (cf. Anal. pr., ii. c.

3o; Hist. anim., i. 8, &c.) sufficient to justify the attribution of the treatise to him. On this, see See also:

Franz, See also:Preface, p. vi. seq., of his Scriplores physiognomiae veteres (See also:Leipzig, 178o). '" See an interesting See also:paper on " Stretching and Yawning as Signs of Madness," by See also:Professor Ridgeway (Trans. See also:Comb. Phil. See also:Soc., i. 201), which refers to Aristoph. Wasps, 642, with which he compares See also:Plautus, Menaechmi, 279. Other references exist to physiognomy in See also:Cassiodorus, Isidorus, Meletius and„See also:Nemesius, but none of any great importance. possible to tell habits from the aspect (cf. Ecclus. xix.

29, 30). Polemon (c. A.D. 150) compiled a treatise (published 1534, in Latin) on the subject, similar in character to that of Aristotle; but be excels in graphic descriptions of different dispositions, and differs only from Aristotle in some of his See also:

animal comparisons. A more important 'work was written by a converted See also:Jew, Adamantius, about A.D. 415. This is in two books, the first on the expression of the See also:eye, the second on physiognomy in general, mostly Aristotelian in character. Among the Latin classical authors See also:Juvenal, Suetonius and See also:Pliny in well-known passages refer to the practice of physiognomy, and numerous allusions occur in the See also:works of the See also:Christian Fathers, especially See also:Clement of See also:Alexandria and See also:Origen (for example, the See also:familiar passage in his work against See also:Celsus, i. 33).1 While the earlier classical physiognomy was chiefly descriptive, the later medieval authors particularly See also:developed the predictive and astrological See also:side, their See also:treatises often digressing into See also:chiromancy, onychomancy, clidomancy, podoscopy, spasmatomancy, and other branches of prophetic folk-See also:lore and magic. Along with the medical science of the period the Arabians contributed to the literature of physiognomy; 'See also:Ali b. Ragel wrote a See also:book on naevi; Rhazes (1040) devoted several chapters to it; and See also:Averroes (1165) made many references to it in his De sanitate, p. 82 (Leiden, 1537).

See also:

Avicenna also makes some acute physiognomical remarks in his De animalibus, which was translated by See also:Michael See also:Scot about 1270. Among medieval writers Albertus See also:Magnus (See also:born 1205) devotes much of the second See also:section of his De animalibus to physiognomy; but this chiefly consists of extracts from Aristotle, Polemon and Loxus. He does not enter into the animal comparisons of his predecessors, but occupies himself chiefly with See also:simple descriptive physiognomy as indicative of character; and the same is true of the scattered references in the writings of See also:Duns Scotus and See also:Thomas See also:Aquinas. The famous See also:sage of Balwearie, Michael Scot, while See also:court astrologer to the See also:emperor See also:Frederick II., wrote his treatise De hominis phisiognomia, much of which is physiological and of curious See also:interest. It was probably composed about 1272, but not printed until 1477. This was the first printed work on the subject. Physiognomy also forms the third part of his work De secretis naturae. In 1335 Pietro d'See also:Abano of See also:Padua delivered in See also:Paris a course of lectures on this subject (afterwards edited by Blondus, 1544), a few years before he was burned for See also:heresy. The 16th See also:century was See also:rich in publications on physiognomy. The works of the classical authors before mentioned were printed, and other treatises were published by See also:John de Indagine, Cocles, Andreas See also:Corvus, Michael Blondus, See also:Janus See also:Cornaro, See also:Anselm Douxciel, Pompeius Ronnseus, Gratarolus, See also:Lucas Gauricus, Tricassus, Cardanus, Taisnierus, Magnus Hund, Rothman, Johannes Padovanus, and, greatest of all, Giambattista dells. Ports. The earliest English works were See also:anonymous: On the See also:Art of Foretelling Future Events by Inspection of the Hand (1504), and A Pleasant Introduction to the Art of Chiromancie and Physiognomie (1588).

Dr Thomas See also:

Hill's work, The Contemplation of Mankynde, contayning a singular Discourse after the Art of Physiognomie, published in 1571, is a quaintly written See also:adaptation from the See also:Italian authors of the See also:day. The undated book on moles and naevi by " See also:Merlin See also:Britannicus, " after the See also:model of 'Ali See also:ibn Ragel, is of about the same date. The development of a more accurate See also:anatomy in the 17th century seems to have diminished the interest in physiognomy, by substituting fact for fiction; and consequently the literature, though as great in quantity, became less valuable in quality. The See also:principal writers of this See also:age were T. See also:Campanella, R. Coclenius, Clement, Timpler, J. E. Gallimard, Moldenarius, Septalius, Saunders, C. See also:Lebrun (a precursor of See also:Charles See also:Bell), Elsholz, de la Belliere, J. See also:Evelyn (in the appendix to Numismata), Baldus, Bulwer (in his Pathomyotomia), See also:Fuchs, Spontoni, Ghiradelli, 1 For Scriptural allusions to physiognomy see Vecchius, Observationes in div. script. (See also:Naples, 1641). Other classical references are contained in the Prooemium to the 1593 edition of the works of Baptista Portae.

Chiaramonti, A. Ingegneri, Finella, De la Chambre, Zanardus, R. See also:

Fludd, and others of less importance. The 18th century shows a still greater decline of interest in physiognomy. Historians of philosophy, like J. See also:Meursius and Franz, re-edited some of the classical works, and G. G. Ftilleborn reviewed the relation of physiognomy to philosophy. Indeed, the only name worthy of See also:note is that of J. K. See also:Lavater (q.v.). The other authors of this century are Peuschel, See also:Spon, Schutz, Wegelin, J.

Pernetti, Girtanner, Grohmann, and several anonymous writers, and from the anatomical side G. M. Lancisi, J. See also:

Parsons and See also:Peter See also:Camper. The popular See also:style, good illustrations and pious spirit pervading the writings of Lavater have given to them a popularity they little deserved, as there is no See also:system in his work, which chiefly consists of rhapsodical comments upon the several portraits. Having a happy knack of estimating character, especially when acquainted with the histories of the persons in question, the good pastor contrived to write a graphic and readable book, but one much inferior to Porta's or Aristotle's as a systematic treatise. The treatises. of See also:Nicolai and of See also:Lichtenberg were written to refute his theory. With Lavater the descriptive school of physiognomists may be said to have ended, as the astrological physiognomy expired with de la Belliere. The few works which have since appeared, before the rise of the physiological school of See also:Sir Charles Bell and Charles See also:Darwin, are undeserving of See also:notice, the development of See also:phrenology having given to pure physiognomy the coup de See also:grace by taking into itself whatever was likely to live of the older science. The writers of the 19th century are Horstig, See also:Maas, Rainer, Thone, A. Stohr, Sehler, Dr Rubels, Polli, See also:Cardona, Mastriani, See also:Diez, Cams, Piderit, See also:Burgess and P. Gratiolet.

The physiological school of physiognomy was foreshadowed by Parsons and founded by Sir Charles Bell, whose See also:

Essay on the Anatomy of the Expression, published in 18o6, was the first scientific study of the See also:physical manifestation of emotions in the terms of the muscles which produce these manifestations. In the later See also:editions of this essay the thesis is elaborated with greater detail. See also:Moreau's edition of Lavater, in 1807, was some-what along the same lines. In 1817 Dr See also:Cross of See also:Glasgow wrote his See also:defence of a scientific physiognomy based on general physiological principles. The experiments of G. B. A. See also:Duchenne (Mecanisme de la physiognomie humaine, Paris, 1862) showed that by the use of See also:electricity the See also:action of the See also:separate muscles could be studied and by the aid of See also:photography accurately represented. These observations confirmed by experimental demonstration the hypothetical conclusions of Bell. The machinery of expression having thus been indicated, the connexion of the physical action§ and the psychical See also:state was made the subject of See also:speculation by See also:Herbert See also:Spencer (See also:Psychology, 1855). These speculations were reduced to a system by Darwin (Expression of Emotions, 1872), who formulated and illustrated the following as fundamental physiognomical principles: (1) Certain complex acts are of See also:direct or indirect service, under certain conditions of the mind, in See also:order to relieve or gratify certain sensations or desires; and whenever the same states of mind are. induced the same sets of actions tend to be performed, even when they have ceased to be of use. (2) When a directly opposite state of mind is induced to one with which a definite action is correlated, there is a strong and involuntary tendency to perform a See also:reverse action.

(3) When the sensorium is strongly excited See also:

nerve-force is generated in excess, and is transmitted in definite directions, depending on the connexions of nerve-cells and on See also:habit. The last of these propositions is adversely criticized by P. Mantegazza as a truism, but it may be allowed to stand with the qualification that we are ignorant concerning the nature of the influence called " nerve-force." It follows from these propositions that the expression of emotion is, for the most part, not under See also:control of the will, and that those striped muscles are the most expressive which are the least voluntary. To the fore-going may be added the following three additional propositions, so as to form a more See also:complete expression of a physiognomical philosophy: (4) Certain muscles concerned in producing these skin-folds be-come strengthened by habitual action, and when the skin diminishes in See also:elasticity and fulness with advancing age, the wrinkles at right angles to the course of the See also:muscular See also:fibres become permanent. (5) To some extent habitual muscular action of this See also:kind may, by affecting See also:local See also:nutrition, alter the See also:contour of such bones and cartilages as are related to the muscles of expression. (6) If the See also:mental disposition and proneness to action are inherited by See also:children from their parents, it may be that the facility in, and disposition towards, certain forms of expression are in like manner matters of See also:heredity. Illustrations of these theoretic propositions are to be found in the works of Bell, Duchenne and Darwin, and in the later publications of Theodor Piderit, Mimike and Physiognomik (1886) and Mantegazza, Physiognomy and Expression (189o), to which the student may be referred for further See also:information. For information on See also:artistic anatomy as applied to physiognomy see the See also:catalogue of sixty-two authors by See also:Ludwig Choulant, Geschichte and Bibliographic der anatomischen Abbildung, &c. (Leipzig, 1852), and the works of the authors enumerated above, especially those of Aristotle, Franz, Porta, See also:Cardan, Corvus and Bulwer. For physiognomy of disease, besides the usual medical handbooks, see abuchet, Essai sur l'expression de la face clans See also:les maladies (Paris, 1801); Mantegazza, Physiology of See also:Pain (1893), and Polli, Saggio di frsiognomonia e potognomonia (1837). For ethnological physiognomy, see amongst older authors Gratarolus, and amongst moderns the writers cited in the various textbooks on See also:anthropology, especially See also:Schadow, Physionomies nationales (1835) and See also:Park See also:Harrison, .See also:burn. Anthrop.

Inst. (1883). The study of the physical characteristics of criminals is discussed at great length by See also:

Lombroso, L' Uomo delinuente (1897); See also:Ferri, L'Omicidio. (1895); von See also:Baer, Der Verbrecher 81893); See also:Laurent, Les Habitues See also:des prisons (189o) ; and See also:Havelock See also:Ellis, The Criminal (1901). (A.

End of Article: PHYSIOGNOMY

Additional information and Comments

There are no comments yet for this article.
» Add information or comments to this article.
Please link directly to this article:
Highlight the code below, right click, and select "copy." Then paste it into your website, email, or other HTML.
Site content, images, and layout Copyright © 2006 - Net Industries, worldwide.
Do not copy, download, transfer, or otherwise replicate the site content in whole or in part.

Links to articles and home page are always encouraged.

[back]
PHYSIOCRATIC SCHOOL 		[next]
PHYSIOGRAPHY OF THE ARCTIC

Site © 2006 - Net Industries