¹ See Cantor, G.N., ‘The Edinburgh Phrenology Debate: 1803–1828’, Annals of Science, (1975), 32, pp. 195–218CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed; ‘A critique of Shapin's social interpretation of the Edinburgh phrenology debate’, Annals of Science, (1975), 33, pp. 245–256Google Scholar; Clapton, G.T., ‘Lavater, Gall et Baudelaire’, Revue de Littérature Comparée, (1933), 13, pp. 259–298, 429–456Google Scholar; Cooler, Roger, ‘Phrenology: the provocation of progress’, History of Science, (1976), 14, pp. 213–234Google Scholar; Davies, John D., Phrenology, Fad and Science: a 19th Century American Crusade, New Haven, 1955Google Scholar; de Giustino, David, Conquest of Mind: Phrenology and Victorian Social Thought, London, 1975Google Scholar; Grant, A. Cameron, ‘Combe on phrenology and free will: a note on XIXth-century secularism’, Journal of the History of Ideas, (1965), 2, pp. 141–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar; ‘New lighten an old view’, Journal of the History of Ideas, (1968), 29, pp. 293–301Google Scholar; Hall, Jason Y., ‘Gall's phrenology: a romantic psychology’, Studies in Romanticism, (1977), 16, pp. 305–317CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed; Hedderly, Francis, Phrenology: Science of Mind, London, 1970Google Scholar; Inkster, Ian, ‘A phase in middle class culture: phrenology in Sheffield, 1824–1850’, Transactions of the Hunter Archaeological Society, (1979), 10, pp. 273–279Google Scholar; McLaren, Angus, ‘Phrenology: medium and message’, Journal of Modern History, (1974), 46, pp. 86–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Parssinen, T. M., ‘Popular science and society: the phrenological movement in early Victorian Britain’, Journal of Social History, (1974), 8, pp. 1–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Pearson, Fiona, ‘Phrenology and sculpture, 1820–1855’, Leeds Arts Calendar, (1981), 88, pp. 14–23Google Scholar; Shapin, S., ‘Homo Phrenologicus: antropological perspectives on an historical problem’, in Barnes, B. and Shapin, S. (eds), Natural Order: Historical Studies of Scientific Culture, London, 1979Google Scholar; ‘“Nibbling at the Teats of Science”: Edinburgh and the diffusion of science in 1830s’, in Inkster, I. and Morrell, J. (eds), Metropolis and Province: Science in British Culture 1780–1850, London, 1983Google Scholar; ‘The politics of observation: cerebral anatomy and social interests in the Edinburgh phrenology disputes’, in Wallis, R. (ed.), On the Margins of Science: The Sociological Construction of Rejected Knowledge (Sociology Review Monographs 27), Keele, 1979Google Scholar; Walsh, Anthony A., ‘The American tour of Dr Spurzheim’, Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences, (1972), 27, pp. 187–205.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

² See Ackerknecht, E., ‘Contributions of Gall and the phrenologists to knowledge of brain function’, in Poynter, F.N.L. (ed.), The History and Philosophy of Knowledge of the Brain and its Functions, Oxford, 1958Google Scholar; Lanteri-Laura, Georges, Histoire de la Phrénologie: l'Homme et son Cerveau Selon F.J. Gall, Paris, 1970Google Scholar; Blondel, C., La Psychophysiologie de Gall, Paris, 1914Google Scholar; Lesky, Erna, ‘Gall, Ahnherr der Wiener Psychiatrie’, Wiener klinische Wochenschrift, (1967), 79, pp. 912–923Google Scholar; ‘Gall and Herder’, Clio Medica, (1967), 2, pp. 85–97Google Scholar; ‘Structure and function in Gall’, Bulletin of the History of Medicine, (1970), 44, pp. 297–314Google Scholar; Riese, W., ‘F.-J. Gall et le problème des localisations cérébrales’, L'Hygiène Mentale, XXI, (1936), 5, 105–136Google Scholar; Temkin, Owsei, ‘Gall and the phrenological movement’, Bulletin of the History of Medicine, (1947), 21, pp. 275–321Google ScholarPubMed; Young, R.M., Mind, Brain and Adaptation in the Nineteenth Century: Cerebral Localization and its Biological Context from Gall to Fourier, Oxford, 1970Google Scholar; Ysabeau, A., Lavater et Gall: Physiognomie et Phrénologie Rendues Intelligibles pour Tout le Monde, Paris, n.d. c. 1860.Google Scholar

³ Gall was a close aquaintance of Anton von Störck, successor to Van Swieten and physician to Emperor Joseph II and to Francis I at the start of his reign. When Störck died, Gall is said to have been appointed his successor as ‘body-physician to the Emperor’; or so claims Bernard Hollander. This, however, is unlikely as Storck himself died in 1803 sometime after the government prohibited Gall's lectures (see Hollander, Bernard, In Search of the Soul and the Mechanism of Thought, Emotion, and Conduct, 2 vols, London 1920, 1, p. 324).Google Scholar

⁴ OFB, I, p. 7.Google Scholar

⁵ See Möbius, P.J., Franz Joseph Gall, in Ausgewählte Werke, 8 vols, Leipzig, 1903–1907, vol. 7.Google Scholar The episode is recounted in VII, pp. 8–12. Although Gall seems to have been granted the opportunity to seek a licence to lecture, he preferred to maintain silence (see OFB, I, p. 19Google Scholar; and Gibbon, Charles, The Life of George Combe, 2 vols, London, 1878, II, p. 17)Google Scholar. The censorship Gall experienced took the form of a general edict prohibiting all private lectures unless permission was obtained, though there is little doubt that Gall was the prime target, the church having singled him sout for his ‘materialist tendencies’. For further information, see Ebstein, Erich, ‘Gall in defence of his theory on the basis of an hitherto unknown correspondence’, Medical Life, (1923), 30, pp. 369–372, 370.Google Scholar

⁶ See Temkin, Owsei, ‘Gall and the phrenological movement’, p. 278.Google Scholar

⁷ Spurzheim, J.C., Phrenology, or the Doctrine of Mental Phenomena, 2 vols, Boston 1835, 1, p. 112.Google Scholar

⁸ Gall, F.J. and Spurzheim, J.G. [Spurzheim's initials vary], Recherches sur le systemè nerveux en général, et sur celui du cerveau en particulier; Mémoire présenté à l'Institut de France, le 14 Mars 1808; suivi d'observations sur le rapport qui en a été fait à cette compagnie par ses commissaires, Paris, 1809.Google Scholar

⁹ Seven of these are listed in the article ‘Cranioscopy’ in the Supplement to the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Editions of the Encyclopaedia Britannica, Edinburgh, 1824, III, p. 422.Google Scholar The Lettre de Charles Villers à Georges Cuvier, de l'Institut de France (Metz, 1802) was already known in Britain; it was reviewed in the Edinburgh Review with the opening remark, ‘Of Dr Gall, and his skulls, who has not heard?’ (Brown, Thomas, ‘Review of Lettre de Charles Villers’, Edinburgh Review, II, 1803, pp. 147–160, 147)Google Scholar. The Edinburgh Medical and Surgical Journal reviewed T.C. Rosemuller's account of Gall's German tour (anon., ‘Account of Dr Gall's Discoveries Regarding the Structure of the Brain, II, 1806, pp. 320–324)Google Scholar and shortly afterwards reviewed two more accounts, beginning with ‘everybody has heard something about the celebrated Dr Gall and his doctrine of Cranioscopy’ (anon., ‘Prof. Bischoff's Account of Dr Gall's Cranioscopy’, II, 1806, pp. 354–366)Google Scholar. This last reviewer also remarked that ‘it appears not unworthy of remark, among the swarm of publications upon this subject, of the host of expositions, refutations, criticisms, and explanations, not one is the work of Gall's own hands’ (ibid., p. 355). A year after the review one of the books mentioned was translated into English: Hufeland, C.W., Dr Gall's New Theory of Physiognomy (1807)Google Scholar. Jean-Baptiste Demangeon was another who attended Gall's lectures and he gave a splendid presentation of them in his La Physiologie Intellectuelle, ou Dévelopment de la Doctrine du Docteur Gall, Paris, 1806.Google Scholar

¹⁰ See Temkin, O., ‘The philosophical background to Magendie's physiology’, Bulletin of the History of Medicine, (1946), 20, pp. 10–35Google ScholarPubMed; ‘Materialism in French and German physiology of the early nineteenth century’, ibid., pp. 322–327; Canguilhem, Georges, ‘La Constitution de la physiologie comme science’, Etudes d'Histoire et de Philosophie des Sciences, Paris, 1975, pp. 226–273.Google Scholar An excellent study of Gall's work and its reception in France which deals in great detail with developments in the theory of cerebral localization on the continent is Lanteri-Laura, Histoire de la Phrénologie.

¹¹ See Hollander, , Search of the Soul, pp. 207–210.Google Scholar On the powerful network of oral communication in France at the time, and the way this spread knowledge of Gall's work, see Demangeon, , Physiologie IntellectuelleGoogle Scholar, Preface; and the Introduction to Nacquart, J.-B., Traité sur la Nouvelle Physiologie du Cerveau, Paris, 1808.Google Scholar For early contemporary reactions, see. Nivélet, F., Gall et sa Doctrine, Paris, 1890, pp. 14–17.Google Scholar

¹² On Napoleon's views, see Las Cases, Emmanuel, Mémorial de Saint-Hélène (1823), 2 vols., Paris, 1961, II, pp. 57–58.Google Scholar The report appears as one of the earliest expositions in English of Gall and Spurzheim's doctrines, like the majority, critical. See anon., ‘Review of Report on a Memoir of Drs Gall and Spurzheim, Relative to the Anatomy of the Brain. By MM. TENON, PORTAL, SABATIER, PINEL, and CUVIER, presented to, and adopted by, the Class of Mathematical and Physical Sciences of the National Institute’, The Edinburgh Medical and Surgical Journal, V, 1809, pp. 36–66.Google Scholar A bitter account of the episode appears in Broussais, F.J.V.' ‘Lectures on phrenology, delivered in 1836, in the University of Paris, lecture V’, The Lancet, (1836), 30, ii, pp. 545–552, 546.Google Scholar

¹³ See Delaunay, Paul, ‘De la physiognomic à la phrénologie. Histoire et evolution des écoles et des doctrines’, Le Progrès Medical, (1928), 31, pp. 1279–1290, 1279Google Scholar; Temkin, , ‘Gall and the phrenological movement’, pp. 293–295Google Scholar; and Broussais, F.J.V., Cours de Phrénologie fait à la Faculté de Medicine de Paris, Paris, 1836.Google Scholar

¹⁴ Its full title is Anatomie et Physiologie du Système Nerveaux en Général, et du Cerveau en Particulier, avec des Observations sur la Possibilité de Reconnoitre Plusieurs Dispositions Intellectuelles et Morales de I'Homme et des Animaux, par la Confirmation de leurs Têtes (4 vols., Paris, 1810–1819Google Scholar; vols. 3 and 4 have Gall as the sole author). This work, which was sold along with a volume of plates, was priced at 1000 francs, and as Spurzheim recognized, was destined for library use (see Spurzheim, to Combe, , 10 05 1818, NLS 7203, fo. 107).Google Scholar

¹⁵ Sur les Functions du Cerveau et sur Celles de Chacune de ses Parties, 6 vols., Paris, 1822–1825.Google Scholar

¹⁶ OFB, I, p. 55.Google Scholar

¹⁷ See Ebstein, Erich, ‘Franz Joseph Gall in Kampf um seine Lehre auf, grand unbekannter Briefe an Bertruch usw. mit zwei Bildern Galls’, in Singer, C. and Sigerist, H.E. (ed.), Essays on the History of Medicine Presented to Karl Sudhoff, Berlin, 1924, pp. 269–322Google Scholar; Combe, Andrew, ‘The substance of an address to the students of Anderson's University’, The Lancet, (1846), i, pp. 61–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Temkin, Owsei, ‘Remarks on the neurology of Gall and Spurzheim’, in Underwood, E. Ashworth (ed.), Science, Medicine and History: Essays on the Evolution of Scientific Thought and Medical Practice Written in Honour of Charles Singer, 2 vols., London, 1953, II, pp. 282–289Google Scholar; Ackerknecht, Erwin H., ‘Contributions of Gall and the phrenologists to knowledge of brain function’Google Scholar; Lesky, Erna, ‘Structure and function in Gall’Google Scholar; Hollander, Bernard, ‘The Centenary of Francis Joseph Gall 1758–1828’, Medical Life, (1928), 35, pp. 373–380Google Scholar; Lanteri-Laura, , Histoire de la phrénologie, pp. 73–115Google Scholar; Zangwill, O.L., ‘The cerebral localization of psychological function’, Advancement of Science, (1963), 20, pp. 335–344Google Scholar; and Young, Robert M., Mind, Brain and Adaptation, pp. 23–37.Google Scholar

¹⁸ See Spurzheim, to Combe, , 13 03 1821, NLS 7207, fo. 75.Google Scholar

¹⁹ Brown, Thomas, ‘Review of Lettre de Charles Villers’.Google Scholar

²⁰ See ‘Biography of the Author’ by Nahum Capen in Spurzheim, J.C., Phrenology in Connexion with the Study of Physiognomy, London, 1836, p. 47.Google Scholar Charles Follen later wrote that Spurzheim's average audience in Bath, Bristol and Cork was about 40 [see his ‘Funeral Oration … Boston … 1832’, PJ, (1832), VIII, 37, pp. 317–331, 321].Google Scholar

²¹ Gordon, John, ‘Review of Anatomie et physiologie … and The Physiognomical System of DRS GALL and SPURZHEIM’, Edinburgh Review, (1815), XXV, pp. 227–268.Google Scholar Gordon's contribution was one of the most savage in a journal that made a speciality out of censorious expositions of scientific pretences—or what it deemed to be such; moreover, it appeared at a period when the Edinburgh Review had begun to wield enormous influence amongst a very large and powerful audience. With some justification, the Phrenological Journal later recalled that this time the Review was the ‘Koran of the reading public’ and that phrenology's reception into the country therefore depended ‘on the fiat of that literary dictatorship’ (PJ, I, 1, 1824, p. iv)Google Scholar. There is no doubt that Jeffrey constituted a powerful ally or savage foe: ‘If Jeffrey was not a great critic’, Walter Bagehot wrote in 1855, ‘he had, what great critics wanted, the art of writing what most people would think good criticism. He might not know his subject, but he knew his readers.’ (Bagelot, Walter, ‘The first Edinburgh review’, Literary Studies, 2 vols., London, 1911, 1, pp. 1–35, 25)Google Scholar. Jeffrey estimated that in 1814 each of his issues was read within a month of its publication by at least 50 000 people adding that ‘no prose preachers have so large an audience’ (quoted in Grieg, James A., Francis Jeffrey of the Edinburgh Review, London, 1948, pp. 60–61).Google Scholar

²² Letter from George to F. Jeffrey, esq. in Answer to bis Criticism of Phrenology, contained in No. LXXXVIII of the Edinburgh Review, Edinburgh, 1826, p. 2nGoogle Scholar; ‘Introductory Statement’, PJ, I, 1, 1824, p. v.Google Scholar

²³ See review of Carmichael, Andrew's A Memoir of the Life and Philosophy of Spurzheim in PJ, VIII, (1834), 36, pp. 261–270, 263–264Google Scholar and ‘Dr Spurzheim and the Edinburgh Reviewer’, PJ, IX, (1836), 46, pp. 526–531Google Scholar, where the incident is recalled with great relish. Spurzheim's own recollection occurs in a letter to Dr Biggar, 30 June 1816, NLS 7202, fo. 47.

²⁴ See Gordon, John, Observations on the Structure of the Brain, Comprising an Estimate of the Claims of Drs. Gall and Spurzheim to Discovery of the Anatomy of that Organ, Edinburgh, (1817), 25, pp. 110–111.Google Scholar This text essentially constitutes a prolonged repetition of Gordon's earlier review but with the addition of criticisms taken from the Institut's report to the effect that even if Gall and Spurzheim did say something of importance it was nothing new (see, e.g. p. 180, 184).

²⁵ See Capen, , ‘Biography’, in Spurzheim, Phrenology in Connexion, p. 50.Google Scholar

²⁶ For information see the ‘Notices and signs of the times’ in PJ, II, (1825), 7, pp. 486–487Google Scholar and the ‘Notices’, in PJ, III, (1826), 10, p. 324Google Scholar; IV, (1827), 14, pp. 315–316; V, (1829), 17, pp. 160–162; VI, (1830), 21, p. 161, 634; and VII, (1831), 28, p. 192. For an example of local reaction and organization, see Inkster, Ian, ‘A phase in middle class culture: phrenology in Sheffield, 1824–1850’.Google Scholar

²⁷ Combe, George, Essays on Phrenology; or an Inquiry into the Principles and Ability of the System of Drs Gall and Spurzheim; and into the Objections Made Against It, Edinburgh, 1819, p. 301.Google Scholar

²⁸ Ibid., pp. 305–306.

²⁹ G. Combe, 1819–1820 Notebooks, NLS 7406, fo. 72–73—and this notwithstanding his earlier worry that phrenology could very easily become a ‘wide field for quackery’ (ibid., fo. 31).

³⁰ See Anon., ‘Practical application of phrenology on a voyage’, PJ, I, (1824), 2, pp. 259–268, 259.Google Scholar Solly remarks that having failed to do justice to the work of Spurzheim and Combe in the first edition of his work (xi), he can only do so by separating them off from those ‘bump readers’ who would unsurp their names (pp. 338–339); Solly, Samuel, The Human Brain: its Structure, Physiology and Diseases, 2nd edn, London, 1837.Google Scholar For a description of the ‘shilling-a-head itinerants’, see Forbes, John, ‘Review of Grundzüge’, British and Foreign Medical Review, (1842), XIV, pp. 65–80, 71.Google Scholar

³¹ See on this my discussion in ‘The Figure of the Hypocrite: some contours of a historical problem’, Studies in the History of Psychology and the Social Sciences, (1986), 4Google Scholar, and ‘Skin deep: Barthes, Lavater and the legible body’, Economy and Society, XIV, (1985), 3, pp. 273–312.Google Scholar

³² MacKenzie, G.S., Illustrations of Phrenology, Edinburgh, 1820, pp. 25, 27.Google ScholarBarclay, John, An Inquiry into the Opinions, Ancient and Modem, Concerning Life and Organization, Edinburgh, 1822, p. 380.Google Scholar

³³ Bray, Charles, ‘The physiology of the brain’, The Anthropological Review, (1869), VII, pp. 268–279, 277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar See also Shapin, S., ‘Phrenological knowledge and the social structure of early nineteenth-century Edinburgh’, Annals of Science, (1975), 32, pp. 219–243, 242.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

³⁴ Anon., ‘Phrenological quacks’, PJ, IX, (1836), 46, pp. 517–519, 517.Google ScholarJeffrey, and Gordon, , The Craniad, 20, p. 72.Google Scholar Some critics, like Sir G.S. MacKenzie, argued against simplistic physiognomical readings (see his Illustrations of Phrenology, Edinburgh, 1820, pp. 25, 47)Google Scholar, but these are in the minority and rarer, I believe, than G.N. Cantor appears to suggest (in his ‘A critique of Shapin's social interpretation of the Edinburgh phrenology debate’, Annals of Science, (1975), 33, pp. 245–256, 252).Google Scholar

³⁵ Spurzheim, J.C., Phrenology, or the Doctrine of the Mental Phenomena, 2 vols., Boston, 1835, 1, 12f.Google Scholar; and his Essai Philosophique sur la Nature Morale et Intellectuelle de I'Homme, Paris, 1820, p. 212.Google Scholar One can also note a significant terminological shift when reference is made to anatomical discoveries, from a ‘we’ in the opening pages of Observations sur la Phraenologie in 1818 to an ‘I’ two years later in the Appendix to the Essai Philosophique.

³⁶ A role Spurzheim described as that of ‘associate’, see, e.g., Spurzheim, to Combe, , n.d. (early 1821), NLS 7207, ff. 77–78.Google Scholar

³⁷ Spurzheim, , Outlines of the Physiognomical System, p. 7.Google Scholar

³⁸ See Anon., Craniologie, ou Découvertes Nouvelles du Docteur F.J. Gall, Concernant le Cerveau, le Cráne, et les Organes, Paris, 1807, p. 32Google Scholar; Hollander, , In Search of the Soul, p. 342Google Scholar; Anon., ‘Dr Spurzheim, the Marquis Moscati, and the London Phrenological Society’, PJ, VIII, (1834), 36, pp. 227–244, 238Google Scholar; and Noel, R.R., ‘Reliques and anecdotes of Dr Gall’, PJ, XVII, 79, pp. 153–157.Google Scholar

³⁹ See Vimont, Joseph, Traité de Phrénologie Humaine et Comparée, Paris, 1836, 2 vols., II, pp. 52–54Google Scholar; and the evidence in Anon., ‘Journal de la Société Phrénologique de Paris’, PJ, IX, (1836), 46, pp. 505–515.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ Originally published in French in Journal de la SociétÉ Phrénologique de Paris in 04 1835Google Scholar, then reproduced in Fossati, G.A.L., Questions Philosophiques, Sociales et Politiques, Traitées d'Après les Principes de la Physiologic du Cerveau, Paris, 1869, pp. 287–302Google Scholar; see also Anon., ‘Report to the President of the Phrenological Society, (Edinburgh), on the state of phrenology in Italy’, PJ, V, (1829), 18, pp. 299–318, 304Google Scholar; and Lélut, L.F., Qu'est-ce que la Phrénologie?, Paris, 1836, p. 398.Google Scholar

⁴¹ See Brigham, Amariah, An Inquiry Concerning the Function of the Brain, the Spinal Cord, and the Nerves, New York, 1840, esp. pp. 129–130, and 133–137Google Scholar; Penny Cyclopaedia entry on Spurzheim (see ‘Intelligence, & c.’, PJ, XV, (1842), 72, p. 287)Google Scholar: Forster's letter to Elliotson, John in Elliotson, , Human Physiology; With Which is Incorporated, Much of the Elementary Pan of the Institutions Physiologicae of J.F. Blumenbach, 5th ed., London, 1840, pp. 1157–1159Google Scholar; and Boardman, Andrew, ‘Sketch of the rise, progress, and present condition, of phrenology’Google Scholar, in Combe, George, Lectures on Phrenology, 3rd edn, New York, 1878, pp. 76–77.Google Scholar

⁴² Forbes, John, ‘Review of Grundzüge’, p. 75Google Scholar; see also Hunt, James, ‘On the localisation of the functions of the brain, with special reference to the faculty of language’, The Anthropological Review, (1869), VII, pp. 201–214, 201CrossRefGoogle Scholar, where Gall is described turning in his grave.

⁴³ The efforts made are recounted by Symes, E.S. in a letter ‘To the Editors of Zoist’, TZ, IX, 36, 1852, pp. 442–443Google Scholar, and by Elliotson, in ‘An account of the appearances after Haydon's death, with reflections upon phrenology and phrenologists’, TZ, XII, (1855), 45, pp. 62–74, 65–66.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ See ‘Note’, PJ II, 6, 1825, p. iii.Google Scholar On page iv we can again read of the intention of the Phrenological Journal to print parts of the Fonctions du Cerveau in its pages; this plan, though occasionally carried out, was swiftly smothered under the weight of practical phrenologizing.

⁴⁵ Anon., Dr Spurzheim's French Works', PJ, II, (1825), 6, pp. 185–201, 186.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ Elliotson, , Human Physiology, p. 387Google Scholar; see also Engledue, W.C., Introductory Address to the Association, London, June 20, 1842, 1842, p. 3Google Scholar. This important lecture was widely distributed and appeared in the Medical Times and in the Phrenological Journal (as part of the ‘report of the Proceedings of the Phrenological Association, at its Fifth Annual Session, at London, in June 1842’, PJ, XV, (1842), 73, pp. 291–343).Google Scholar

⁴⁷ Prideaux, T. Symes, ‘Gall's organology’, The Anthropological Review, (1869), VII, pp. 76–92, 77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁴⁸ On the unavailability of the volumes in England, see Elliotson, John, ‘Dr Elliotson on Gall’, PJ, XI, (1838), 54, pp. 64–65.Google Scholar The review appeared in PJ, X, (1837), 51, pp. 458–462Google Scholar; a notice of the work in PJ, XVII, (1844), 79, p. 207.Google Scholar

⁴⁹ Combe, to Gall, , 11 01 1825, NLS 7383, fo. 119.Google Scholar

⁵⁰ See NLS 7447, ff. 19–96.

⁵¹ Lanteri-Laura, , Histoire de la Phrénologie, p. 106.Google Scholar

⁵² Robert Stone Dow and Giuseppe Moruzzi, The Physiology and Pathology of the Cerebellum, Minneapolis, 1958, p. 6.Google Scholar

⁵³ For the following pages I have relied on secondary sources unless otherwise specified. These are: Dow, and Moruzzi, , Physiology, pp. 3–7 and passimGoogle Scholar; Neuburger, M., Die historische Entwicklung der experimentellen Gehirn- und Rückenmarksphysiologie vor Flourens, Stuggart, 1897Google Scholar; Rawson, Noel R., ‘The story of the cerebellum’, Canadian Medical Association Journal, (1932), 26, pp. 220–225Google ScholarPubMed; and Fulton, John F., Functional Localization in the Frontal Lobes of the Cerebellum, Oxford, 1949, pp. 106–133.Google Scholar

⁵⁴ Shakespeare, William, Love's Labour's Lost, IV, ii.Google Scholar

⁵⁵ Though, as Canguilhem shows, Willis rendered such a notion possible (see Canguilhem, Georges, La Formation du Concept de Réflexe aux XVII^e et XVIII^e siècles, Paris, 1977Google Scholar, especially chapter III and appendix).

⁵⁶ See Willis, Thomas, Cerebri Anatome cui Nervorum Descriptio et Usus (1664), 2 vols., Montreal, 1965Google Scholar; and Thomas Willis's Oxford Lectures (ed. Dewhurst, Kenneth), Oxford, 1980, pp. 103–107, pp. 145–150.Google Scholar

⁵⁷ Harvey, William, Du motu cordisGoogle Scholar, chapter 4 (in his The Circulation of the Blood and Other Writings (ed. Franklin, Kenneth J.), London, 1968, pp. 33–38)Google Scholar; see also Whitteridge, Gweneth, William Harvey and the Circulation of the Blood, London, 1971, pp. 96–97, 115–117.Google Scholar For Haller's comments, see von Haller, A., Elementa Physiologiae Corporis Humani, 8 vols., Lausanne, 1757–1766, I, pp. 474–479Google Scholar (Fibra, vasa, circuitus sanguinis, cor); and IV, pp. 345–351 (Cerebrum, nervi, musculi).

⁵⁸ Rolando, L., ‘Expériences sur les fonctions du système nerveux’, Journal de Physiologie Expérimentale et Pathologique, (1823), III, pp. 95–113Google Scholar (Flourens' comments follow on pp. 113–114).

⁵⁹ Magendie, F., ‘Mémoire sur les fonctions de quelques parties du système nerveux’ (read to the Academy of Sciences on 7 March 1823—not as dated on the Memoir, in 1825), Journal de Physiologie Expérimental et Pathologique, (1824), IV, pp. 399–407.Google Scholar

⁶⁰ Foderà, M., ‘Recherches expérimentales sur le système nerveux’, Journal de Physiologie Expérimentale et Pathologique, (1823), III, pp. 191–217.Google Scholar

⁶¹ Magendie, F., ‘Memoire sur les fonctions de quelques parties du système nerveux’, Journal de Physiologie Expérimental et Pathologique, (1825), V, pp. 27–37.Google Scholar

⁶² See Dickinson, William Howship, ‘On the functions of the cerebellum’, British and Foreign MedicoChirurgical Review, (1865), XXXVI, pp. 455–480, 457.Google Scholar

⁶³ See Neuberger, , Die historische Entwicklung.Google Scholar

⁶⁴ See Serres, A., Anatomie Comparée du Cerveau, dans les Quatres Classes des Animaux Vertébrés Appliqué à la Physiologie du Système Nerveux, 2 vols., Paris, 1826, II, pp. 717–718.Google Scholar

⁶⁵ Dickinson, , ‘On the functions’Google Scholar; Bouillaud, J., ‘Recherches expérimentales tendant à prouver que le cervelet préside aux actes de la station et de la progression, et non a l'instinct de la propagation’, Archives Générates de Médicine de Paris, (1827), XV, pp. 64–91Google Scholar (see especially, pp. 84, 88; on p. 65, however, he stresses the lack of consensus); and idem, ‘Recherches cliniques tendant à réfuter l'opinion de M. Gall sur les fonctions du cervelet, et à prouver que cet organe preside aux actes de l'équilibration, de la station et de la progression’, ibid., pp. 225–247. For a similar equivocation, see de Backer, J., ‘Observations’, Bibliothèque Médicale de Bruxelles, (1828), V, pp. 405–407.Google Scholar

⁶⁶ See Longet, F.A., Traité de Physiologie, 2 vols., Paris, 1850.Google Scholar This test is cited as decisive by Dow, and Moruzzi, , The Physiology and Pathology, p. 6.Google Scholar

⁶⁷ Lélut, F., ‘Appréciation des idées de Gall’, Annales Médico-Psychologiques, (1843), II, pp. 175–195.Google Scholar

⁶⁸ ‘Notice’, Lancet, (1855), I, p. 210.Google Scholar

⁶⁹ Dunn, Robert, ‘A case of apoplexy of the cerebellum’, Medico-Chirurgical Transactions, (1849), XXXII, pp. 107–114, 109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁷⁰ See Magendie, F., Leçons sur les Fonctions et les Maladies du Système Nerveux, 2 vols., Paris, 1839–1841, II, p. 262.Google Scholar See also Magendie's remarks which are not wholly critical of Gall in Desmoulins, A., Anatomie des Systèmes Nerveux des Animaux à Vertebres Appliqués à la Physiologic et à la Zoologie, Paris, 1825, p. 599Google Scholar [remarks reprinted in Bostock, John, An Elementary System of Physiology (3rd edn), 2 vols., London (1836), I, pp. 197–201].Google Scholar

⁷¹ See Zangwill, O.L., ‘The cerebral localization of psychological functions’Google Scholar; Knott, John, ‘Franz Joseph Gall and the “science” of phrenology’, Westminster Review, (1906), CLXVI, pp. 150–163, 159Google Scholar; Hunt, James, ‘On the localization of the functions of the brain, with special reference to the faculty of speech’, Anthropological Review, (1869), VII, pp. 201–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Lanteri-Laura, , Histoire de la Phrénologie, pp. 178–192Google Scholar; and Hécaen, H. and Dubois, J., La Naissance de la Neurophysiologie du Langage, Paris, 1969.Google Scholar

⁷² OFB, III, p. 170.Google Scholar

⁷³ Ibid., III, p. 167.

⁷⁴ Ibid., III, p. 172.

⁷⁵ Ibid., III, p. 172.

⁷⁶ Ibid.

⁷⁷ Ibid., III, pp. 180–183.

⁷⁸ Ibid., III, pp. 184–185.

⁷⁹ Ibid., III, pp. 189–200.

⁸⁰ Ibid., III, p. 198.

⁸¹ Gall devotes some 120 pages to his discussion of the sexual instinct, that is roughly six times the length he allows any other. Its importance to Gall is further shown by the size of the organ (cerebellum), its role in man's well-being and in the perpetuation of the species. Gall reports that he wrote a Traité sur l'instinct de la propagation in 1818, but I can find no other record of this (see OFB, III, p. 178).Google Scholar

⁸² See ibid., III, p. 158.

⁸³ Combe maintains that he published the work at his own expense in a letter to Elliotson, John, 10 03 1838Google Scholar, NLS 7388, fo.8.

⁸⁴ OFB, III, p. 142.Google Scholar

⁸⁵ Ibid., III, p. 152.

⁸⁶ Ibid., III, p. 161.

⁸⁷ Ibid., III, p. 155 (my emphasis); and Gall, F.J., Vimont and Broussais, On the Functions of the Cerebellum, by Drs Gall, Vimont, and Broussais, translated from the French by George Combe: also Answers to the Objections urged against Phrenology by Drs Roget, Rudolphi, Prichard, and Tiedermann; by George Combe and Dr A. Combe, Edinburgh, 1838, p. 12.Google Scholar

⁸⁸ OFB, III, pp. 238–239.Google Scholar

⁸⁹ Combe in Functions of the Cerebellum, p. 93.Google Scholar

⁹⁰ Notebook 1833–1835, NLS 7440, fo. 138.

⁹¹ Combe, George, A System of Phrenology, 5th edn, 2 vols., Edinburgh, 1843, I, pp. 183–184Google Scholar; Hewlett C. Watson in a review of The Anatomy of the Brain, fell into Latin and French (see ‘The Anatomy of the Brain’, PJ, VII, (1832), 31, pp. 434–444, p. 441).Google Scholar

⁹² See Anon., ‘Comparative merits of the mental philosophy of the school of Reid and Stewart, and of the phrenologists’, PJ, X, (1837), 50, pp. 301–336, 334.Google Scholar

⁹³ Anon., ‘Review of On the Functions of the Brain’, PJ, XI, (1838), 56, pp. 298–307, 298.Google Scholar

⁹⁴ See Anon., ‘The British medical journals’, PJ, XV, (1842), 72, pp. 266–277, 272.Google Scholar

⁹⁵ See Spurzheim, J.C., Lectures on Phrenology, London, 1837, p. 35Google Scholar; and his ‘Lectures on phrenology, Lancet, VII, 1825, p. 134Google Scholar; also Broussais, F.J.V., ‘Lectures on phrenology, I’, Lancet, (1836), XXX, p. 580.Google Scholar

⁹⁶ A translation of Gall's defence against the charges made against him by the Viennese authorities makes this clear (NLS 7449, ff. 32–49, published in Functions of the Cerebellum, pp. 309–339, see especially p. 312).Google Scholar

⁹⁷ Spurzheim, to Combe, , 8 10 1821Google Scholar, NLS 7207, fo. 47.

⁹⁸ See ‘notices’, PJ, III, 10, 1826, pp. 324–325Google Scholar (which reports the Courant article of 20 March 1825 or 1826). In his notebooks, Combe relates how discussions of physiology seemed to attract rather than deter ladies: ‘The forenoon lectures were attended chiefly by ladies, and when the physiological subjects were introduced, the number of ladies doubled, and mothers brought their daughters and fathers brought their sisters’ (NLS 7440, fo. 138).

⁹⁹ See for an example, ‘Dunfermline Phrenological Society’, PJ, VII, (1832), 29, pp. 246–250, 247.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁰ See, ‘Case of larger cerebellum’, PJ, V, 20, pp. 636–639Google Scholar; also notes below which report further case-studies.

¹⁰¹ See ‘History of the discovery of the phrenological organs’, PJ, II, 7, 1825, p. 451Google Scholar; Spurzheim, J.C., Essai sur les Principes Élémentaires de l'Education, Paris, 1820, pp. 39, 48–49, 58)Google Scholar; functions of the Cerebellum, p. XIXGoogle Scholar; Spurzheim, J.C., A View of the Philosophical Principles of Phrenology, 3rd edn., London, c. 1845, p. 52Google Scholar; Voisin, Felix, De l'Homme Animal, Paris, 1839, p. 93Google Scholar: Broussais, , ‘Lecture I’, p. 583.Google Scholar

¹⁰² See Spurzheim, J.C., Outlines of the Physiogiomical System of Drs Gall and Spurzheim: Indicating the Predispositions and Manifestations of the Mind, London, 1815, pp. 106–107Google Scholar; and his Observations sur la Phraenologie ou la Connaissance de l'Homme Moral et Intellectuelle, Fondée sur les Fonctions du Système Nerveux (sic), Paris, 1818, pp. 129, 138.

¹⁰³ See Combe, 1821–1826 Notebook, NLS 7408, ff. 49, pp. 53–56; and Functions of the Cerebellum, pp. 181–188.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁴ Lewes, G.H., The Physiology of Common Life, 2 vols., Edinburgh, 1859, II, pp. 122–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁰⁵ See Alison, W.P., Dissertation on the State of Medical Science, from the Termination of the Eighteenth Century to the Present Time, London, 1834, p. 6Google Scholar; and his Outlines of Physiology and Pathology; with a Supplement to the Physiology, Embracing an Account of the Most Recent Additions to that Science, Edinburgh, 1836, p. 253.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁶ Mayo, Herbert, Outlines of Human Physiology, London, 1837, p. 245Google Scholar; Carpenter, W.B., Principles of Human Physiology, 5th edn., London, 1857, pp. 522–523Google Scholar; Prichard, J.C., Treatise on Insanity and Other Disorders affecting the Mind, London, 1835, p. 482CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Solly, Samuel, The Human Brain; Its Structure, Physiology and Diseases, 2nd edn., London 1837, p. 323.Google Scholar See also the reprint from Dr Noble's The Brain and its Physiology in ‘On the insufficiency of the evidence on which some physiologists attribute to the cerebellum functions related to certain muscular actions’, PJ, XX, (1847), 92, pp. 251–268Google Scholar, with comments by an anonymous phrenologist.

¹⁰⁷ See Jeffrey, Francis, ‘Phrenology’, Edinburgh Review, (1826), LXXXVIII, pp. 253–318, 314.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁸ See ‘On the insufficiency’, PJ, XX, (1847), 92, pp. 251–268.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁹ OFB, III, p. 259.Google Scholar

¹¹⁰ See for example, ‘Cruelty to animals—Sir William Hamilton’s experiments’, PJ, VII, (1832), 31, pp. 427–433.Google Scholar

¹¹¹ See on this Olmstead, J.M.D., François Magendie: Pioneer in Experimental Physiology and Scientific Medicine in XIX Century France, New York, 1944, pp. 138–143.Google Scholar

¹¹² See Fairholme, E.G. and Pain, W., A Century of Work for Animals: The History of the R.S.P.C.A., 1824–1934, London, 1934Google Scholar; and Harrison, B., ‘Animals and the State in nineteenth-century England’, English Historical Review, (1973), LXXXVIII, pp. 786–820.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹¹³ See Cranefield, P.P., The Way In and the Way Out: François Magendie, Charles Bell, and the Roots of the Spinal Nerves, New York, 1974.Google Scholar

¹¹⁴ French, Richard D., Antivivisection and Medical Science in Victorian Society, Princeton, 1975, p. 19.Google Scholar

¹¹⁵ See ‘The London Press and the Phrenological Journal’, PJ, VII, (1983), 30, pp. 309–313, 309, 312.Google Scholar

¹¹⁶ Gall, , OFB, III, p. 244Google Scholar; ‘Flourens on the nervous system’, PJ, I, (1825), 3, pp. 455–463Google Scholar; ‘Bouillaud's experiments to discover the function of the brain’, PJ, VII, (1832), 28, pp. 133–144Google Scholar, and VII, (1832), 29, pp. 224–234; Combe, , Functions of the Cerebellum, p. 188.Google Scholar

¹¹⁷ See Functions of the Cerebellum, pp. 131–148Google Scholar; ‘On the insufficiency’, p. 260.Google Scholar

¹¹⁸ Broussais, F.J.V., ‘Lectures on Phrenology, I’, p. 577–583Google Scholar; and his Cours de Phrénologie Fait à la Faculté de Médicine de Paris, Paris, 1836, pp. 164–187.Google Scholar

¹¹⁹ Vimont, J., Traité de Phrénologie Humaine et Comparée, 2 vols., Paris, 1822–1825, II, p. 242Google Scholar; see also the discussion in II, pp. 230–245.

¹²⁰ Atkinson, George and Martineau, Harriet, Letters on the Laws of Man's Nature and Development, London, 1851, p. 61.Google Scholar See also Lussana, Phillipe, ‘Leçons sur les fonctions de cervelet’, Journal de la Physiologie de l'Homme, (1862), V, pp. 418–441, 441 for similar moves.Google Scholar

¹²¹ OFB, III, p. 154.Google Scholar

¹²² Ibid., III, p. 208.

¹²³ Ibid., III, pp. 208–209.

¹²⁴ For example, in Browne, W. A.F., Observations on Religious Fanaticism, London, 1835Google Scholar, reviewed in PJ, X, (1836), 46, pp. 532–545.Google Scholar

¹²⁵ A strong anti-clericalism is also to be found in Voisin, Felix's De l'Homme Animal, Paris, 1839, pp. 81–88Google Scholar; the author says that of 31 priests he knew, 26 had been condemned for rape! (see p. 86).

¹²⁶ OFB, III, p. 146.Google Scholar

¹²⁷ Ibid., III, p. 142.

¹²⁸ Ibid., III, p. 146.

¹²⁹ See Porter, Roy, ‘Mixed feelings: the enlightenment and sexuality in eighteenth-century Britain’, in Boucé, Paul Gabriel (ed.), Sexuality in Eighteenth-Century Britain, Manchester, 1982, pp. 1–27.Google Scholar

¹³⁰ OFB, III, p. 141f.Google Scholar

¹³¹ Voisin, , De l'Homme Animal, pp. 89–90.Google Scholar

¹³² See Anon., ‘On the natural supremacy of the moral sentiments’, PJ, III, (1826), 11, pp. 327–351.Google Scholar

¹³³ See 1820–1821 Notebook, NLS 7407, ff. 20, 22.

¹³⁴ See Grant, A. Cameron, ‘New light on an old view’ Journal of the History of Ideas, XXIX, (1968), 2, pp. 293–301, 294CrossRefGoogle Scholar; his ‘Combe on phrenology and freewill: a note on XlXth-century secularism’, Journal of the History of Ideas, (1965), XXVI, pp. 141–147Google Scholar; de Giustino, David, Conquest of Mind, pp. 140–145Google Scholar; and Combe, George, Life and Dying Testimony of Abram Combe, in Favour of Robert Owen's New Views of Man and Society, London, 1844.Google Scholar These all offer useful perspectives, but none of them treat the issue of sexuality.

¹³⁵ See Combe, , ‘Phrenology and Mr Owen’, PJ, I, (1824), 3, pp. 463–466.Google Scholar

¹³⁶ Owen, to Combe, , 26 02 1824, NLS 7213, fo. 156.Google Scholar

¹³⁷ Combe, to Owen, , 28 02 1824, NLS 7383, fo. 14.Google Scholar

¹³⁸ Owen, to Combe, , 4 03 1824, NLS 7213, fo. 159.Google Scholar

¹³⁹ See for information, Combe, to Owen, 5 March 7383, NLS 7383, fo. 19Google Scholar; the letter is reproduced in Combe's ‘Phrenology and Mr Owen’, p. 464.Google Scholar

¹⁴⁰ See on this Taylor, Barbara, Eve and the New Jerusalem, London, 1983, p. 42f.Google Scholar; and Saville, J., ‘Robert Owen on the family’, in Cornforth, M. (ed.), Rebels and Their Causes, London, 1978.Google Scholar

¹⁴¹ Combe, , ‘Phrenological analysis of Mr Owen's new views of society’, PJ, I, (1824), 2, pp. 218–237, 227.Google Scholar

¹⁴² See Léonard, Jacques, La Médecine entre les Pouvoirs et les Savoirs, Paris, 1981, pp. 112–114.Google Scholar

¹⁴³ In remarks made in footnotes to Combe's ‘Phrenological analysis of Mr Owen’, pp. 226–227.Google Scholar

¹⁴⁴ See Combe, ibid., p. 229. Other similar statements may be found in ‘Letter to the Editor on Marriage’, PJ, II, (1825), 6, pp. 178–180Google Scholar; Anon., ‘Owenism and phrenology’, PJ, IX, (1834), 46, pp. 489–494Google Scholar; and Smith, William Hawkes, ‘Remarks on the application of phrenology as a test of the practicality of socialism’, PJ, XIII, (1840), XIII, pp. 119–128Google Scholar; also Combe in 1820–1821 Notebook, NLS 7407, fo. 20; and Combe, to Smith, W. Hawkes, 28 08 1838, NLS 7388, fo. 82.Google Scholar

¹⁴⁵ See for example, Combe, George, Moral Philosophy; or, the Duties of Man, Considered in his Individual, Social and Domestic Capacities, Edinburgh, 1840, p. 110.Google Scholar

¹⁴⁶ Spurzheim, , Sur la Phraenologie, p. 139.Google Scholar

¹⁴⁷ Foucault, Michel, The History of Sexuality, vol. I. An Introduction, London, 1979.Google Scholar

¹⁴⁸ This image has often been presented as the colonization of the sexual by external modes of thought and metaphors. Thus, the sexual becomes taken over by military metaphors especially in the arena of contraception (see for examples, Wood, C. and Suitters, B., The Flight for Acceptance: A History of Contraception, Aylesbury, 1970, pp. 93, 96Google Scholar; Sontag, S., Illness as Metaphor, London, 1979, p. 66)Google Scholar. Or economic metaphors are used (see examples, Britain, Ian, Fabianism and Culture, Cambridge, 1983, pp. 116–117Google Scholar; Walters, Ronald C., Primers for Prudery, New Jersey, 1974, pp. 34, 87Google Scholar; de Vries, Leonard and Fryer, Peter (eds), Venus Unmasked or an Inquiry into the Nature and Origin of the Passion of Love, London, 1967, p. 8)Google Scholar. Elsewhere and rather later, energy models are deployed (see Beecher, Catherine E. and Beecher Stowe, Harriet, The American Woman's Home (1869), Hartford, 1975, pp. 111, 255Google Scholar; Skultans, Vieda, Madness and Morals: Ideas of Insanity in the Nineteenth Century, London, 1975, p. 18Google Scholar; Sontag, , Illness, p. 64Google Scholar: Hall, Ruth (ed.), Dear Or Stopes, London, 1978, p. 164)Google Scholar. And (not finally) the electricity model (see Rosenberg, Charles E., ‘Scientific theories and social thought’, in Barnes, Barry (ed.), Sociology of Science, Harmondsworth, 1972, pp. 292–308, 294–275Google Scholar; Wilson, Colin, Origins of the Sexual Impulse, London, 1966, pp. 24–26Google Scholar; and Aspiz, Harold, ‘The body electric: science, sex, and metaphor’, Walt Whitman Review, (1978), 24, 4, pp. 137–142)Google Scholar. It would not be difficult to compile an inventory of the metaphorical approaches to sex and sexuality during the nineteenth century; more difficult would be to account for these satisfactorily. At present Susan Sontag's brilliant but slender volume is one of the best attempts we possess.

¹⁴⁹ Anon., ‘On the natural supremacy’ (see note 132 above). As a contrast, see Anon., ‘On the influence of amativeness on the higher sentiments and intellect’, PJ, II, (1825), 7, pp. 391–407.Google Scholar The latter was judged important to merit and to receive translation into French (see ‘Notices’, PJ, IV, 15, 1826, p. 477).Google Scholar

¹⁵⁰ See Combe, to Spurzheim, , 8 10 1821, NLS 7207, fo. 67Google Scholar; Combe, , 1826–1836 Notebook, NLS 7409, ff. 80–81Google Scholar (entry dated 2 January 1830).

¹⁵¹ See Functions of the Cerebellum, p. XVI.Google Scholar

¹⁵² OFB, VI, p. 302Google Scholar (‘It is the nape of his neck which has been his ruin’).

¹⁵³ See Elliotson, to Combe, , 21 03 1838, NLS 7246, fo. 128.Google Scholar

¹⁵⁴ See Aron, Jean-Paul and Kempf, Roger, Le Pénis et la Démoralisation de l'Occident, Paris, 1978, p. 258.Google Scholar

¹⁵⁵ Smart, Alexander, ‘On the application of phrenology in the formation of marriages, PJ, VIII, (1834), 38, pp. 464–475, 464Google Scholar; Broussais, , ‘Lecture I’, p. 582.Google Scholar

¹⁵⁶ See Spencer, Herbert, ‘On the situation of the organ of amativeness’, TZ, II, (1845), 6, pp. 186–188, 188Google Scholar; ‘Case of a large cerebellum’, PJ, V, (1829), 20, pp. 636–639Google Scholar; Combe, , Functions of the Cerebellum, pp. 149–175Google Scholar; Anon. ‘On the female character’, PJ, II, (1826), 6, pp. 275–288. 277Google Scholar; Anon. ‘Practical applications of phrenology on a voyage’, PJ, I, (1824), 2, pp. 259–268, 259.Google Scholar On medical evidence reporting the correlation of cerebellum size and extent of amativeness, see ‘Note’, PJ, XI, (1838), 54, p. 79Google Scholar; and ‘Note’, PJ, XFV, (1841), 69, pp. 380–381.Google Scholar Also Spurzheim, J.C., The Anatomy of the Brain with a General View of the Nervous System, 2nd edn., Boston, 1836, pp. 114–134.Google Scholar

¹⁵⁷ OFB, III, p. 165.Google Scholar

¹⁵⁸ See for examples: Anon. ‘Case illustrative of the utility of phrenology’, PJ, IX, (1836), 45, pp. 459–466, 460Google Scholar; Combe, , Functions of the Cerebellum, p. 175Google Scholar: ‘On the female character’, PJ, II, (1825), 6, esp. p. 277Google Scholar; Watson, Hewett C. ‘The anatomy of the brain’, PJ, VII, (1832), 31, pp. 434–444, 437, 439–440Google Scholar; and contrast to French view- Voisin, De l‘Homme Animal, p. 66Google Scholar; Vimont, , Traité, I, p. 236.Google Scholar

¹⁵⁹ See Combe, , 1821–1826 Notebook, NLS 7408, fo. 91.Google Scholar For a treatment of Lavaterian physiognomy which stresses its basis in perception touches upon its use in reading sexual characteristics, see my ‘Skin deep: Barthes, Lavater and the legible body’, Economy and Society, XIV, (1985), 3, pp. 273–312.Google Scholar

¹⁶⁰ See Anon. ‘Theory of animal resemblances’, PJ, VII, (1832), 32, pp. 552–555.Google Scholar

¹⁶¹ See Gall, , OFB, V. p. 272.Google Scholar

¹⁶² See ‘Illustrations of phrenology’, PJ, III, (1826), 12, pp. 635–639, esp. p. 635.Google Scholar

¹⁶³ Paul Julius Möbius, Franz Joseph Call. Möbius also wrote an article which I have not seen: ‘Uber Galls specielle Organologie’, Carl Christian Schmidt's Jahrbücher der Medicin (formerly Jahrbücher der in- und ausländichen gesammten Medicin), CCLXVII, 1900. As far as Freud is concerned, he certainly knew of Gall's work (see for example, Jung to Freud, 6 July 1907, in McGuire, William ed., The Freud/Jung Letters, London, 1974, p. 73)Google Scholar. Möbius was impressed by the way Gall had apparently described the relation of hysteria and sexuality (as in the case study we reported above) and this forms a central plank in his assessment of Gall's work. In the ‘Preliminary Communication’ to the Studies on Hysteria, Freud (and Breuer) say that Möbius held ‘similar views on hysteria to ours’. The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud (ed. Strachey, John), 24 vols., London, 1953–1973, II, p. 8nGoogle Scholar; see also pp. 186–188, 190–191, 215, 243, 248n. Later, Freud says that much of the information in his first of Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality is taken from Möbius and others (Complete Works, VII, p. 135n)Google Scholar. For further information on this interesting link, see Jones, Ernest, Sigmund Freud: Life and Work. Vol. I. The Young Freud, 1856–1900, London, 1953, p. 323n, p. 405Google Scholar; Sulloway, Frank J., Freud, Biologist of the Mind, London, 1980, p. 279Google Scholar; Ellenberger, Henri F., The Discovery of the Unconscious, New York, 1970, pp. 289, 292, 302, 375Google Scholar and passim; and Levin, Kenneth, Freud's Early Psychology of the Neuroses, Hassocks, 1978, pp. 67–68, 186–188.Google Scholar

¹⁶⁴ Ellis, Henry Havelock, Studies in the Psychology of Sex, 4 vols., New York, 1936, 1, 2, pp. 15–16.Google Scholar For an interesting indication of the view of the sexual instinet being sited in the genital organs, see de Lamarck, Jean-Baptiste's lecture, ‘Systeme de Gall’ in Wheeler, William Morton and Barbour, Thomas (eds), The Lamarck Manuscripts at Harvard, Cambridge, Mass., 1933, p. 6 (translation on p. 106).Google Scholar