INTRODUCTION......................................................Pages
1--26
CHAP. I--GENERAL
PRINCIPLES OF EXPRESSION.
The three chief principles stated--The first principle--Serviceable actions
become habitual in association with certain states of the mind, and are
performed whether or not of service in each particular case-- The force of
habit--Inheritance--Associated habitual movements in man--Reflex
actions--Passage of habits into reflex actions--Associated habitual movements
in the lower animals--Concluding remarks -- 27--49
CHAP. II--GENERAL
PRINCIPLES OF EXPRESSION--continued.
The Principle of Antithesis--Instances in the dog and cat--Origin of the
principle--Conventional signs--The principle of antithesis has not arisen from
opposite actions being consciously performed under opposite impulses -- 50--65
CHAP. III--GENERAL
PRINCIPLES OF EXPRESSION--concluded.
The principle of the direct action of the excited nervous system on the body,
independently of the will and in part of habit--Change of colour in the
hair--Trembling of the muscles--Modified secretions-- Perspiration--Expression
of extreme pain--Of rage, great joy, and terror--Contrast between the emotions
which cause and do not cause expressive movements--Exciting and depressing
states of the mind-- Summary -- 66--82
CHAP. IV--MEANS OF
EXPRESSION. IN ANIMALS.
The emission of sounds--Vocal sounds--Sounds otherwise produced-- Erection of
the dermal appendages, hairs, feathers, &c., under the emotions of anger
and terror--The drawing back of the ears as a preparation for fighting, and as
an expression of anger--Erection of the ears and raising the head, a sign of
attention -- 88--114
CHAP. V.--SPECIAL
EXPRESSIONS OF ANIMALS.
The Dog, various expressive movements of--Cats--Horses--Ruminants --Monkeys,
their expression of joy and affection--Of pain--Anger-- Astonishment and Terror
-- Pages 115--145
CHAP. VI.--SPECIAL
EXPRESSIONS OF MAN: SUFFERING AND WEEPING.
The screaming and weeping of infants--Form of features--Age at which weeping
commences--The effects of habitual restraint on weeping-- Sobbing--Cause of the
contraction of the muscles round the eyes during screaming--Cause of the
secretion of tears -- 146--175
CHAP. VII.--LOW
SPIRITS, ANXIETY, GRIEF, DEJECTION, DESPAIR.
General effect of grief on the system--Obliquity of the eyebrows under
suffering--On the cause of the obliquity of the eyebrows--On the depression of
the corners of the mouth -- 176--195
CHAP. VIII.--JOY, HIGH
SPIRITS, LOVE, TENDER FEELINGS, DEVOTION.
Laughter primarily the expression of joy--Ludicrous ideas--Movements of the
features during laughter--Nature of the sound produced--The secretion of tears
during loud laughter--Gradation from loud laughter to gentle smiling--High
spirits--The expression of love--Tender feelings--Devotion -- 196--219
CHAP. IX.--REFLECTION--MEDITATION--ILL--TEMPER--SULKINESS--
DETERMINATION.
The act of frowning--Reflection with an effort or with the perception of
something difficult or disagreeable--Abstracted
meditation--Ill--temper--Moroseness--Obstinacy--Sulkiness and pouting--Decision
or determination--The firm closure of the mouth -- 220--236
CHAP. X.--HATRED AND
ANGER.
Hatred--Rage, effects of on the system--Uncovering of the teeth--Rage in the
insane--Anger and indignation--As expressed by the various races of man--Sneering
and defiance--The uncovering of the canine teeth on one side of the face --
237--252
CHAP.
XI.--DISDAIN--CONTEMPT--DISGUST--GUILT-- PRIDE, ETC.--
HELPLESSNESS--PATIENCE--AFFIRMATION AND NEGATION.
Contempt, scorn and disdain, variously expressed--Derisive Smile-- Gestures
expressive of contempt--Disgust--Guilt, deceit, pride, etc.-- Helplessness or
impotence--Patience--Obstinacy--Shrugging the shoulders common to most of the
races of man--Signs of affirmation and negation -- 253--277
CHAP. XII.--SURPRISE--ASTONISHMENT--FEAR--HORROR.
Surprise, astonishment--Elevation of the eyebrows--Opening the mouth
--Protrusion of the lips--Gestures accompanying surprise--Admiration--
Fear--Terror--Erection of the hair--Contraction of the platysma
muscle--Dilatation of the pupils--horror--Conclusion. Pages 278--308
CHAP.
XIII.--SELF-ATTENTION--SHAME--SHYNESS--MODESTY: BLUSHING.
Nature of a blush--Inheritance--The parts of the body most affected-- Blushing
in the various races of man--Accompanying gestures-- Confusion of mind--Causes
of blushing--Self-attention, the fundamental element--Shyness--Shame, from
broken moral laws and conventional rules--Modesty--Theory of
blushing--Recapitulation -- 309--346
CHAP. XIV.--CONCLUDING
REMARKS AND SUMMARY.
The three leading principles which have determined the chief movements of
expression--Their inheritance--On the part which the will and intention have
played in the acquirement of various expressions --The instinctive recognition
of expression--The bearing of our subject on the specific unity of the races of
man--On the successive acquirement of various expressions by the progenitors of
man--The importance of expression-- Conclusion -- 347--366
FIG.
1. Diagram of the
muscles of the face, from Sir C. Bell 24
2. " " "
Henle 24
3. " " "
" 25
4. Small dog watching a
cat on a table 43
5. Dog approaching
another dog with hostile intentions 52
6. Dog in a humble and
affectionate frame of mind 53
7. Half-bred Shepherd
Dog 54
8. Dog caressing his
master 55
9. Cat, savage, and
prepared to fight 58
10. Cat in an
affectionate frame of mind 59
11. Sound-producing
quills from the tail of the Porcupine 93
12. Hen driving away a
dog from her chickens 98
13. Swan driving away
an intruder 99
14. Head of snarling
dog 117
15. Cat terrified at a
dog 125
16. Cynopithecus niger,
in a placid condition 135
17. The same, when
pleased by being caressed 135
18. Chimpanzee
disappointed and sulky 139
19. Photograph of an
insane woman 296
20. Terror 299
21. Horror and Agony
306
---------- PlateI.to face
page147.PlateV.to face
page254."II."178."VI."264"III."200."VII."300"IV."248. N. B.--Several of the figures in these
seven Heliotype Plates have been reproduced from photographs, instead of from
the original negatives; and they are in consequence somewhat indistinct.
Nevertheless they are faithful copies, and are much superior for my purpose to
any drawing, however carefully executed.
MANY works have been
written on Expression, but a greater number on Physiognomy,--that is, on the
recognition of character through the study of the permanent form of the
features. With this latter subject I am not here concerned. The older
treatises,[1] which I have consulted, have been of little or no service to me.
The famous `Conférences'[2] of the painter Le Brun, published in 1667, is the
best known ancient work, and contains some good remarks. Another somewhat old
essay, namely, the `Discours,' delivered 1774-1782, by the well-;known Dutch
anatomist Camper,[3] can hardly be considered as having made any marked advance
in the subject. The following works, on the contrary, deserve the fullest
consideration.
Sir Charles Bell, so
illustrious for his discoveries in physiology, published in 1806 the first
edition, and in 1844 the third edition of his `Anatomy and Philosophy of
Expression.'[4] He may with justice be said, not only to have laid the
foundations of the subject as a branch of science, but to have built up a noble
structure. His work is in every way deeply interesting; it includes graphic
descriptions of the various emotions, and is admirably illustrated. It is
generally admitted that his service consists chiefly in having shown the
intimate relation which exists between the movements of expression and those of
respiration. One of the most important points, small as it may at first appear,
is that the muscles round the eyes are involuntarily contracted during violent
expiratory efforts, in order to protect these delicate organs from the pressure
of the blood. This fact, which has been fully investigated for me with the
greatest kindness by Professors Donders of Utrecht, throws, as we shall hereafter
see, a flood of light on several of the most important expressions of the human
countenance. The merits of Sir C. Bell's work have been undervalued or quite
ignored by several foreign writers, but have been fully admitted by some, for
instance by M. Lemoine,[5] who with great justice says:--"Le livre de Ch.
Bell devrait être médité par quiconque essaye de faire parler le visage de
l'homme, par les philosophes aussi bien que par les artistes, car, sous une
apparence plus légère et sous le prétexte de l'esthétique, c'est un des plus
beaux monuments de la science des rapports du physique et du moral."
From reasons which will
presently be assigned, Sir C. Bell did not attempt to follow out his views as
far as they might have been carried. He does not try to explain why different
muscles are brought into action under different emotions; why, for instance,
the inner ends of the eyebrows are raised, and the corners of the mouth
depressed, by a person suffering from grief or anxiety.
In 1807 M. Moreau
edited an edition of Lavater on Physiognomy,[6] in which he incorporated
several of his own essays, containing excellent descriptions of the movements
of the facial muscles, together with many valuable remarks. He throws, however,
very little light on the philosophy of the subject. For instance, M. Moreau, in
speaking of the act of frowning, that is, of the contraction of the muscle
called by French writers the soucilier (corrigator supercilii), remarks with
truth:--"Cette action des sourciliers est un des symptômes tômes les plus
tranchés de l'expression des affections pénibles ou concentrées." He then
adds that these muscles, from their attachment and position, are fitted "à
resserrer, à concentrer les principaux traits de la face, comme il convient
dans toutes ces passions vraiment oppressives ou profondes, dans ces affections
dont le sentiment semble porter l'organisation à revenir sur elle-même, à se
contracter et à s'amoindrir, comme pour offrir moins de prise et de surface à
des impressions redoutables ou importunes." He who thinks that remarks of
this kind throw any light on the meaning or origin of the different
expressions, takes a very different view of the subject to what I do.
In the above passage
there is but a slight, if any, advance in the philosophy of the subject, beyond
that reached by the painter Le Brun, who, in 1667, in describing the expression
of fright, says:--"Le sourcil qui est abaissé d'un côté et élevé de
l'autre, fait voir que la partie élevée semble le vouloir joindre au cerveau
pour le garantir du mal que l'âme aperçoit, et le côté qui est abaissé et qui
paraît enflé, nous fait trouver dans cet état par les esprits qui viennent du
cerveau en abondance, comme polir couvrir l'aine et la défendre du mal qu'elle
craint; la bouche fort ouverte fait voir le saisissement du cœur, par le sang
qui se retire vers lui, ce qui l'oblige, voulant respirer, à faire un effort
qui est cause que la bouche s'ouvre extrémement, et qui, lorsqu'il passe par
les organes de la voix, forme un son qui n'est point articulé; que si les
muscles et les veines paraissent enflés, ce n'est que par les esprits que le
cerveau envoie en ces parties-là." I have thought the foregoing sentences
worth quoting, as specimens of the surprising nonsense which has been written
on the subject.
`The Physiology or
Mechanism of Blushing,' by Dr. Burgess, appeared in 1839, and to this work I
shall frequently refer in my thirteenth Chapter.
In 1862 Dr. Duchenne
published two editions, in folio and octavo, of his `Mécanisme de la
Physionomie Humaine,' in which he analyses by means of electricity, and
illustrates by magnificent photographs, the movements of the facial muscles. He
has generously permitted me to copy as many of his photographs as I desired.
His works have been spoken lightly of, or quite passed over, by some of his
countrymen. It is possible that Dr. Duchenne may have exaggerated the
importance of the contraction of single muscles in giving expression; for,
owing to the intimate manner in which the muscles are connected, as may be seen
in Henle's anatomical drawings[7]--the best I believe ever published it is
difficult to believe in their separate action. Nevertheless, it is manifest
that Dr. Duchenne clearly apprehended this and other sources of error, and as
it is known that he was eminently successful in elucidating the physiology of
the muscles of the hand by the aid of electricity, it is probable that he is
generally in the right about the muscles of the face. In my opinion, Dr.
Duchenne has greatly advanced the subject by his treatment of it. No one has
more carefully studied the contraction of each separate muscle, and the
consequent furrows produced on the skin. He has also, and this is a very
important service, shown which muscles are least under the separate control of
the will. He enters very little into theoretical considerations, and seldom
attempts to explain why certain muscles and not others contract under the
influence of certain emotions. A distinguished French anatomist, Pierre Gratiolet,
gave a course of lectures on Expression at the Sorbonne, and his notes were
published (1865) after his death, under the title of `De la Physionomie et des
Mouvements d'Expression.' This is a very interesting work, full of valuable
observations. His theory is rather complex, and, as far as it can be given in a
single sentence (p. 65), is as follows:--"Il résulte, de tous les faits
que j'ai rappelés, que les sens, l'imagination et la pensée elle-même, si élevée,
si abstraite qu'on la suppose, ne peuvent s'exercer sans éveiller un sentiment
corrélatif, et que ce sentiment se traduit directement, sympathiquement,
symboliquement ou métaphoriquement, dans toutes les sphères des organs extérieurs,
qui la racontent tous, suivant leur mode d'action propre, comme si chacun d'eux
avait été directement affecté."
Gratiolet appears to
overlook inherited habit, and even to some extent habit in the individual; and
therefore he fails, as it seems to me, to give the right explanation, or any
explanation at all, of many gestures and expressions. As an illustration of
what he calls symbolic movements, I will quote his remarks (p. 37), taken from
M. Chevreul, on a man playing at billiards. "Si une bille dévie légèrement
de la direction que le joueur prétend lui imprimer, ne l'avez-vous pas vu cent
fois la pousser du regard, de la tête et même des épaules, comme si ces
mouvements, purement symboliques, pouvaient rectifier son trajet? Des
mouvements non moins significatifs se produisent quand la bille manque d'une
impulsion suffisante. Et cliez les joueurs novices, ils sont quelquefois accusés
au point d'éveiller le sourire sur les lèvres des spectateurs." Such
movements, as it appeirs to me, may be attributed simply to habit. As often as
a man has wished to move an object to one side, he has always pushed it to that
side when forwards, he has pushed it forwards; and if he has wished to arrest
it, he has pulled backwards. Therefore, when a man sees his ball travelling in
a wrong direction, and he intensely wishes it to go in another direction, he
cannot avoid, from long habit, unconsciously performing movements which in
other cases he has found effectual.
As an instance of
sympathetic movements Gratiolet gives (p. 212) the following case:--"un
jeune chien A oreilles droites, auquel son maître présente de loin quelque
viande appétissante, fixe avec ardeur ses yeux sur cet objet dont il suit tous
les mouvements, et pendant que les yeux regardent, les deux oreilles se portent
en avant comme si cet objet pouvait étre entendu." Here, instead of
speaking of sympathy between the ears and eyes, it appears to me more simple to
believe, that as dogs during many generations have, whilst intently looking at
any object, pricked their ears in order to perceive any sound; and conversely
have looked intently in the direction of a sound to which they may have
listened, the movements of these organs have become firmly associated together
through long-continued habit.
Dr. Piderit published
in 1859 an essay on Expression, which I have not seen, but in which, as he
states, he forestalled Gratiolet in many of his views. In 1867 he published his
`Wissenschaftliches System der Mimik und Physiognomik.' It is hardly possible
to give in a few sentences a fair notion of his views; perhaps the two
following sentences will tell as much as can be briefly told: "the
muscular movements of expression are in part related to imaginary objects, and
in part to imaginary sensorial impressions. In this proposition lies the key to
the comprehension of all expressive muscular movements." (s. 25) Again,
"Expressive movements manifest themselves chiefly in the numerous and
mobile muscles of the face, partly because the nerves by which they are set
into motion originate in the most immediate vicinity of the mind-organ, but partly
also because these muscles serve to support the organs of sense." (s. 26.)
If Dr. Piderit had studied Sir C. Bell's work, he would probably not have said
(s. 101) that violent laughter causes a frown from partaking of the nature of
pain; or that with infants (s. 103) the tears irritate the eyes, and thus
excite the contraction of the surrounding in muscles. Many good remarks are
scattered throughout this volume, to which I shall hereafter refer.
Short discussions on
Expression may be found in various works, which need not here be
particularised. Mr. Bain, however, in two of his works has treated the subject
at some length. He says,[8] "I look upon the expression so-called as part
and parcel of the feeling. I believe it to be a general law of the mind that
along with the fact of inward feeling or consciousness, there is a diffusive
action or excitement over the bodily members." In another place he adds,
"A very considerable number of the facts may be brought under the
following principle: namely, that states of pleasure are connected with an
increase, and states of pain with an abatement, of some, or all, of the vital
functions." But the above law of the diffusive action of feelings seems
too general to throw much light on special expressions.
Mr. Herbert Spencer, in
treating of the Feelings in his `Principles of Psychology' (1855), makes the
following remarks:--"Fear, when strong, expresses itself in cries, in
efforts to hide or escape, in palpitations and tremblings; and these are just
the manifestations that would accompany an actual experience of the evil
feared. The destructive passions are shown in a general tension of the muscular
system, in gnashing of the teeth and protrusion of the claws, in dilated eyes
and nostrils in growls; and these are weaker forms of the actions that
accompany the killing of prey." Here we have, as I believe, the true
theory of a large number of expressions; but the chief interest and difficulty
of the subject lies in following out the wonderfully complex results. I infer that
some one (but who he is I have not been able to ascertain) formerly advanced a
nearly similar view, for Sir C. Bell says,[9] "It has been maintained that
what are called the external signs of passion, are only the concomitants of
those voluntary movements which the structure renders necessary." Mr.
Spencer has also published[10] a valuable essay on the physiology of Laughter,
in which he insists on "the general law that feeling passing a certain
pitch, habitually vents itself in bodily action," and that "an
overflow of nerve-force undirected by any motive, will manifestly take first
the most habitual routes; and if these do not suffice, will next overflow into
the less habitual ones." This law I believe to be of the highest
importance in throwing light on our subject.[11]
All the authors who
have written on Expression, with the exception of Mr. Spencer--the great
expounder of the principle of Evolution--appear to have been firmly convinced
that species, man of course included, came into existence in their present
condition. Sir C. Bell, being thus convinced, maintains that many of our facial
muscles are "purely instrumental in expression;" or are "a
special provision" for this sole object.[12] But the simple fact that the
anthropoid apes possess the same facial muscles as we do,[13] renders it very
improbable that these muscles in our case serve exclusively for expression; for
no one, I presume, would be inclined to admit that monkeys have been endowed
with special muscles solely for exhibiting their hideous grimaces. Distinct
uses, independently of expression, can indeed be assigned with much probability
for almost all the facial muscles.
Sir C. Bell evidently
wished to draw as broad a distinction as possible between man and the lower
animals; and he consequently asserts that with "the lower creatures there
is no expression but what may be referred, more or less plainly, to their acts
of volition or necessary instincts." He further maintains that their faces
"seem chiefly capable of expressing rage and fear."[14] But man
himself cannot express love and humility by external signs, so plainly as does
a dog, when with drooping ears, hanging lips, flexuous body, and wagging tail,
he meets his beloved master. Nor can these movements in the dog be explained by
acts of volition or necessary instincts, any more than the beaming eyes and
smiling cheeks of a man when he meets an old friend. If Sir C. Bell had been
questioned about the expression of affection in the dog, he would no doubt have
answered that this animal had been created with special instincts, adapting him
for association with man, and that all further enquiry on the subject was
superfluous.
Although Gratiolet
emphatically denies[15] that any muscle has been developed solely for the sake
of expression, he seems never to have reflected on the principle of evolution.
He apparently looks at each species as a separate creation. So it is with the
other writers on Expression. For instance, Dr. Duchenne, after speaking of the
movements of the limbs, refers to those which give expression to the face, and
remarks:[16] "Le créateur n'a donc pas eu à se préoccuper ici des besoins
de la mécanique; il a pu, selon sa sagesse, ou--que l'on me pardonne cette manière
de parler--par une divine fantaisie, mettre en action tel ou tel muscle, un
seul ou plusieurs muscles à la fois, lorsqu'il a voulu que les signes caractéristiques
des passions, même les plus fugaces, lussent écrits passagèrement sur la face
de l'homme. Ce langage de la physionomie une fois créé, il lui a suffi, pour le
rendre universel et immuable, de donner à tout être humain la faculté
instinctive d'exprimer toujours ses sendments par la contraction des mêmes
muscles."
Many writers consider
the whole subject of Expression as inexplicable. Thus the illustrious
physiologist Müller, says,[17] "The completely different expression of the
features in different passions shows that, according to the kind of feeling
excited, entirely different groups of the fibres of the facial nerve are acted
on. Of the cause of this we are quite ignorant."
No doubt as long as man
and all other animals are viewed as independent creations, an effectual stop is
put to our natural desire to investigate as far as possible the causes of
Expression. By this doctrine, anything and everything can be equally well
explained; and it has proved as pernicious with respect to Expression as to
every other branch of natural history. With mankind some expressions, such as
the bristling of the hair under the influence of extreme terror, or the uncovering
of the teeth under that of furious rage, can hardly be understood, except on
the belief that man once existed in a much lower and animal-like condition. The
community of certain expressions in distinct though allied species, as in the
movements of the same facial muscles during laughter by man and by various
monkeys, is rendered somewhat more intelligible, if we believe in their descent
from a common progenitor. He who admits on general grounds that the structure
and habits of all animals have been gradually evolved, will look at the whole
subject of Expression in a new and interesting light.
The study of Expression
is difficult, owing to the movements being often extremely slight, and of a
fleeting nature. A difference may be clearly perceived, and yet it may be
impossible, at least I have found it so, to state in what the difference
consists. When we witness any deep emotion, our sympathy is so strongly
excited, that close observation is forgotten or rendered almost impossible; of
which fact I have had many curious proofs. Our imagination is another and still
more serious source of error; for if from the nature of the circumstances we
expect to see any expression, we readily imagine its presence. Notwithstanding
Dr. Duchenne's great experience, he for a long time fancied, as he states, that
several muscles contracted under certain emotions, whereas he ultimately
convinced himself that the movement was confined to a single muscle.
In order to acquire as
good a foundation as possible, and to ascertain, independently of common
opinion, how far particular movements of the features and gestures are really
expressive of certain states of the mind, I have found the following means the
most serviceable. In the first place, to observe infants; for they exhibit many
emotions, as Sir C. Bell remarks, "with extraordinary force;"
whereas, in after life, some of our expressions "cease to have the pure
and simple source from which they spring in infancy."[18]
In the second place, it
occurred to me that the insane ought to be studied, as they are liable to the
strongest passions, and give uncontrolled vent to them. I had, myself, no
opportunity of doing this, so I applied to Dr. Maudsley and received from him
an introduction to Dr. J. Crichton Browne, who has charge of an immense asylum
near Wakefield, and who, as I found, had already attended to the subject. This
excellent observer has with unwearied kindness sent me copious notes and
descriptions, with valuable suggestions on many points; and I can hardly
over-estimate the value of his assistance. I owe also, to the kindness of Mr.
Patrick Nicol, of the Sussex Lunatic Asylum, interesting statements on two or
three points.
Thirdly Dr. Duchenne
galvanized, as we have already seen, certain muscles in the face of an old man,
whose skin was little sensitive, and thus produced various expressions which
were photographed on a large scale. It fortunately occurred to me to show
several of the best plates, without a word of explanation, to above twenty
educated persons of various ages and both sexes, asking them, in each case, by
what emotion or feeling the old man was supposed to be agitated; and I recorded
their answers in the words which they used. Several of the expressions were
instantly recognised by almost everyone, though described in not exactly the
same terms; and these may, I think, be relied on as truthful, and will
hereafter be specified. On the other hand, the most widely different judgments
were pronounced in regard to some of them. This exhibition was of use in
another way, by convincing me how easily we may be misguided by our
imagination; for when I first looked through Dr. Duchenne's photographs,
reading at the same time the text, and thus learning what was intended, I was
struck with admiration at the truthfulness of all, with only a few exceptions.
Nevertheless, if I had examined them without any explanation, no doubt I should
have been as much perplexed, in some cases, as other persons have been.
Fourthly, I had hoped
to derive much aid from the great masters in painting and sculpture, who are
such close observers. Accordingly, I have looked at photographs and engravings
of many well-known works; but, with a few exceptions, have not thus profited.
The reason no doubt is, that in works of art, beauty is the chief object; and
strongly contracted facial muscles destroy beauty.[19] The story of the
composition is generally told with wonderful force and truth by skilfully given
accessories.
Fifthly, it seemed to
me highly important to ascertain whether the same expressions and gestures
prevail, as has often been asserted without much evidence, with all the races
of mankind, especially with those who have associated but little with
Europeans. Whenever the same movements of the features or body express the same
emotions in several distinct races of man, we may infer with much probability,
that such expressions are true ones,--that is, are innate or instinctive.
Conventional expressions or gestures, acquired by the individual during early
life, would probably have differed in the different races, in the same manner
as do their languages. Accordingly I circulated, early in the year 1867, the
following printed queries with a request, which has been fully responded to,
that actual observations, and not memory, might be trusted. These queries were
written after a considerable interval of time, during which my attention had
been otherwise directed, and I can now see that they might have been greatly
improved. To some of the later copies, I appended, in manuscript, a few additional
remarks:--
(1.) Is astonishment
expressed by the eyes and mouth being opened wide, and by the eyebrows being
raised?
(2.) Does shame excite
a blush when the colour of the skin allows it to be visible? and especially how
low down the body does the blush extend?
(3.) When a man is
indignant or defiant does he frown, hold his body and head erect, square his
shoulders and clench his fists?
(4) When considering
deeply on any subject, or trying to understand any puzzle, does he frown, or
wrinkle the skin beneath the lower eyelids?
(5.) When in low
spirits, are the corners of the mouth depressed, and the inner corner of the
eyebrows raised by that muscle which the French call the "Grief
muscle"? The eyebrow in this state becomes slightly oblique, with a little
swelling at the Inner end; and the forehead is transversely wrinkled in the
middle part, but not across the whole breadth, as when the eyebrows are raised
in surprise.
(6.) When in good
spirits do the eyes sparkle, with the skin a little wrinkled round and under
them, and with the mouth a little drawn back at the corners?
(7.) When a man sneers
or snarls at another, is the corner of the upper lip over the canine or eye
tooth raised on the side facing the man whom he addresses?
(8) Can a dogged or
obstinate expression be recognized, which is chiefly shown by the mouth being
firmly closed, a lowering brow and a slight frown?
(9.) Is contempt
expressed by a slight protrusion of the lips and by turning up the nose, and
with a slight expiration?
(10) Is disgust shown
by the lower lip being turned down, the upper lip slightly raised, with a
sudden expiration, something like incipient vomiting, or like something spit
out of the mouth?
(11.) Is extreme fear
expressed in the same general manner as with Europeans?
(12.) Is laughter ever
carried to such an extreme as to bring tears into the eyes?
(13.) When a man wishes
to show that he cannot prevent something being done, or cannot himself do
something, does he shrug his shoulders, turn inwards his elbows, extend
outwards his hands and open the palms; with the eyebrows raised?
(14) Do the children
when sulky, pout or greatly protrude the lips?
(15.) Can guilty, or
sly, or jealous expressions be recognized? though I know not how these can be
defined.
(16.) Is the head
nodded vertically in affirmation, and shaken laterally in negation?
Observations on natives
who have had little communication with Europeans would be of course the most
valuable, though those made on any natives would be of much interest to me.
General remarks on expression are of comparatively little value; and memory is
so deceptive that I earnestly beg it may not be trusted. A definite description
of the countenance under any emotion or frame of mind, with a statement of the
circumstances under which it occurred, would possess much value.
To these queries I have
received thirty-six answers from different observers, several of them
missionaries or protectors of the aborigines, to all of whom I am deeply
indebted for the great trouble which they have taken, and for the valuable aid
thus received. I will specify their names, &c., towards the close of this
chapter, so as not to interrupt my present remarks. The answers relate to
several of the most distinct and savage races of man. In many instances, the
circumstances have been recorded under which each expression was observed, and
the expression itself described. In such cases, much confidence may be placed
in the answers. When the answers have been simply yes or no, I have always
received them with caution. It follows, from the information thus acquired,
that the same state of mind is expressed throughout the world with remarkable
uniformity; and this fact is in itself interesting as evidence of the close
similarity in bodily structure and mental disposition of all the races, of
mankind.
Sixthly, and lastly, I
have attended. as closely as I could, to the expression of the several passions
in some of the commoner animals; and this I believe to be of paramount
importance, not of course for deciding how far in man certain expressions are
characteristic of certain states of mind, but as affording the safest basis for
generalisation on the causes, or origin, of the various movements of
Expression. In observing animals, we are not so likely to be biassed by our
imagination; and we may feel safe that their expressions are not conventional.
From the reasons above
assigned, namely, the fleeting nature of some expressions (the changes in the
features being often extremely slight); our sympathy being easily aroused when
we behold any strong emotion, and our attention thus distracted; our
imagination deceiving us, from knowing in a vague manner what to expect, though
certainly few of us know what the exact changes in the countenance are; and
lastly, even our long familiarity with the subject,--from all these causes
combined, the observation of Expression is by no means easy, as many persons,
whom I have asked to observe certain points, have soon discovered. Hence it is
difficult to determine, with certainty, what are the movements of the features
and of the body, which commonly characterize certain states of the mind.
Nevertheless, some of the doubts and difficulties have, as I hope, been cleared
away by the observation of infants, --of the insane,--of the different races of
man,--of works of art,--and lastly, of the facial muscles under the action of
galvanism, as effected by Dr. Duchenne.
But there remains the
much greater difficulty of understanding the cause or origin of the several
expressions, and of judging whether any theoretical explanation is trustworthy.
Besides, judging as well as we can by our reason, without the aid of any rules,
which of two or more explanations is the most satisfactory, or are quite
unsatisfactory, I see only one way of testing our conclusions. This is to
observe whether the same principle by which one expression can, as it appears,
be explained, is applicable in other allied cases; and especially, whether the
same general principles can be applied with satisfactory results, both to man
and the lower animals. This latter method, I am inclined to think, is the most
serviceable of all. The difficulty of judging of the truth of any theoretical
explanation, and of testing it by some distinct line of investigation, is the
great drawback to that interest which the study seems well fitted to excite.
Finally, with respect
to my own observations, I may state that they were commenced in the year 1838;
and from that time to the present day, I have occasionally attended to the
subject. At the above date, I was already inclined to believe in the principle
of evolution, or of the derivation of species from other and lower forms.
Consequently, when I read Sir C. Bell's great work, his view, that man had been
created with certain muscles specially adapted for the expression of his
feelings, struck me as unsatisfactory. It seemed probable that the habit of
expressing our feelings by certain movements, though now rendered innate, had
been in some manner gradually acquired. But to discover how such habits had
been acquired was perplexing in no small degree. The whole subject had to be
viewed under a new aspect, and each expression demanded a rational explanation.
This belief led me to attempt the present work, however imperfectly it may have
been executed. --------
I will now give the
names of the gentlemen to whom, as I have said, I am deeply indebted for
information in regard to the expressions exhibited by various races of man, and
I will specify some of the circumstances under which the observations were in
each case made. Owing to the great kindness and powerful influence of Mr.
Wilson, of Hayes Place, Kent, I have received from Australia no less than
thirteen sets of answers to my queries. This has been particularly fortunate,
as the Australian aborigines rank amongst the most distinct of all the races of
man. It will be seen that the observations have been chiefly made in the south,
in the outlying parts of the colony of Victoria; but some excellent answers
have been received from the north.
Mr. Dyson Lacy has
given me in detail some valuable observations, made several hundred miles in
the interior of Queensland. To Mr. R. Brough Smyth, of Melbourne, I am much
indebted for observations made by himself, and for sending me several of the following
letters, namely:--From the Rev. Mr. Hagenauer, of Lake Wellington, a missionary
in Gippsland, Victoria, who has had much experience with the natives. From Mr.
Samuel Wilson, a landowner, residing at Langerenong, Wimmera, Victoria. From
the Rev. George Taplin, superintendent of the native Industrial Settlement at
Port Macleay. From Mr. Archibald G. Lang, of Coranderik, Victoria, a teacher at
a school where aborigines, old and young, are collected from all parts of the
colony. From Mr. H. B. Lane, of Belfast, Victoria, a police magistrate and
warden, whose observations, as I am assured, are highly trustworthy. From Mr.
Templeton Bunnett, of Echuca, whose station is on the borders of the colony of
Victoria, and who has thus been able to observe many aborigines who have had
little intercourse with white men. He compared his observations with those made
by two other gentlemen long resident in the neighbourhood. Also from Mr. J.
Bulmer, a missionary in a remote part of Gippsland, Victoria.
I am also indebted to
the distinguished botanist, Dr. Ferdinand Müller, of Victoria, for some
observations made by himself, and for sending me others made by Mrs. Green, as
well as for some of the foregoing letters.
In regard to the Maoris
of New Zealand, the Rev. J. W. Stack has answered only a few of my queries; but
the answers have been remarkably full, clear, and distinct, with the
circumstances recorded under which the observations were made.
The Rajah Brooke has
given me some information with respect to the Dyaks of Borneo.
Respecting the Malays,
I have been highly successful; for Mr. F. Geach (to whom I was introduced by
Mr. Wallace), during his residence as a mining engineer in the interior of
Malacca, observed many natives, who had never before associated with white men.
He wrote me two long letters with admirable and detailed observations on their
expression. He likewise observed the Chinese immigrants in the Malay
archipelago.
The well-known
naturalist, H. M. Consul, Mr. Swinhoe, also observed for me the Chinese in
their native country; and he made inquiries from others whom he could trust.
In India Mr. H.
Erskine, whilst residing in his official capacity in the Admednugur District in
the Bombay Presidency, attended to the expression of the inhabitants, but found
much difficulty in arriving at any safe conclusions, owing to their habitual
concealment of all emotions in the presence of Europeans. He also obtained
information for me from Mr. West, the Judge in Canara, and he consulted some
intelligent native gentlemen on certain points. In Calcutta Mr. J. Scott,
curator of the Botanic Gardens, carefully observed the various tribes of men
therein employed during a considerable period, and no one has sent me such full
and valuable details. The habit of accurate observation, gained by his
botanical studies, has been brought to bear on our present subject. For Ceylon
I am much indebted to the Rev. S. O. Glenie for answers to some of my queries.
Turning to Africa, I
have been unfortunate with respect to the negroes, though Mr. Winwood Reade
aided me as far as lay in his power. It would have been comparatively easy to
have obtained information in regard to the negro slaves in America; but as they
have long associated with white men, such observations would have possessed
little value. In the southern parts of the continent Mrs. Barber observed the
Kafirs and Fingoes, and sent me many distinct answers. Mr. J. P. Mansel Weale
also made some observations on the natives, and procured for me a curious
document, namely, the opinion, written in English, of Christian Gaika, brother
of the Chief Sandilli, on the expressions of his fellow-countrymen. In the
northern regions of Africa Captain Speedy, who long resided with the
Abyssinians, answered my queries partly from memory and partly from
observations made on the son of King Theodore, who was then under his charge.
Professor and Mrs. Asa Gray attended to some points in the expressions of the
natives, as observed by them whilst ascending the Nile.
On the great American continent
Mr. Bridges, a catechist residing with the Fuegians, answered some few
questions about their expression, addressed to him many years ago. In the
northern half of the continent Dr. Rothrock attended to the expressions of the
wild Atnah and Espyox tribes on the Nasse River, in North-Western America. Mr.
Washington Matthews Assistant-Surgeon in the United States Army, also observed
with special care (after having seen my queries, as printed in the `Smithsonian
Report') some of the wildest tribes in the Western parts of the United States,
namely, the Tetons, Grosventres, Mandans, and Assinaboines; and his answers
have proved of the highest value.
Lastly, besides these
special sources of information, I have collected some few facts incidentally
given in books of travels. --------
As I shall often have
to refer, more especially in the latter part of this volume, to the muscles of
the human face, I have had a diagram (fig. 1) copied and reduced from Sir C.
Bell's work, and two others, with more accurate details (figs. 2 and 3), from
Herde's well-known `Handbuch der Systematischen Anatomie des Menschen.' The
same letters refer to the same muscles in all three figures, but the names are
given of only the more important ones to which I shall have to allude. The
facial muscles blend much together, and, as I am informed, hardly appear on a
dissected face so distinct as they are here represented. Some writers consider
that these muscles consist of nineteen pairs, with one unpaired;[20] but others
make the number much larger, amounting even to fifty-five, according to Moreau.
They are, as is admitted by everyone who has written on the subject, very
variable in structure; and Moreau remarks that they are hardly alike in
half-a-dozen subjects.[21] They are also variable in function. Thus the power
of uncovering the canine tooth on one side differs much in different persons.
The power of raising the wings of the nostrils is also, according to Dr.
Piderit,[22] variable in a remarkable degree; and other such cases could be
given.
Finally, I must have
the pleasure of expressing my obligations to Mr. Rejlander for the trouble
which he has taken in photographing for me various expressions and gestures. I
am also indebted to Herr Kindermann, of Hamburg, for the loan of some excellent
negatives of crying infants; and to Dr. Wallich for a charming one of a smiling
girl. I have already expressed my obligations to Dr. Duchenne for generously
permitting me to have some of his large photographs copied and reduced. All
these photographs have been printed by the Heliotype process, and the accuracy
of the copy is thus guaranteed. These plates are referred to by Roman numerals.
I am also greatly
indebted to Mr. T. W. Wood for the extreme pains which he has taken in drawing
from life the expressions of various animals. A distinguished artist, Mr.
Riviere, has had the kindness to give me two drawings of dogs--one in a hostile
and the other in a humble and caressing frame of mind. Mr. A. May has also
given me two similar sketches of dogs. Mr. Cooper has taken much care in
cutting the blocks. Some of the photographs and drawings, namely, those by Mr.
May, and those by Mr. Wolf of the Cynopithecus, were first reproduced by Mr.
Cooper on wood by means of photography, and then engraved: by this means almost
complete fidelity is ensured.
[1] J. Parsons, in his
paper in the Appendix to the `Philosophical Transactions' for 1746, p. 41,
gives a list of forty- one old authors who have written on Expression.
[2] Conférences sur
l'expression des différents Caractères des Passions.' Paris, 4to, 1667. I
always quote from the republication of the `Conférences' in the edition of
Lavater, by Moreau, which appeared in 1820, as given in vol. ix. p. 257.
[3] `Discours par
Pierre Camper sur le moyen de représenter les diverses passions,' &c. 1792.
[4] I always quote from
the third edition, 1844, which was published after the death of Sir C. Bell,
and contains his latest corrections. The first edition of 1806 is much inferior
in merit, and does not include some of his more important views.
[5] `De la Physionomie
et de la Parole,' par Albert Lemoine, 1865, p. 101.
[6] `L'Art de connaître
les Hommes,' &c., par G. Lavater. The earliest edition of this work, referred
to in the preface to the edition of 1820 in ten volumes, as containing the
observations of M. Moreau, is said to have been published in 1807; and I have
no doubt that this is correct, because the `Notice sur Lavater' at the
commencement of volume i. is dated April 13, 1806. In some bibliographical
works, however, the date of 1805-1809 is given, but it seems impossible that
1805 can be correct. Dr. Duchenne remarks (`Mécanisme de la Physionomie
Humaine,'--8vo edit. 1862, p. 5, and `Archives Générales de Médecine,' Jan. et
Fév. 1862) that M. Moreau "a composé pour son ouvrage un article
important," &c., in the year 1805; and I find in volume i. of the
edition of 1820 passages bearing the dates of December 12, 1805, and another
January 5, 1806, besides that of April 13, 1806, above referred to. In
consequence of some of these passages having thus been composed in 1805, Dr.
Duchenne assigns to M. Moreau the priority over Sir C. Bell, whose work, as we
have seen, was published in 1806. This is a very unusual manner of determining
the priority of scientific works; but such questions are of extremely little
importance in comparison with their relative merits. The passages above quoted
from M. Moreau and from Le Brun are taken in this and all other cases from the
edition of 1820 of Lavater, tom. iv. p. 228, and tom. ix. p. 279.
[7] `Handbuch der
Systematischen Anatomie des Menschen.' Band I. Dritte Abtheilung, 1858.
[8] `The Senses and the
Intellect,' 2nd edit. 1864, pp. 96 and 288. The preface to the first edition of
this work is dated June, 1855. See also the 2nd edition of Mr. Bain's work on
the `Emotions and Will.'
[9] `The Anatomy of
Expression,' 3rd edit. p. 121.
[10] `Essays,
Scientific, Political, and Speculative,' Second Series, 1863, p. 111. There is
a discussion on Laughter in the First Series of Essays, which discussion seems
to me of very inferior value.
[11] Since the
publication of the essay just referred to, Mr. Spencer has written another, on
"Morals and Moral Sentiments," in the `Fortnightly Review,' April 1,
1871, p. 426. He has, also, now published his final conclusions in vol. ii. of
the second edit. of the `Principles of Psychology,' 1872, p. 539. I may state,
in order that I may not be accused of trespassing on Mr. Spencer's domain, that
I announced in my `Descent of Man,' that I had then written a part of the
present volume: my first MS. notes on the subject of expression bear the date
of the year 1838.
[12] `Anatomy of
Expression,' 3rd edit. pp. 98, 121, 131.
[13] Professor Owen
expressly states (Proc. Zoolog. Soc. 1830, p. 28) that this is the case with
respect to the Orang, and specifies all the more important muscles which are
well known to serve with man for the expression of his feelings. See, also, a
description of several of the facial muscles in the Chimpanzee, by Prof.
Macalister, in `Annals and Magazine of Natural History,' vol. vii. May, 1871,
p. 342.
[14] `Anatomy of
Expression,' pp. 121, 138.
[15] `De la
Physionomie,' pp. 12, 73.
[16] `Mécanisme de la
Physionomie Humaine,' 8vo edit. p. 31.
[17] `Elements of
Physiology,' English translation, vol. ii. p. 934.
[18] "Anatomy of
Expression,' 3rd edit. p. 198.
[19] See remarks to
this effect in Lessing's `Lacooon,' translated by W. Ross, 1836, p. 19.
[20] Mr. Partridge in Todd's
`Cyclopædia of Anatomy and Physiology,' vol. ii. p. 227.
[21] `La Physionomie,'
par G. Lavater, tom. iv. 1820, p. 274. On the number of the facial muscles, see
vol. iv. pp. 209-211.
[22] " `Mimik und
Physiognomik,' 1867, s. 91.
I WILL begin by giving
the three Principles, which appear to me to account for most of the expressions
and gestures involuntarily used by man and the lower animals, under the
influence of various emotions and sensations.[1] I arrived, however, at these
three Principles only at the close of my observations. They will be discussed
in the present and two following chapters in a general manner. Facts observed
both with man and the lower animals will here be made use of; but the latter
facts are preferable, as less likely to deceive us. In the fourth and fifth
chapters, I will describe the special expressions of some of the lower animals;
and in the succeeding chapters those of man. Everyone will thus be able to
judge for himself, how far my three principles throw light on the theory of the
subject. It appears to me that so many expressions are thus explained in a
fairly satisfactory manner, that probably all will hereafter be found to come
under the same or closely analogous heads. I need hardly premise that movements
or changes in any part of the body,--as the wagging of a dog's tail, the
drawing back of a horse's ears, the shrugging of a man's shoulders, or the
dilatation of the capillary vessels of the skin,-- may all equally well serve
for expression. The three Principles are as follows.
I. The principle of
serviceable associated Habits.-- Certain complex actions are of direct or
indirect service under certain states of the mind, in order to relieve or
gratify certain sensations, desires, &c.; and whenever the same state of
mind is induced, however feebly, there is a tendency through the force of habit
and association for the same movements to be performed, though they may not
then be of the least use. Some actions ordinarily associated through habit with
certain states of the mind may be partially repressed through the will, and in
such cases the muscles which are least under the separate control of the will
are the most liable still to act, causing movements which we recognize as
expressive. In certain other cases the checking of one habitual movement
requires other slight movements; and these are likewise expressive.
II. The principle of
Antithesis.--Certain states of the mind lead to certain habitual actions, which
are of service, as under our first principle. Now when a directly opposite
state of mind is induced, there is a strong and involuntary tendency to the
performance of movements of a directly opposite nature, though these are of no
use; and such movements are in some cases highly expressive.
III. The principle of
actions due to the constitution of the Nervous System, independently from the
first of the Will, and independently to a certain extent of Habit. ----When the
sensorium is strongly excited, nerve-force is generated in excess, and is
transmitted in certain definite directions, depending on the connection of the
nerve-cells, and partly on habit: or the supply of nerve-force may, as it
appears, be interrupted. Effects are thus produced which we recognize as
expressive. This third principle may, for the sake of brevity, be called that
of the direct action of the nervous system.
With respect to our
first Principle, it is notorious how powerful is the force of habit. The most
complex and difficult movements can in time be performed without the least
effort or consciousness. It is not positively known how it comes that habit is
so efficient in facilitating complex movements; but physiologists admit[2]
"that the conducting power of the nervous fibres increases with the
frequency of their excitement." This applies to the nerves of motion and
sensation, as well as to those connected with the act of thinking. That some
physical change is produced in the nerve-cells or nerves which are habitually
used can hardly be doubted, for otherwise it is impossible to understand how
the tendency to certain acquired movements is inherited. That they are
inherited we see with horses in certain transmitted paces, such as cantering
and ambling, which are not natural to them,--in the pointing of young pointers
and the setting of young setters--in the peculiar COMEBACK manner of flight of
certain breeds of the pigeon, &c. We have analogous cases with mankind in
the inheritance of tricks or unusual gestures, to which we shall presently
recur. To those who admit the gradual evolution of species, a most striking
instance of the perfection with which the most difficult consensual movements
can be transmitted, is afforded by the humming-bird Sphinx-moth (Macroglossa);
for this moth, shortly after its emergence from the cocoon, as shown by the
bloom on its unruffled scales, may be seen poised stationary in the air, with
its long hair--like proboscis uncurled and inserted into the minute orifices of
flowers; and no one, I believe, has ever seen this moth learning to perform its
difficult task, which requires such unerring aim.
When there exists an
inherited or instinctive tendency to the performance of an action, or an
inherited taste for certain kinds of food, some degree of habit in the
individual is often or generally requisite. We find this in the paces of the
horse, and to a certain extent in the pointing of dogs; although some young
dogs point excellently the first time they are taken out, yet they often
associate the proper inherited attitude with a wrong odour, and even with
eyesight. I have heard it asserted that if a calf be allowed to suck its mother
only once, it is much more difficult afterwards to rear it by hand.[3]
Caterpillars which have been fed on the leaves of one kind of tree, have been
known to perish from hunger rather than to eat the leaves of another tree,
although this afforded them their proper food, under a state of nature;[4] and
so it is in many other cases.
The power of
Association is admitted by everyone. Mr. Bain remarks, that "actions,
sensations and states of feeling, occurring together or in close succession,
tend to grow together, or cohere, in such a way that when any one of them is
afterwards presented to the mind, the others are apt to be brought up in
idea."[5] It is so important for our purpose fully to recognize that
actions readily become associated with other actions and with various states of
the mind, that I will give a good many instances, in the first place relating
to man, and afterwards to the lower animals. Some of the instances are of a
very trifling nature, but they are as good for our purpose as more important
habits. It is known to everyone how difficult, or even impossible it is, without
repeated trials, to move the limbs in certain opposed directions which have
never been practised. Analogous cases occur with sensations, as in the common
experiment of rolling a marble beneath the tips of two crossed fingers, when it
feels exactly like two marbles. Everyone protects himself when falling to the
ground by extending his arms, and as Professor Alison has remarked, few can
resist acting thus, when voluntarily falling on a soft bed. A man when going
out of doors puts on his gloves quite unconsciously; and this may seem an
extremely simple operation, but he who has taught a child to put on gloves,
knows that this is by no means the case.
When our minds are much
affected, so are the movements of our bodies; but here another principle
besides habit, namely the undirected overflow of nerve-force, partially comes
into play. Norfolk, in speaking of Cardinal Wolsey, says--
"Some strange
commotion Is in his brain; he bites his lip and starts; Stops on a sudden,
looks upon the ground, Then, lays his finger on his temple: straight, Springs
out into fast gait; then, stops again, Strikes his breast hard; and anon, he
casts His eye against the moon: in most strange postures We have seen him set
himself."--Hen. VIII., act 3, sc. 2.
A vulgar man often scratches
his head when perplexed in mind; and I believe that he acts thus from habit, as
if he experienced a slightly uncomfortable bodily sensation, namely, the
itching of his head, to which he is particularly liable, and which he thus
relieves. Another man rubs his eyes when perplexed, or gives a little cough
when embarrassed, acting in either case as if he felt a slightly uncomfortable
sensation in his eyes or windpipe.[6]
From the continued use
of the eyes, these organs are especially liable to be acted on through
association under various states of the mind, although there is manifestly
nothing to be seen. A man, as Gratiolet remarks, who vehemently rejects a
proposition, will almost certainly shut his eyes or turn away his face; but if
he accepts the proposition, he will nod his head in affirmation and open his
eyes widely. The man acts in this latter case as if he clearly saw the thing,
and in the former case as if he did not or would not see it. I have noticed
that persons in describing a horrid sight often shut their eyes momentarily and
firmly, or shake their heads, as if not to see or to drive away something
disagreeable; and I have caught myself, when thinking in the dark of a horrid
spectacle, closing my eyes firmly. In looking suddenly at any object, or in
looking all around, everyone raises his eyebrows, so that the eyes may be
quickly and widely opened; and Duchenne remarks that[7] a person in trying to
remember something often raises his eyebrows, as if to see it. A Hindoo
gentleman made exactly the same remark to Mr. Erskine in regard to his
countrymen. I noticed a young lady earnestly trying to recollect a painter's
name, and she first looked to one corner of the ceiling and then to the
opposite corner, arching the one eyebrow on that side; although, of course,
there was nothing to be seen there.
In most of the
foregoing cases, we can understand how the associated movements were acquired
through habit; but with some individuals, certain strange gestures or tricks
have arisen in association with certain states of the mind, owing to wholly
inexplicable causes, and are undoubtedly inherited. I have elsewhere given one
instance from my own observation of an extraordinary and complex gesture,
associated with pleasurable feelings, which was transmitted from a father to
his daughter, as well as some other analogous facts.[8]{footnote continues:} is
of peculiar interest, because it occurs only during sound sleep, and therefore
cannot be due to imitation, but must be altogether natural. The particulars are
perfectly trustworthy, for I have enquired fully into them, and speak from
abundant and independent evidence. A gentleman of considerable position was
found by his wife to have the curious trick, when he lay fast asleep on his
back in bed, of raising his right arm slowly in front of his face, up to his
forehead, and then dropping it with a jerk, so that the wrist fell heavily on
the bridge of his nose. The trick did not occur every night, but occasionally,
and was independent of any ascertained cause. Sometimes it was repeated
incessantly for an hour or more. The gentleman's nose was prominent, and its
bridge often became sore from the blows which it received. At one time an
awkward sore was produced, that was long in healing, on account of the recurrence,
night after night, of the blows which first caused it. His wife had to remove
the button from the wrist of his night-gown as it made severe scratches, and
some means were attempted of tying his arm.
"Many years after
his death, his son married a lady who had never heard of the family incident.
She, however, observed precisely the same peculiarity in her husband; but his
nose, from not being particularly prominent, has never as yet suffered from the
blows. The trick does not occur when he is half-asleep, as, for example, when
dozing in his arm-chair, but the moment he is fast asleep it is apt to begin.
It is, as with his father, intermittent; sometimes ceasing for many nights, and
sometimes almost incessant during a part of every night. It is performed, as it
was by his father, with his right hand.
"One of his
children, a girl, has inherited the same trick. She performs it, likewise, with
the right hand, but in a slightly modified form; for, after raising the arm,
she does not allow the wrist to drop upon the bridge of the nose, but the palm
of the half-closed hand falls over and down the nose, striking it rather
rapidly. It is also very intermittent with this child, not occurring for
periods of some months, but sometimes occurring almost incessantly." {end
of long footnote} Another curious instance of an odd inherited movement,
associated with the wish to obtain an object, will be given in the course of
this volume.
There are other actions
which are commonly performed under certain circumstances, independently of
habit, and which seem to be due to imitation or some sort of sympathy. Thus
persons cutting anything with a pair of scissors may be seen to move their jaws
simultaneously with the blades of the scissors. Children learning to write
often twist about their tongues as their fingers move, in a ridiculous fashion.
When a public singer suddenly becomes a little hoarse, many of those present
may be heard, as I have been assured by a gentleman on whom I can rely, to
clear their throats; but here habit probably comes into play, as we clear our
own throats under similar circumstances. I have also been told that at leaping
matches, as the performer makes his spring, many of the spectators, generally
men and boys, move their feet; but here again habit probably comes into play,
for it is very doubtful whether women would thus act.
Reflex actions--Reflex
actions, in the strict sense of the term, are due to the excitement of a
peripheral nerve, which transmits its influence to certain nerve-cells, and
these in their turn excite certain muscles or glands into action; and all this
may take place without any sensation or consciousness on our part, though often
thus accompanied. As many reflex actions are highly expressive, the subject
must here be noticed at some little length. We shall also see that some of them
graduate into, and can hardly be distinguished from actions which have arisen
through habit? Coughing and sneezing are familiar instances of reflex actions.
With infants the first act of respiration is often a sneeze, although this
requires the co-ordinated movement of numerous muscles. Respiration is partly
voluntary, but mainly reflex, and is performed in the most natural and best
manner without the interference of the will. A vast number of complex movements
are reflex. As good an instance as can be given is the often-quoted one of a
decapitated frog, which cannot of course feel, and cannot consciously perform,
any movement. Yet if a drop of acid be placed on the lower surface of the thigh
of a frog in this state, it will rub off the drop with the upper surface of the
foot of the same leg. If this foot be cut off, it cannot thus act. "After
some fruitless efforts, therefore, it gives up trying in that way, seems
restless, as though, says Pflüger, it was seeking some other way, and at last
it makes use of the foot of the other leg and succeeds in rubbing off the acid.
Notably we have here not merely contractions of muscles, but combined and
harmonized contractions in due sequence for a special purpose. These are
actions that have all the appearance of being guided by intelligence and
instigated by will in an animal, the recognized organ of whose intelligence and
will has been removed."[10]
We see the difference
between reflex and voluntary movements in very young children not being able to
perform, as I am informed by Sir Henry Holland, certain acts somewhat analogous
to those of sneezing and coughing, namely, in their not being able to blow
their noses (i. e. to compress the nose and blow violently through the
passage), and in their not being able to clear their throats of phlegm. They
have to learn to perform these acts, yet they are performed by us, when a
little older, almost as easily as reflex actions. Sneezing and coughing,
however, can be controlled by the will only partially or not at all; whilst the
clearing the throat and blowing the nose are completely under our command.
When we are conscious
of the presence of an irritating particle in our nostrils or windpipe--that is,
when the same sensory nerve-cells are excited, as in the case of sneezing and
coughing--we can voluntarily expel the particle by forcibly driving air through
these passages; but we cannot do this with nearly the same force, rapidity, and
precision, as by a reflex action. In this latter case the sensory nerve-cells
apparently excite the motor nerve-cells without any waste of power by first
communicating with the cerebral hemispheres--the seat of our consciousness and
volition. In all cases there seems to exist a profound antagonism between the
same movements, as directed by the will and by a reflex stimulant, in the force
with which they are performed and in the facility with which they are excited.
As Claude Bernard asserts, "L'influence du cerveau tend donc à entraver
les mouvements réflexes, à limiter leur force et leur étendue."[11]
The conscious wish to
perform a reflex action sometimes stops or interrupts its performance, though
the proper sensory nerves may be stimulated. For instance, many years ago I
laid a small wager with a dozen young men that they would not sneeze if they
took snuff, although they all declared that they invariably did so; accordingly
they all took a pinch, but from wishing much to succeed, not one sneezed,
though their eyes watered, and all, without exception, had to pay me the wager.
Sir H. Holland remarks[12] that attention paid to the act of swallowing
interferes with the proper movements; from which it probably follows, at least
in part, that some persons find it so difficult to swallow a pill.
Another familiar
instance of a reflex action is the involuntary closing of the eyelids when the
surface of the eye is touched. A similar winking movement is caused when a blow
is directed towards the face; but this is an habitual and not a strictly reflex
action, as the stimulus is conveyed through the mind and not by the excitement
of a peripheral nerve. The whole body and head are generally at the same time
drawn suddenly backwards. These latter movements, however, can be prevented, if
the danger does not appear to the imagination imminent; but our reason telling
us that there is no danger does not suffice. I may mention a trifling fact,
illustrating this point, and which at the time amused me. I put my face close
to the thick glass-plate in front of a puff-adder in the Zoological Gardens,
with the firm determination of not starting back if the snake struck at me;
but, as soon as the blow was struck, my resolution went for nothing, and I
jumped a yard or two backwards with astonishing rapidity. My will and reason
were powerless against the imagination of a danger which had never been
experienced.
The violence of a start
seems to depend partly on the vividness of the imagination, and partly on the
condition, either habitual or temporary, of the nervous system. He who will
attend to the starting of his horse, when tired and fresh, will perceive how
perfect is the gradation from a mere glance at some unexpected object, with a
momentary doubt whether it is dangerous, to a jump so rapid and violent, that
the animal probably could not voluntarily whirl round in so rapid a manner. The
nervous system of a fresh and highly-fed horse sends its order to the motory
system so quickly, that no time is allowed for him to consider whether or not
the danger is real. After one violent start, when he is excited and the blood
flows freely through his brain, he is very apt to start again; and so it is, as
I have noticed, with young infants.
A start from a sudden
noise, when the stimulus is conveyed through the auditory nerves, is always
accompanied in grown-up persons by the winking of the eyelids.[13] I observed,
however, that though my infants started at sudden sounds, when under a
fortnight old, they certainly did not always wink their eyes, and I believe
never did so. The start of an older infant apparently represents a vague
catching hold of something to prevent falling. I shook a pasteboard box close
before the eyes of one of my infants, when 114 days old, and it did not in the
least wink; but when I put a few comfits into the box, holding it in the same
position as before, and rattled them, the child blinked its eyes violently
every time, and started a little. It was obviously impossible that a
carefully-guarded infant could have learnt by experience that a rattling sound
near its eyes indicated danger to them. But such experience will have been
slowly gained at a later age during a long series of generations; and from what
we know of inheritance, there is nothing improbable in the transmission of a
habit to the offspring at an earlier age than that at which it was first
acquired by the parents.
From the foregoing
remarks it seems probable that some actions, which were at first performed
consciously, have become through habit and association converted into reflex
actions, and are now so firmly fixed and inherited, that they are performed,
even when not of the least use,[14] as often as the same causes arise, which
originally excited them in us through the volition. In such cases the sensory
nerve-cells excite the motor cells, without first communicating with those
cells on which our consciousness and volition depend. It is probable that
sneezing and coughing were originally acquired by the habit of expelling, as
violently as possible, any irritating particle from the sensitive air-passages.
As far as time is concerned, there has been more than enough for these habits
to have become innate or converted into reflex actions; for they are common to
most or all of the higher quadrupeds, and must therefore have been first
acquired at a very remote period. Why the act of clearing the throat is not a
reflex action, and has to be learnt by our children, I cannot pretend to say;
but we can see why blowing the nose on a handkerchief has to be learnt.
It is scarcely credible
that the movements of a headless frog, when it wipes off a drop of acid or
other object from its thigh, and which movements are so well coordinated for a
special purpose, were not at first performed voluntarily, being afterwards
rendered easy through long-continued habit so as at last to be performed
unconsciously, or independently of the cerebral hemispheres.
So again it appears
probable that starting was originally acquired by the habit of jumping away as
quickly as possible from danger, whenever any of our senses gave us warning.
Starting, as we have seen, is accompanied by the blinking of the eyelids so as
to protect the eyes, the most tender and sensitive organs of the body; and it
is, I believe, always accompanied by a sudden and forcible inspiration, which
is the natural preparation for any violent effort. But when a man or horse
starts, his heart beats wildly against his ribs, and here it may be truly said
we have an organ which has never been under the control of the will, partaking
in the general reflex movements of the body. To this point, however, I shall
return in a future chapter.
The contraction of the
iris, when the retina is stimulated by a bright light, is another instance of a
movement, which it appears cannot possibly have been at first voluntarily performed
and then fixed by habit; for the iris is not known to be under the conscious
control of the will in any animal. In such cases some explanation, quite
distinct from habit, will have to be discovered. The radiation of nerve-force
from strongly-excited nerve-cells to other connected cells, as in the case of a
bright light on the retina causing a sneeze, may perhaps aid us in
understanding how some reflex actions originated. A radiation of nerve-force of
this kind, if it caused a movement tending to lessen the primary irritation, as
in the case of the contraction of the iris preventing too much light from
falling on the retina, might afterwards have been taken advantage of and
modified for this special purpose.
It further deserves
notice that reflex actions are in all probability liable to slight variations,
as are all corporeal structures and instincts; and any variations which were
beneficial and of sufficient importance, would tend to be preserved and
inherited. Thus reflex actions, when once gained for one purpose, might
afterwards be modified independently of the will or habit, so as to serve for
some distinct purpose. Such cases would be parallel with those which, as we
have every reason to believe, have occurred with many instincts; for although some
instincts have been developed simply through long-continued and inherited
habit, other highly complex ones have been developed through the preservation
of variations of pre-existing instincts--that is, through natural selection.
I have discussed at some
little length, though as I am well aware, in a very imperfect manner, the
acquirement of reflex actions, because they are often brought into play in
connection with movements expressive of our emotions; and it was necessary to
show that at least some of them might have been Erst acquired through the will
in order to satisfy a desire, or to relieve a disagreeable sensation.
Associated habitual
movements in the lower animals. --I have already given in the case of Man
several instances of movements associated with various states of the mind or
body, which are now purposeless, but which were originally of use, and are
still of use under certain circumstances. As this subject is very important for
us, I will here give a considerable number of analogous facts, with reference
to animals; although many of them are of a very trifling nature. My object is
to show that certain movements were originally performed for a definite end,
and that, under nearly the same circumstances, they are still pertinaciously
performed through habit when not of the least use. That the tendency in most of
the following cases is inherited, we may infer from such actions being
performed in the same manner by all the individuals, young and old, of he same
species. We shall also see that they are excited by the most diversified, often
circuitous, and sometimes mistaken associations.
Dogs, when they wish to
go to sleep on a carpet or other hard surface, generally turn round and round
and scratch the ground with their fore-paws in a senseless manner, as if they
intended to trample down the grass and scoop out a hollow, as no doubt their
wild parents did, when they lived on open grassy plains or in the woods.
Jackals, fennecs, and other allied animals in the Zoological Gardens, treat
their straw in this manner; but it is a rather odd circumstance that the
keepers, after observing for some months, have never seen the wolves thus
behave. A semi-idiotic dog--and an animal in this condition would be
particularly liable to follow a senseless habit--was observed by a friend to
turn completely round on a carpet thirteen times before going to sleep.
Many carnivorous
animals, as they crawl towards their prey and prepare to rush or spring on it,
lower their heads and crouch, partly, as it would appear, to hide themselves,
and partly to get ready for their rush; and this habit in an exaggerated form
has become hereditary in our pointers and setters. Now I have noticed scores of
times that when two strange dogs meet on an open road, the one which first sees
the other, though at the distance of one or two hundred yards, after the first
glance always lowers its bead, generally crouches a little, or even lies down;
that is, he takes the proper attitude for concealing himself and for making a
rush or spring, although the road is quite open and The distance great. Again,
dogs of all kinds when intently watching and slowly approaching their prey,
frequently keep one of their fore-legs doubled up for a long time, ready for
the next cautious step; and this is eminently characteristic of the pointer.
But from habit they behave in exactly the same manner whenever their attention
is aroused (fig. 4). I have seen a dog at the foot of a high wall, listening
attentively to a sound on the opposite side, with one leg doubled up; and in
this case there could have been no intention of making a cautious approach.
Dogs after voiding
their excrement often make with all four feet a few scratches backwards, even
on a bare stone pavement, as if for the purpose of covering up their excrement
with earth, in nearly the same manner as do cats. Wolves and jackals behave in
the Zoological Gardens in exactly the same manner, yet, as I am assured by the
keepers, neither wolves, jackals, nor foxes, when they have the means of doing
so, ever cover up their excrement, any more than do dogs. All these animals,
however, bury superfluous food. Hence, if we rightly understand the meaning of
the above cat-like habit, of which there can be little doubt, we have a
purposeless remnant of an habitual movement, which was originally followed by
some remote progenitor of the dog-genus for a definite purpose, and which has
been retained for a prodigious length of time.
Dogs and jackals[15]
take much pleasure in rolling and rubbing their necks and backs on carrion. The
odour seems delightful to them, though dogs at least do not eat carrion. Mr.
Bartlett has observed wolves for me, and has given them carrion, but has never
seen them roll on it. I have heard it remarked, and I believe it to be true,
that the larger dogs, which are probably descended from wolves, do not so often
roll in carrion as do smaller dogs, which are probably descended from jackals.
When a piece of brown biscuit is offered to a terrier of mine and she is not
hungry (and I have heard of similar instances), she first tosses it about and
worries it, as if it were a rat or other prey; she then repeatedly rolls on it
precisely as if it were a piece of carrion, and at last eats it. It would
appear that an imaginary relish has to be given to the distasteful morsel; and
to effect this the dog acts in his habitual manner, as if the biscuit was a
live animal or smelt like carrion, though he knows better than we do that this
is not the case. I have seen this same terrier act in the same manner after killing
a little bird or mouse.
Dogs scratch themselves
by a rapid movement of one of their hind-feet; and when their backs are rubbed
with a stick, so strong is the habit, that they cannot help rapidly scratching
the air or the ground in a useless and ludicrous manner. The terrier just
alluded to, when thus scratched with a stick, will sometimes show her delight
by another habitual movement, namely, by licking the air as if it were my hand.
Horses scratch
themselves by nibbling those parts of their bodies which they can reach with
their teeth; but more commonly one horse shows another where he wants to be
scratched, and they then nibble each other. A friend whose attention I had
called to the subject, observed that when he rubbed his horse's neck, the
animal protruded his head, uncovered his teeth, and moved his jaws, exactly as
if nibbling another horse's neck, for he could never have nibbled his own neck.
If a horse is much tickled, as when curry-combed, his wish to bite something
becomes so intolerably strong, that he will clatter his teeth together, and
though not vicious, bite his groom. At the same time from habit he closely
depresses his ears, so as to protect them from being bitten, as if he were
fighting with another horse.
A horse when eager to
start on a journey makes the nearest approach which he can to the habitual
movement of progression by pawing the ground. Now when horses in their stalls
are about to be fed and are eager for their corn, they paw the pavement or the
straw. Two of my horses thus behave when they see or hear the corn given to
their neighbours. But here we have what may almost be called a true expression,
as pawing the ground is universally recognized as a sign of eagerness.
Cats cover up their
excrements of both kinds with earth; and my grandfather[16]{sic} saw a kitten
scraping ashes over a spoonful of pure water spilt on the hearth; so that here
an habitual or instinctive action was falsely excited, not by a previous act or
by odour, but by eyesight. It is well known that cats dislike wetting their
feet, owing, it is probable, to their having aboriginally inhabited the dry
country of Egypt; and when they wet their feet they shake them violently. My
daughter poured some water into a glass close to the head of a kitten; and it
immediately shook its feet in the usual manner; so that here we have an
habitual movement falsely excited by an associated sound instead of by the
sense of touch.
Kittens, puppies, young
pigs and probably many other young animals, alternately push with their
forefeet against the mammary glands of their mothers, to excite a freer
secretion of milk, or to make it flow. Now it is very common with young cats,
and not at all rare with old cats of the common and Persian breeds (believed by
some naturalists to be specifically extinct), when comfortably lying on a warm
shawl or other soft substance, to pound it quietly and alternately with their
fore-feet; their toes being spread out and claws slightly protruded, precisely
as when sucking their mother. That it is the same movement is clearly shown by
their often at the same time taking a bit of the shawl into their mouths and
sucking it; generally closing their eyes and purring from delight. This curious
movement is commonly excited only in association with the sensation of a warm
soft surface; but I have seen an old cat, when pleased by having its back
scratched, pounding the air with its feet in the same manner; so that this
action has almost become the expression of a pleasurable sensation.
Having referred to the
act of sucking, I may add that this complex movement, as well as the alternate
protrusion of the fore-feet, are reflex actions; for they are performed if a
finger moistened with milk is placed in the mouth of a puppy, the front part of
whose brain has been removed.[17] It has recently been stated in France, that
the action of sucking is excited solely through the sense of smell, so that if
the olfactory nerves of a puppy are destroyed, it never sucks. In like manner
the wonderful power which a chicken possesses only a few hours after being
hatched, of picking up small particles of food, seems to be started into action
through the sense of hearing; for with chickens hatched by artificial heat, a
good observer found that "making a noise with the finger-nail against a
board, in imitation of the hen-mother, first taught them to peck at their
meat."[18]
I will give only one
other instance of an habitual and purposeless movement. The Sheldrake (Tadorna)
feeds on the sands left uncovered by the tide, and when a worm-cast is
discovered, "it begins patting the ground with its feet, dancing as it
were, over the hole;" and this makes the worm come to the surface. Now Mr.
St. John says, that when his tame Sheldrakes "came to ask for food, they
patted the ground in an impatient and rapid manner."[19] This therefore
may almost be considered as their expression of hunger. Mr. Bartlett informs me
that the Flamingo and the Kagu (Rhinochetus jubatus) when anxious to be fed,
beat the ground with their feet in the same odd manner. So again Kingfishers,
when they catch a fish, always beat it until it is killed; and in the
Zoological Gardens they always beat the raw meat, with which they are sometimes
fed, before devouring it.
We have now, I think,
sufficiently shown the truth of our first Principle, namely, that when any
sensation, desire, dislike, &c., has led during a long series of
generations to some voluntary movement, then a tendency to the performance of a
similar movement will almost certainly be excited, whenever the same, or any
analogous or associated sensation &c., although very weak, is experienced;
notwithstanding that the movement in this case may not be of the least use.
Such habitual movements are often, or generally inherited; and they then differ
but little from reflex actions. When we treat of the special expressions of
man, the latter part of our first Principle, as given at the commencement of
this chapter, will be seen to hold good; namely, that when movements,
associated through habit with certain states of the mind, are partially
repressed by the will, the strictly involuntary muscles, as well as those which
are least under the separate control of the will, are liable still to act; and
their action is often highly expressive. Conversely, when the will is
temporarily or permanently weakened, the voluntary muscles fail before the
involuntary. It is a fact familiar to pathologists, as Sir C. Bell remarks,[20]
"that when debility arises from affection of the brain, the influence is
greatest on those muscles which are, in their natural condition, most under the
command of the will." We shall, also, in our future chapters, consider
another proposition included in our first Principle; namely, that the checking
of one habitual movement sometimes requires other slight movements; these
latter serving as a means of expression.
[1] Mr. Herbert Spencer
(`Essays,' Second Series, 1863, p. 138) has drawn a clear distinction between
emotions and sensations, the latter being "generated in our corporeal
framework." He classes as Feelings both emotions and--sensations.
[2] Müller, `Elements
of Physiology,' Eng. translat. vol. ii. p. 939. See also Mr. H. Spencer's
interesting speculations on the same subject, and on the genesis of nerves, in
his `Principles of Biology,' vol. ii. p. 346; and in his `Principles of
Psychology,' 2nd edit. pp. 511-557.
[3] A remark to much
the same effect was made long ago by Hippocrates and by the illustrious Harvey;
for both assert that a young animal forgets in the course of a few days the art
of sucking, and cannot without some difficulty again acquire it. I give these
assertions on the authority of Dr. Darwin, `Zoonomia,' 1794, vol. i. p. 140.
[4] See for my
authorities, and for various analogous facts, `The Variation of Animals and
Plants under Domestication,' 1868, vol. ii. p. 304.
[5] `The Senses and the
Intellect,' 2nd edit. 1864, p. 332. Prof. Huxley remarks (`Elementary Lessons
in Physiology,' 5th edit. 1872, p. 306), "It may be laid down as a rule,
that, if any two mental states be called up together, or in succession, with
due frequency and vividness, the subsequent production of the one of them will
suffice to call up the other, and that whether we desire it or not."
[6] Gratiolet (`De la
Physionomie,' p. 324), in his discussion on this subject, gives many analogous
instances. See p. 42, on the opening and shutting of the eyes. Engel is quoted
(p. 323) on the changed paces of a man, as his thoughts change.
[7] `Mécanisme de la
Physionomie Humaine,' 1862, p. 17.
[8] `The Variation of
Animals and Plants under Domestication,' vol. ii. p. 6. The inheritance of
habitual gestures is so important for us, that I gladly avail myself of Mr. F.
Galton's permission to give in his own words the following remarkable
case:--"The following account of a habit occurring in individuals of three
consecutive generations
[9] Prof. Huxley
remarks (`Elementary Physiology,' 5th edit. p. 305) that reflex actions proper
to the spinal cord are natural; but, by the help of the brain, that is through
habit, an infinity of artificial reflex actions may be acquired. Virchow admits
(`Sammlung wissenschaft. Vorträge,' &c., "Ueber das Rückeninark,"
1871, ss. 24, 31) that some reflex actions can hardly be distinguished from
instincts; and, of the latter, it may be added, some cannot be distinguished
from inherited habits.
[10] "Dr.
Maudsley, `Body and Mind,' 1870, p. 8.
[11] "See the very
interesting discussion on the whole subject by Claude Bernard, `Tissus
Vivants,' 1866, p. 353-356.
[12] `Chapters on
Mental Physiology,' 1858, p. 85.
[13] Müller remarks
(`Elements of Physiology,' Eng. tr. vol. ii. p. 1311) on starting being always
accompanied by the closure of the eyelids.
[14] Dr. Maudsley
remarks (`Body and Mind,' p. 10) that "reflex movements which commonly
effect a useful end may, under the changed circumstances of disease, do great
mischief, becoming even the occasion of violent suffering and of a most painful
death."
[15] See Mr. F. H.
Salvin's account of a tame jackal in `Land and Water,' October, 1869.
[16]"Dr. Darwin,
`Zoonomia,' 1794, vol. i. p. 160. I find that the fact of cats protruding their
feet when pleased is also noticed (p. 151) in this work.
[17] Carpenter,
`Principles of Comparative Physiology,' 1854, p. 690, and Müller's `Elements of
Physiology,' Eng. translat. vol. ii. p. 936.
[18] Mowbray on
`Poultry,' 6th edit. 1830, p. 54.
[19] See the account
given by this excellent observer in `Wild Sports of the Highlands,' 1846, p.
142.
[20] `Philosophical
Translations,' 1823, p. 182.
WE will now consider
our second Principle, that of Antithesis. Certain states of the mind lead, as
we have seen in the last chapter, to certain habitual movements which were
primarily, or may still be, of service; and we shall find that when a directly
opposite state of mind is induced, there is a strong and involuntary tendency
to the performance of movements of a directly opposite nature, though these
have never been of any service. A few striking instances of antithesis will be
given, when we treat of the special expressions of man; but as, in these cases,
we are particularly liable to confound conventional or artificial gestures and
expressions with those which are innate or universal, and which alone deserve
to rank as true expressions, I will in the present chapter almost confine
myself to the lower animals.
When a dog approaches a
strange dog or man in a savage or hostile frame of mind be walks upright and
very stiffly; his head is slightly raised, or not much lowered; the tail is
held erect, and quite rigid; the hairs bristle, especially along the neck and
back; the pricked ears are directed forwards, and the eyes have a fixed stare:
(see figs. 5 and 7). These actions, as will hereafter be explained, follow from
the dog's intention to attack his enemy, and are thus to a large extent
intelligible. As he prepares to spring with a savage growl on his enemy, the
canine teeth are uncovered, and the ears are pressed close backwards on the
head; but with these latter actions, we are not here concerned. Let us now
suppose that the dog suddenly discovers that the man he is approaching, is not
a stranger, but his master; and let it be observed how completely and
instantaneously his whole bearing is reversed. Instead of walking upright, the
body sinks downwards or even crouches, and is thrown into flexuous movements;
his tail, instead of being held stiff and upright, is lowered and wagged from
side to side; his hair instantly becomes smooth; his ears are depressed and
drawn backwards, but not closely to the head; and his lips hang loosely. From
the drawing back of the ears, the eyelids become elongated, and the eyes no
longer appear round and staring. It should be added that the animal is at such
times in an excited condition from joy; and nerve-force will be generated in
excess, which naturally leads to action of some kind. Not one of the above
movements, so clearly expressive of affection, are of the least direct service
to the animal. They are explicable, as far as I can see, solely from being in
complete opposition or antithesis to the attitude and movements which, from
intelligible causes, are assumed when a dog intends to fight, and which
consequently are expressive of anger. I request the reader to look at the four
accompanying sketches, which have been given in order to recall vividly the
appearance of a dog under these two states of mind. It is, however, not a
little difficult to represent affection in a dog, whilst caressing his master
and wagging his tail, as the essence of the expression lies in the continuous
flexuous movements.
We will now turn to the
cat. When this animal is threatened by a dog, it arches its back in a
surprising manner, erects its hair, opens its mouth and spits. But we are not
here concerned with this well-known attitude, expressive of terror combined
with anger; we are concerned only with that of rage or anger. This is not often
seen, but may be observed when two cats are fighting together; and I have seen
it well exhibited by a savage cat whilst plagued by a boy. The attitude is almost
exactly the same as that of a tiger disturbed and growling over its food, which
every one must have beheld in menageries. The animal assumes a crouching
position, with the body extended; and the whole tail, or the tip alone, is
lashed or curled from side to side. The hair is not in the least erect. Thus
far, the attitude and movements are nearly the same as when the animal is
prepared to spring on its prey, and when, no doubt, it feels savage. But when
preparing to fight, there is this difference, that the ears are closely pressed
backwards; the mouth is partially opened, showing the teeth; the fore feet are
occasionally struck out with protruded claws; and the animal occasionally
utters a fierce growl. (See figs. 9 and 10.) All, or almost all these actions
naturally follow (as hereafter to be explained), from the cat's manner and
intention of attacking its enemy.
Let us now look at a
cat in a directly opposite frame of mind, whilst feeling affectionate and
caressing her master; and mark how opposite is her attitude in every respect.
She now stands upright with her back slightly arched, which makes the hair
appear rather rough, but it does not bristle; her tail, instead of being
extended and lashed from side to side, is held quite still and perpendicularly
upwards; her ears are erect and pointed; her mouth is closed; and she rubs
against her master with a purr instead of a growl. Let it further be observed
how widely different is the whole bearing of an affectionate cat from that of a
dog, when with his body crouching and flexuous, his tail lowered and wagging,
and ears depressed, he caresses his master. This contrast in the attitudes and
movements of these two carnivorous animals, under the same pleased and
affectionate frame of mind, can be explained, as it appears to me, solely by
their movements standing in complete antithesis to those which are naturally
assumed, when these animals feel savage and are prepared either to fight or to
seize their prey.
In these cases of the
dog and cat, there is every reason to believe that the gestures both of
hostility and affection are innate or inherited; for they are almost
identically the same in the different races of the species, and in all the
individuals of the same race, both young and old.
I will here give one
other instance of antithesis in expression. I formerly possessed a large dog,
who, like every other dog, was much pleased to go out walking. He showed his
pleasure by trotting gravely before me with high steps, head much raised,
moderately erected ears, and tail carried aloft but not stiffly. Not far from
my house a path branches off to the right, leading to the hot-house, which I
used often to visit for a few moments, to look at my experimental plants. This
was always a great disappointment to the dog, as he did not know whether I
should continue my walk; and the instantaneous and complete change of
expression which came over him as soon as my body swerved in the least towards
the path (and I sometimes tried this as an experiment) was laughable. His look
of dejection was known to every member of the family, and was called his
hot-house face. This consisted in the head drooping much, the whole body
sinking a little and remaining motionless; the ears and tail falling suddenly
down, but the tail was by no means wagged. With the falling of the ears and of
his great chaps, the eyes became much changed in appearance, and I fancied that
they looked less bright. His aspect was that of piteous, hopeless dejection;
and it was, as I have said, laughable, as the cause was so slight. Every detail
in his attitude was in complete opposition to his former joyful yet dignified
bearing; and can be explained, as it appears to me, in no other way, except
through the principle of antithesis. Had not the change been so instantaneous,
I should have attributed it to his lowered spirits affecting, as in the case of
man, the nervous system and circulation, and consequently the tone of his whole
muscular frame; and this may have been in part the cause.
We will now consider
how the principle of antithesis in expression has arisen. With social animals,
the power of intercommunication between the members of the same community,--and
with other species, between the opposite sexes, as well as between the young
and the old,--is of the highest importance to them. This is generally effected
by means of the voice, but it is certain that gestures and expressions are to a
certain extent mutually intelligible. Man not only uses inarticulate cries,
gestures, and expressions, but has invented articulate language; if, indeed,
the word invented can be applied to a process, completed by innumerable steps,
half-consciously made. Any one who has watched monkeys will not doubt that they
perfectly understand each other's gestures and expression, and to a large
extent, as Rengger asserts,[1] those of man. An animal when going to attack
another, or when afraid of another, often makes itself appear terrible, by
erecting its hair, thus increasing the apparent bulk of its body, by showing
its teeth, or brandishing its horns, or by uttering fierce sounds.
As the power of
intercommunication is certainly of high service to many animals, there is no à
priori improbability in the supposition, that gestures manifestly of an
opposite nature to those by which certain feelings are already expressed,
should at first have been voluntarily employed under the influence of an
opposite state of feeling. The fact of the gestures being now innate, would be
no valid objection to the belief that they were at first intentional; for if
practised during many generations, they would probably at last be inherited.
Nevertheless it is more than doubtful, as we shall immediately see, whether any
of the cases which come under our present head of antithesis, have thus
originated.
With conventional signs
which are not innate, such as those used by the deaf and dumb and by savages,
the principle of opposition or antithesis has been partially brought into play.
The Cistercian monks thought it sinful to speak, and as they could not avoid
holding some communication, they invented a gesture language, in which the
principle of opposition seems to have been employed.[2] Dr. Scott, of the
Exeter Deaf and Dumb Institution, writes to me that "opposites are greatly
used in teaching the deaf and dumb, who have a lively sense of them."
Nevertheless I have been surprised how few unequivocal instances can be
adduced. This depends partly on all the signs having commonly had some natural
origin; and partly on the practice of the deaf and dumb and of savages to
contract their signs as much as possible for the sake of rapidity?[3] Hence
their natural source or origin often becomes doubtful or is completely lost; as
is likewise the case with articulate language.
Many signs, moreover,
which plainly stand in opposition to each other, appear to have had on both
sides a significant origin. This seems to hold good with the signs used by the
deal and dumb for light and darkness, for strength and weakness, &c. In a
future chapter I shall endeavour to show that the opposite gestures of
affirmation and negation, namely, vertically nodding and laterally shaking the
head, have both probably had a natural beginning. The waving of the hand from
right to left, which is used as a negative by some savages, may have been
invented in imitation of shaking the head; but whether the opposite movement of
waving the hand in a straight line from the face, which is used in affirmation,
has arisen through antithesis or in some quite distinct manner, is doubtful.
If we now turn to the
gestures which are innate or common to all the individuals of the same species,
and which come under the present head of antithesis, it is extremely doubtful,
whether any of them were at first deliberately invented and consciously
performed. With mankind the best instance of a gesture standing in direct
opposition to other movements, naturally assumed under an opposite frame of
mind, is that of shrugging the shoulders. This expresses impotence or an
apology,-- something which cannot be done, or cannot be avoided. The gesture is
sometimes used consciously and voluntarily, but it is extremely improbable that
it was at first deliberately invented, and afterwards fixed by habit; for not
only do young children sometimes shrug their shoulders under the above states of
mind, but the movement is accompanied, as will be shown in a future chapter, by
various subordinate movements, which not one man in a thousand is aware of,
unless he has specially attended to the subject.
Dogs when approaching a
strange dog, may find it useful to show by their movements that they are
friendly, and do not wish to fight. When two young dogs in play are growling
and biting each other's faces and legs, it is obvious that they mutually
understand each other's gestures and manners. There seems, indeed, some degree
of instinctive knowledge in puppies and kittens, that they must not use their
sharp little teeth or claws too freely in their play, though this sometimes
happens and a squeal is the result; otherwise they would often injure each other's
eyes. When my terrier bites my hand in play, often snarling at the same time,
if he bites too hard and I say gently, gently, he goes on biting, but answers
me by a few wags of the tail, which seems to say "Never mind, it is all
fun." Although dogs do thus express, and may wish to express, to other
dogs and to man, that they are in a friendly state of mind, it is incredible
that they could ever have deliberately thought of drawing back and depressing
their ears, instead of holding them erect,--of lowering and wagging their
tails, instead of keeping them stiff and upright, &c., because they knew
that these movements stood in direct opposition to those assumed under an
opposite and savage frame of mind.
Again, when a cat, or
rather when some early progenitor of the species, from feeling affectionate
first slightly arched its back, held its tail perpendicularly upwards and
pricked its ears, can it be believed that the animal consciously wished thus to
show that its frame of mind was directly the reverse of that, when from being
ready to fight or to spring on its prey, it assumed a crouching attitude,
curled its tail from side to side and depressed its ears? Even still less can I
believe that my dog voluntarily put on his dejected attitude and "hot-house
face," which formed so complete a contrast to his previous cheerful
attitude and whole bearing. It cannot be supposed that he knew that I should
understand his expression, and that he could thus soften my heart and make me
give up visiting the hot-house.
Hence for the
development of the movements which come under the present head, some other
principle, distinct from the will and consciousness, must have intervened. This
principle appears to be that every movement which we have voluntarily performed
throughout our lives has required the action of certain muscles; and when we
have performed a directly opposite movement, an opposite set of muscles has
been habitually brought into play,--as in turning to the right or to the left,
in pushing away or pulling an object towards us, and in lifting or lowering a
weight. So strongly are our intentions and movements associated together, that
if we eagerly wish an object to move in any direction, we can hardly avoid
moving our bodies in the same direction, although we may be perfectly aware
that this can have no influence. A good illustration of this fact has already
been given in the Introduction, namely, in the grotesque movements of a young
and eager billiard-player, whilst watching the course of his ball. A man or
child in a passion, if he tells any one in a loud voice to begone, generally
moves his arm as if to push him away, although the offender may not be standing
near, and although there may be not the least need to explain by a gesture what
is meant. On the other hand, if we eagerly desire some one to approach us
closely, we act as if pulling him towards us; and so in innumerable other
instances.
As the performance of
ordinary movements of an opposite kind, under opposite impulses of the will,
has become habitual in us and in the lower animals, so when actions of one kind
have become firmly associated with any sensation or emotion, it appears natural
that actions of a directly opposite kind, though of no use, should be
unconsciously performed through habit and association, under the influence of a
directly opposite sensation or emotion. On this principle alone can I
understand how the gestures and expressions which come under the present head
of antithesis have originated. If indeed they are serviceable to man or to any
other animal, in aid of inarticulate cries or language, they will likewise be
voluntarily employed, and the habit will thus be strengthened. But whether or
not of service as a means of communication, the tendency to perform opposite
movements under opposite sensations or emotions would, if we may judge by
analogy, become hereditary through long practice; and there cannot be a doubt
that several expressive movements due to the principle of antithesis are
inherited.
[1] `Naturgeschichte
der Säugethiere von Paraguay,' 1830, s. 55.
[2] Mr. Tylor gives an
account of the Cistercian gesture-language in his `Early History of Mankind'
(2nd edit. 1870, p. 40), and makes some remarks on the principle of opposition
in gestures.
[3] See on this subject
Dr. W. R. Scott's interesting work, `The Deaf and Dumb,' 2nd edit. 1870, p. 12.
He says, "This contracting of natural gestures into much shorter gestures
than the natural expression requires, is very common amongst the deaf and dumb.
This contracted gesture is frequently so shortened as nearly to lose all
semblance of the natural one, but to the deaf and dumb who use it, it still has
the force of the original expression."
WE now come to our
third Principle, namely, that certain actions which we recognize as expressive
of certain states of the mind, are the direct result of the constitution of the
nervous system, and have been from the first independent of the will, and, to a
large extent, of habit. When the sensorium is strongly excited nerve-force is
generated in excess, and is transmitted in certain directions, dependent on the
connection of the nerve-cells, and, as far as the muscular system is concerned,
on the nature of the movements which have been habitually practised. Or the
supply of nerve-force may, as it appears, be interrupted. Of course every
movement which we make is determined by the constitution of the nervous system;
but actions performed in obedience to the will, or through habit, or through
the principle of antithesis, are here as far as possible excluded. Our present
subject is very obscure, but, from its importance, must be discussed at some
little length; and it is always advisable to perceive clearly our ignorance.
The most striking case,
though a rare and abnormal one, which can be adduced of the direct influence of
the nervous system, when strongly affected, on the body, is the loss of colour
in the hair, which has occasionally been observed after extreme terror or
grief. One authentic instance has been recorded, in the case of a man brought
out for execution in India, in which the change of colour was so rapid that it
was perceptible to the eye.[1]
Another good case is
that of the trembling of the muscles, which is common to man and to many, or
most, of the lower animals. Trembling is of no service, often of much
disservice, and cannot have been at first acquired through the will, and then
rendered habitual in association with any emotion. I am assured by an eminent
authority that young children do not tremble, but go into convulsions under the
circumstances which would induce excessive trembling in adults. Trembling is
excited in different individuals in very different degrees. and by the most
diversified causes,--by cold to the surface, before fever-fits, although the
temperature of the body is then above the normal standard; in blood-poisoning,
delirium tremens, and other diseases; by general failure of power in old age;
by exhaustion after excessive fatigue; locally from severe injuries, such as
burns; and, in an especial manner, by the passage of a catheter. Of all
emotions, fear notoriously is the most apt to induce trembling; but so do
occasionally great anger and joy. I remember once seeing a boy who had just
shot his first snipe on the wing, and his hands trembled to such a degree from
delight, that he could not for some time reload his gun; and I have heard of an
exactly similar case with an Australian savage, to whom a gun had been lent.
Fine music, from the vague emotions thus excited, causes a shiver to run down
the backs of some persons. There seems to be very little in common in the above
several physical causes and emotions to account for trembling; and Sir J.
Paget, to whom I am indebted for several of the above statements, informs me
that the subject is a very obscure one. As trembling is sometimes caused by
rage, long before exhaustion can have set in, and as it sometimes accompanies
great joy, it would appear that any strong excitement of the nervous system
interrupts the steady flow of nerve-force to the muscles.[2]
The manner in which the
secretions of the alimentary canal and of certain glands--as the liver,
kidneys, or mammæ are affected by strong emotions, is another excellent
instance of the direct action of the sensorium on these organs, independently
of the will or of any serviceable associated habit. There is the greatest
difference in different persons in the parts which are thus affected, and in
the degree of their affection.
The heart, which goes
on uninterruptedly beating night and day in so wonderful a manner, is extremely
sensitive to external stimulants. The great physiologist, Claude Bernard,[3]
has shown bow the least excitement of a sensitive nerve reacts on the heart;
even when a nerve is touched so slightly that no pain can possibly be felt by
the animal under experiment. Hence when the mind is strongly excited, we might
expect that it would instantly affect in a direct manner the heart; and this is
universally acknowledged and felt to be the case. Claude Bernard also
repeatedly insists, and this deserves especial notice, that when the heart is
affected it reacts on the brain; and the state of the brain again reacts
through the pneumo-gastric nerve on the heart; so that under any excitement
there will be much mutual action and reaction between these, the two most
important organs of the body.
The vaso-motor system,
which regulates the diameter of the small arteries, is directly acted on by the
sensorium, as we see when a man blushes from shame; but in this latter case the
checked transmission of nerve-force to the vessels of the face can, I think, be
partly explained in a curious manner through habit. We shall also be able to
throw some light, though very little, on the involuntary erection of the hair
under the emotions of terror and rage. The secretion of tears depends, no
doubt, on the connection of certain nerve-cells; but here again we can trace
some few of the steps by which the flow of nerve-force through the requisite
channels has become habitual under certain emotions.
A brief consideration
of the outward signs of some of the stronger sensations and emotions will best
serve to show us, although vaguely, in how complex a manner the principle under
consideration of the direct action of the excited nervous system of the body,
is combined with the principle of habitually associated, serviceable movements.
When animals suffer
from an agony of pain, they generally writhe about with frightful contortions;
and those which habitually use their voices utter piercing cries or groans.
Almost every muscle of the body is brought into strong action. With man the
mouth may be closely compressed, or more commonly the lips are retracted, with
the teeth clenched or ground together. There is said to be "gnashing of
teeth" in hell; and I have plainly heard the grinding of the molar teeth
of a cow which was suffering acutely from inflammation of the bowels. The
female hippopotamus in the Zoological Gardens, when she produced her young,
suffered greatly; she incessantly walked about, or rolled on her sides, opening
and closing her jaws, and clattering her teeth together.[4] With man the eyes
stare wildly as in horrified astonishment, or the brows are heavily contracted.
Perspiration bathes the body, and drops trickle down the face. The circulation
and respiration are much affected. Hence the nostrils are generally dilated and
often quiver; or the breath may be held until the blood stagnates in the purple
face. If the agony be severe and prolonged, these signs all change; utter
prostration follows, with fainting or convulsions.
A sensitive nerve when
irritated transmits some influence to the nerve-cell, whence it proceeds; and
this transmits its influence, first to the corresponding nerve- cell on the
opposite side of the body, and then upwards and downwards along the
cerebro-spinal column to other nerve-cells, to a greater or less extent, according
to the strength of the excitement; so that, ultimately, the whole nervous
system maybe affected.[5] This involuntary transmission of nerve-force may or
may not be accompanied by consciousness. Why the irritation of a nerve- cell
should generate or liberate nerve-force is not known; but that this is the case
seems to be the conclusion arrived at by all the greatest physiologists, such
as Müller, Virchow, Bernard, &c.[6] As Mr. Herbert Spencer remarks, it may
be received as an "unquestionable truth that, at any moment, the existing
quantity of liberated nerve-force, which in an inscrutable way produces in us
the state we call feeling, must expend itself in some direction--must generate
an equivalent manifestation of force somewhere;" so that, when the cerebro-spinal
system is highly excited and nerve-force is liberated in excess, it may be
expended in intense sensations, active thought, violent movements, or increased
activity of the glands.[7] Mr. Spencer further maintains that an "overflow
of nerve-force, undirected by any motive, will manifestly take the most
habitual routes; and, if these do not suffice, will next overflow into the less
habitual ones." Consequently the facial and respiratory muscles, which are
the most used, will be apt to be first brought into action; then those of the
upper extremities, next those of the lower, and finally those of the whole
body.[8]
An emotion may be very
strong, but it will have little tendency to induce movements of any kind, if it
has not commonly led to voluntary action for its relief or gratification; and
when movements are excited, their nature is, to a large extent, determined by
those which have often and voluntarily been performed for some definite end
under the same emotion. Great pain urges all animals, and has urged them during
endless generations, to make the most violent and diversified efforts to escape
from the cause of suffering. Even when a limb or other separate part of the
body is hurt, we often see a tendency to shake it, as if to shake off the cause,
though this may obviously be impossible. Thus a habit of exerting with the
utmost force all the muscles will have been established, whenever great
suffering is experienced. As the muscles of the chest and vocal organs are
habitually used, these will be particularly liable to be acted on, and loud,
harsh screams or cries will be uttered. But the advantage derived from outcries
has here probably come into play in an important manner; for the young of most
animals, when in distress or danger, call loudly to their parents for aid, as
do the members of the same community for mutual aid.
Another principle,
namely, the internal consciousness that the power or capacity of the nervous
system is limited, will have strengthened, though in a subordinate degree, the
tendency to violent action under extreme suffering. A man cannot think deeply
and exert his utmost muscular force. As Hippocrates long ago observed, if two
pains are felt at the same time, the severer one dulls the other. Martyrs, in
the ecstasy of their religious fervour have often, as it would appear, been
insensible to the most horrid tortures. Sailors who are going to be flogged
sometimes take a piece of lead into their mouths, in order to bite it with
their utmost force, and thus to bear the pain. Parturient women prepare to
exert their muscles to the utmost in order to relieve their sufferings.
We thus see that the
undirected radiation of nerve- force from the nerve-cells which are first
affected-- the long-continued habit of attempting by struggling to escape from
the cause of suffering--and the consciousness that voluntary muscular exertion
relieves pain, have all probably concurred in giving a tendency to the most
violent, almost convulsive, movements under extreme suffering; and such movements,
including those of the vocal organs, are universally recognized as highly
expressive of this condition.
As the mere touching of
a sensitive nerve reacts in a direct manner on the heart, severe pain will
obviously react on it in like manner, but far more energetically. Nevertheless,
even in this case, we must not overlook the indirect effects of habit on the
heart, as we shall see when we consider the signs of rage.
When a man suffers from
an agony of pain, the perspiration often trickles down his face; and I have
been assured by a veterinary surgeon that he has frequently seen drops falling
from the belly and running down the inside of the thighs of horses, and from
the bodies of cattle, when thus suffering. He has observed this, when there has
been no struggling which would account for the perspiration. The whole body of
the female hippopotamus, before alluded to, was covered with red-coloured
perspiration whilst giving birth to her young. So it is with extreme fear; the
same veterinary has often seen horses sweating from this cause; as has Mr.
Bartlett with the rhinoceros; and with man it is a well-known symptom. The
cause of perspiration bursting forth in these cases is quite obscure; but it is
thought by some physiologists to be connected with the failing power of the
capillary circulation; and we know that the vaso-motor system, which regulates
the capillary circulation, is much influenced by the mind. With respect to the
movements of certain muscles of the face under great suffering, as well as from
other emotions, these will be best considered when we treat of the special
expressions of man and of the lower animals.
We will now turn to the
characteristic symptoms of Rage. Under this powerful emotion the action of the
heart is much accelerated,[9] or it may be much disturbed. The face reddens, or
it becomes purple from the impeded return of the blood, or may turn deadly
pale. The respiration is laboured, the chest heaves, and the dilated nostrils
quiver. The whole body often trembles. The voice is affected. The teeth are
clenched or ground together, and the muscular system is commonly stimulated to
violent, almost frantic action. But the gestures of a man in this state usually
differ from the purposeless writhings and struggles of one suffering from an
agony of pain; for they represent more or less plainly the act of striking or
fighting with an enemy.
All these signs of rage
are probably in large part, and some of them appear to be wholly, due to the
direct action of the excited sensorium. But animals of all kinds, and their
progenitors before them, when attacked or threatened by an enemy, have exerted
their utmost powers in fighting and in defending themselves. Unless an animal
does thus act, or has the intention, or at least the desire, to attack its
enemy, it cannot properly be said to be enraged. An inherited habit of muscular
exertion will thus have been gained in association with rage; and this will
directly or indirectly affect various organs, in nearly the same manner as does
great bodily suffering.
The heart no doubt will
likewise be affected in a direct manner; but it will also in all probability be
affected through habit; and all the more so from not being under the control of
the will. We know that any great exertion which we voluntarily make, affects
the heart, through mechanical and other principles which need not here be
considered; and it was shown in the first chapter that nerve-force flows
readily through habitually used channels,--through the nerves of voluntary or
involuntary movement, and through those of sensation. Thus even a moderate
amount of exertion will tend to act on the heart; and on the principle of
association, of which so many instances have been given, we may feel nearly
sure that any sensation or emotion, as great pain or rage, which has habitually
led to much muscular action, will immediately influence the flow of nerve-force
to the heart, although there may not be at the time any muscular exertion.
The heart, as I have
said, will be all the more readily affected through habitual associations, as
it is not under the control of the will. A man when moderately angry, or even
when enraged, may command the movements of his body, but he cannot prevent his
heart from beating rapidly. His chest will perhaps give a few heaves, and his
nostrils just quiver, for the movements of respiration are only in part
voluntary. In like manner those muscles of the face which are least obedient to
the will, will sometimes alone betray a slight and passing emotion. The glands
again are wholly independent of the will, and a man suffering from grief may
command his features, but cannot always prevent the tears from coming into his
eyes. A hungry man, if tempting food is placed before him, may not show his
hunger by any outward gesture, but he cannot check the secretion of saliva.
Under a transport of
Joy or of vivid Pleasure, there is a strong tendency to various purposeless
movements, and to the utterance of various sounds. We see this in our young
children, in their loud laughter, clapping of hands, and jumping for joy; in
the bounding and barking of a dog when going out to walk with his master; and
in the frisking of a horse when turned out into an open field. Joy quickens the
circulation, and this stimulates the brain, which again reacts on the whole
body. The above purposeless movements and increased heart-action may be
attributed in chief part to the excited state of the sensorium,[10] and to the
consequent undirected overflow, as Mr. Herbert Spencer insists, of nerve-force.
It deserves notice, that it is chiefly the anticipation of a pleasure, and not
its actual enjoyment, which leads to purposeless and extravagant movements of
the body, and to the utterance of various sounds. We see this in our children
when they expect any great pleasure or treat; and dogs, which have been
bounding about at the sight of a plate of food, when they get it do not show
their delight by any outward sign, not even by wagging their tails. Now with
animals of all kinds, the acquirement of almost all their pleasures, with the
exception of those of warmth and rest, are associated, and have long been
associated with active movements, as in the hunting or search for food, and in
their courtship. Moreover, the mere exertion of the muscles after long rest or
confinement is in itself a pleasure, as we ourselves feel, and as we see in the
play of young animals. Therefore on this latter principle alone we might
perhaps expect, that vivid pleasure would be apt to show itself conversely in
muscular movements.
With all or almost all
animals, even with birds, Terror causes the body to tremble. The skin becomes
pale, sweat breaks out, and the hair bristles. The secretions of the alimentary
canal and of the kidneys are increased, and they are involuntarily voided,
owing to the relaxation of the sphincter muscles, as is known to be the case
with man, and as I have seen with cattle, dogs, cats, and monkeys. The
breathing is hurried. The heart beats quickly, wildly, and violently; but
whether it pumps the blood more efficiently through the body may be doubted,
for the surface seems bloodless and the strength of the muscles soon fails. In
a frightened horse I have felt through the saddle the beating of the heart so
plainly that I could have counted the beats. The mental faculties are much
disturbed. Utter prostration soon follows, and even fainting. A terrified
canary-bird has been seen not only to tremble and to turn white about the base
of the bill, but to faint;[11] and I once caught a robin in a room, which
fainted so completely, that for a time I thought it dead.
Most of these symptoms
are probably the direct result, independently of habit, of the disturbed state
of the sensorium; but it is doubtful whether they ought to be wholly thus
accounted for. When an animal is alarmed it almost always stands motionless for
a moment, in order to collect its senses and to ascertain the source of danger,
and sometimes for the sake of escaping detection. But headlong flight soon
follows, with no husbanding of the strength as in fighting, and the animal
continues to fly as long as the danger lasts, until utter prostration, with
failing respiration and circulation, with all the muscles quivering and profuse
sweating, renders further flight impossible. Hence it does not seem improbable
that the principle of associated habit may in part account for, or at least
augment, some of the above- named characteristic symptoms of extreme terror.
That the principle of
associated habit has played an important part in causing the movements
expressive of the foregoing several strong emotions and sensations, we may, I
think, conclude from considering firstly, some other strong emotions which do
not ordinarily require for their relief or gratification any voluntary
movement; and secondly the contrast in nature between the so-called exciting
and depressing states of the mind. No emotion is stronger than maternal love;
but a mother may feel the deepest love for her helpless infant, and yet not
show it by any outward sign; or only by slight caressing movements, with a
gentle smile and tender eyes. But let any one intentionally injure her infant,
and see what a change! how she starts up with threatening aspect, how her eyes
sparkle and her face reddens, how her bosom heaves, nostrils dilate, and heart
beats; for anger, and not maternal love, has habitually led to action. The love
between the opposite sexes is widely different from maternal love; and when
lovers meet, we know that their hearts beat quickly, their breathing is
hurried, and their faces flush; for this love is not inactive like that of a
mother for her infant.
A man may have his mind
filled with the blackest hatred or suspicion, or be corroded with envy or
jealousy, but as these feelings do not at once lead to action, and as they
commonly last for some time, they are not shown by any outward sign, excepting
that a man in this state assuredly does not appear cheerful or good-tempered.
If indeed these feelings break out into overt acts, rage takes their place, and
will be plainly exhibited. Painters can hardly portray suspicion, jealousy,
envy, &c., except by the aid of accessories which tell the tale; and poets
use such vague and fanciful expressions as "green-eyed jealousy."
Spenser describes suspicion as "Foul, ill-favoured, and grim, under his
eyebrows looking still askance," &c.; Shakespeare speaks of envy
"as lean-faced in her loathsome case;" and in another place he says,
"no black envy shall make my grave;" and again as "above pale
envy's threatening reach."
Emotions and sensations
have often been classed as exciting or depressing. When all the organs of the
body and mind,--those of voluntary and involuntary movement, of perception,
sensation, thought, &c.,-- perform their functions more energetically and
rapidly than usual, a man or animal may be said to be excited, and, under an
opposite state, to be depressed. Anger and joy are from the first exciting
emotions, and they naturally lead, more especially the former, to energetic
movements, which react on the heart and this again on the brain. A physician
once remarked to me as a proof of the exciting nature of anger, that a man when
excessively jaded will sometimes invent imaginary offences and put himself into
a passion, unconsciously for the sake of reinvigorating himself; and since
hearing this remark, I have occasionally recognized its full truth.
Several other states of
mind appear to be at first exciting, but soon become depressing to an extreme
degree. When a mother suddenly loses her child, sometimes she is frantic with
grief, and must be considered to be in an excited state; she walks wildly
about, tears her hair or clothes, and wrings her hands. This latter action is
perhaps due to the principle of antithesis, betraying an inward sense of
helplessness and that nothing can be done. The other wild and violent movements
may be in part explained by the relief experienced through muscular exertion,
and in part by the undirected overflow of nerve-force from the excited
sensorium. But under the sudden loss of a beloved person, one of the first and commonest
thoughts which occurs, is that something more might have been done to save the
lost one. An excellent observer,[12] in describing the behaviour of a girl at
the sudden death of her father, says she "went about the house wringing
her hands like a creature demented, saying `It was her fault;' `I should never
have left him;' `If I had only sat up with him,' " &c. With such ideas
vividly present before the mind, there would arise, through the principle of
associated habit, the strongest tendency to energetic action of some kind.
As soon as the sufferer
is fully conscious that nothing can be done, despair or deep sorrow takes the
place of frantic grief. The sufferer sits motionless, or gently rocks to and
fro; the circulation becomes languid; respiration is almost forgotten, and deep
sighs are drawn. All this reacts on the brain, and prostration soon follows
with collapsed muscles and dulled eyes. As associated habit no longer prompts
the sufferer to action, he is urged by his friends to voluntary exertion, and
not to give way to silent, motionless grief. Exertion stimulates the heart, and
this reacts on the brain, and aids the mind to bear its heavy load.
Pain, if severe, soon
induces extreme depression or prostration; but it is at first a stimulant and
excites to action, as we see when we whip a horse, and as is shown by the
horrid tortures inflicted in foreign lands on exhausted dray-bullocks, to rouse
them to renewed exertion. Fear again is the most depressing of all the
emotions; and it soon induces utter, helpless prostration, as if in consequence
of, or in association with, the most violent and prolonged attempts to escape
from the danger, though no such attempts have actually been made. Nevertheless,
even extreme fear often acts at first as a powerful stimulant. A man or animal
driven through terror to desperation, is endowed with wonderful strength, and
is notoriously dangerous in the highest degree.
On the whole we may
conclude that the principle of the direct action of the sensorium on the body,
due to the constitution of the nervous system, and from the first independent
of the will, has been highly influential in determining many expressions. Good
instances are afforded by the trembling of the muscles, the sweating of the
skin, the modified secretions of the alimentary canal and glands, under various
emotions and sensations. But actions of this kind are often combined with
others, which follow from our first principle, namely, that actions which have
often been of direct or indirect service, under certain states of the mind, in
order to gratify or relieve certain sensations, desires, &c., are still
performed under analogous circumstances through mere habit although of no
service. We have combinations of this kind, at least in part, in the frantic
gestures of rage and in the writhings of extreme pain; and, perhaps, in the
increased action of the heart and of the respiratory organs. Even when these
and other emotions or sensations are aroused in a very feeble manner, there
will still be a tendency to similar actions, owing to the force of
long-associated habit; and those actions which are least under voluntary
control will generally be longest retained. Our second principle of antithesis
has likewise occasionally come into play.
Finally, so many expressive
movements can be explained, as I trust will be seen in the course of this
volume, through the three principles which have now been discussed, that we may
hope hereafter to see all thus explained, or by closely analogous principles.
It is, however, often impossible to decide how much weight ought to be
attributed, in each particular case, to one of our principles, and how much to
another; and very many points in the theory of Expression remain inexplicable.
[1] See the interesting
cases collected by M. G. Pouchet in the `Revue des Deux Mondes,' January 1,
1872, p. 79. An instance was also brought some years ago before the British
Association at Belfast.
[2] Müller remarks
(`Elements of Physiology,' Eng. translat. vol. ii. p. 934) that when the feelings
are very intense, "all the spinal nerves become affected to the extent of
imperfect paralysis, or the excitement of trembling of the whole body."
[3] `Leçons sur les
Prop. des Tissus Vivants,' 1866, pp. 457-466.
[4] Mr. Bartlett,
"Notes on the Birth of a Hippopotamus," Proc. Zoolog. Soc. 1871, p.
255.
[5] See, on this
subject, Claude Bernard, `Tissus Vivants,' 1866, pp. 316, 337, 358. Virchow
expresses himself to almost exactly the same effect in his essay "Ueber
das Rückenmark" (Sammlung wissenschaft. Vorträge, 1871, s. 28).
[6] Müller (`Elements
of Physiology,' Eng. translat. vol. ii. p. 932) in speaking of the nerves,
says, "any sudden change of condition of whatever kind sets the nervous
principle into action." See Virchow and Bernard on the same subject in
passages in the two works referred to in my last foot-note.
[7] H. Spencer,
`Essays, Scientific, Political,' &c., Second Series, 1863, pp. 109, 111.
[8] Sir H. Holland, in
speaking (`Medical Notes and Reflexions,' 1839, p. 328) of that curious state
of body called the fidgets, remarks that it seems due to "an accumulation
of some cause of irritation which requires muscular action for its relief."
[9] I am much indebted
to Mr. A. H. Garrod for having informed me of M. Lorain's work on the pulse, in
which a sphygmogram of a woman in a rage is given; and this shows much
difference in the rate and other characters from that of the same woman in her
ordinary state.
[10] How powerfully
intense joy excites the brain, and how the brain reacts on the body, is well
shown in the rare cases of Psychical Intoxication. Dr. J. Crichton Browne
(`Medical Mirror,' 1865) records the case of a young man of strongly nervous
temperament, who, on hearing by a telegram that a fortune had been bequeathed
him, first became pale, then exhilarated, and soon in the highest spirits, but
flushed and very restless. He then took a walk with a friend for the sake of
tranquillising himself, but returned staggering in his gait, uproariously
laughing, yet irritable in temper, incessantly talking, and singing loudly in
the public streets. It was positively ascertained that he had not touched any
spirituous liquor, though every one thought that he was intoxicated. Vomiting
after a time came on, and the half-digested contents of his stomach were
examined, but no odour of alcohol could be detected. He then slept heavily, and
on awaking was well, except that he suffered from headache, nausea, and
prostration of strength.
[11] Dr. Darwin,
`Zoonomia,' 1794, vol. i. p. 148.
[12] "Mrs.
Oliphant, in her novel of `Miss Majoribanks,' p. 362.
IN this and the
following chapter I will describe, but only in sufficient detail to illustrate
my subject, the expressive movements, under different states of the mind, of
some few well-known animals. But before considering them in due succession, it
will save much useless repetition to discuss certain means of expression common
to most of them.
The emission of
Sounds.--With many kinds of animals, man included, the vocal organs are
efficient in the highest degree as a means of expression. We have seen, in the
last chapter, that when the sensorium is strongly excited, the muscles of the
body are generally thrown into violent action; and as a consequence, loud
sounds are uttered, however silent the animal may generally be, and although
the sounds may be of no use. Hares and rabbits for instance, never, I believe,
use their vocal organs except in the extremity of suffering; as, when a wounded
hare is killed by the sportsman, or when a young rabbit is caught by a stoat.
Cattle and horses suffer great pain in silence; but when this is excessive, and
especially when associated with terror, they utter fearful sounds. I have often
recognized, from a distance on the Pampas, the agonized death-bellow of the
cattle, when caught by the lasso and hamstrung. It is said that horses, when
attacked by wolves, utter loud and peculiar screams of distress.
Involuntary and
purposeless contractions of the muscles of the chest and glottis, excited in
the above manner, may have first given rise to the emission of vocal sounds.
But the voice is now largely used by many animals for various purposes; and
habit seems to have played an important part in its employment under other
circumstances. Naturalists have remarked, I believe with truth, that social
animals, from habitually using their vocal organs as a means of
intercommunication, use them on other occasions much more freely than other
animals. But there are marked exceptions to this rule, for instance, with the
rabbit. The principle, also, of association, which is so widely extended in its
power, has likewise played its part. Hence it follows that the voice, from
having been habitually employed as a serviceable aid under certain conditions,
inducing pleasure, pain, rage, &c,, is commonly used whenever the same
sensations or emotions are excited, under quite different conditions, or in a
lesser degree.
The sexes of many
animals incessantly call for each other during the breeding-season; and in not
a few cases, the male endeavours thus to charm or excite the female. This,
indeed, seems to have been the primeval use and means of development of the
voice, as I have attempted to show in my `Descent of Man.' Thus the use of the
vocal organs will have become associated with the anticipation of the strongest
pleasure which animals are capable of feeling. Animals which live in society
often call to each other when separated, and evidently feel much joy at
meeting; as we see with a horse, on the return of his companion, for whom he
has been neighing. The mother calls incessantly for her lost young ones; for
instance, a cow for her calf; and the young of many animals call for their
mothers. When a flock of sheep is scattered, the ewes bleat incessantly for
their lambs, and their mutual pleasure at coming together is manifest. Woe
betide the man who meddles with the young of the larger and fiercer quadrupeds,
if they hear the cry of distress from their young. Rage leads to the violent
exertion of all the muscles, including those of the voice; and some animals,
when enraged, endeavour to strike terror into their enemies by its power and
harshness, as the lion does by roaring, and the dog by growling. I infer that
their object is to strike terror, because the lion at the same time erects the
hair of its mane, and the dog the hair along its back, and thus they make
themselves appear as large and terrible as possible. Rival males try to excel
and challenge each other by their voices, and this leads to deadly contests.
Thus the use of the voice will have become associated with the emotion of
anger, however it may be aroused. We have also seen that intense pain, like
rage, leads to violent outcries, and the exertion of screaming by itself gives
some relief; and thus the use of the voice will have become associated with
suffering of any kind.
The cause of widely
different sounds being uttered under different emotions and sensations is a
very obscure subject. Nor does the rule always hold good that there is any
marked difference. For instance with the dog, the bark of anger and that of joy
do not differ much, though they can be distinguished. It is not probable that
any precise explanation of the cause or source of each particular sound, under
different states of the mind, will ever be given. We now that some animals,
after being domesticated, have acquired the habit of uttering sounds which were
not natural to them.[1] Thus domestic dogs, and even tamed jackals, have learnt
to bark, which is a noise not proper to any species of the genus, with the
exception of the Canis latrans of North America, which is said to bark. Some
breeds, also, of the domestic pigeon have learnt to coo in a new and quite
peculiar manner.
The character of the
human voice, under the influence of various emotions, has been discussed by Mr.
Herbert Spencer[2] in his interesting essay on Music. He clearly shows that the
voice alters much under different conditions, in loudness and in quality, that
is, in resonance and timbre, in pitch and intervals. No one can listen to an
eloquent orator or preacher, or to a man calling angrily to another, or to one
expressing astonishment, without being struck with the truth of Mr. Spencer's
remarks. It is curious how early in life the modulation of the voice becomes
expressive. With one of my children, under the age of two years, I clearly
perceived that his humph of assent was rendered by a slight modulation strongly
emphatic; and that by a peculiar whine his negative expressed obstinate
determination. Mr. Spencer further shows that emotional speech, in all the
above respects is intimately related to vocal music, and consequently to
instrumental music; and he attempts to explain the characteristic qualities of
both on physiological grounds--namely, on "the general law that a feeling
is a stimulus to muscular action." It may be admitted that the voice is affected
through this law; but the explanation appears to me too general and vague to
throw much light on the various differences, with the exception of that of
loudness, between ordinary speech and emotional speech, or singing.
This remark holds good,
whether we believe that the various qualities of the voice originated in
speaking under the excitement of strong feelings, and that these qualities have
subsequently been transferred to vocal music; or whether we believe, as I
maintain, that the habit of uttering musical sounds was first developed, as a
means of courtship, in the early progenitors of man, and thus became associated
with the strongest emotions of which they were capable,--namely, ardent love,
rivalry and triumph. That animals utter musical notes is familiar to every one,
as we may daily hear in the singing of birds. It is a more remarkable fact that
an ape, one of the Gibbons, produces an exact octave of musical sounds,
ascending and descending the scale by half-tones; so that this monkey "alone
of brute mammals may be said to sing."[3] From this fact, and from the
analogy of other animals, I have been led to infer that the progenitors of man
probably uttered musical tones, before they had acquired the power of
articulate speech; and that consequently, when the voice is used under any
strong emotion, it tends to assume, through the principle of association, a
musical character. We can plainly perceive, with some of the lower animals,
that the males employ their voices to please the females, and that they
themselves take pleasure in their own vocal utterances; but why particular
sounds are uttered, and why these give pleasure cannot at present be explained.
That the pitch of the
voice bears some relation to certain states of feeling is tolerably clear. A
person gently complaining of ill-treatment, or slightly suffering, almost
always speaks in a high-pitched voice. Dogs, when a little impatient, often
make a high piping note through their noses, which at once strikes us as
plaintive;[4] but how difficult it is to know whether the sound is essentially
plaintive, or only appears so in this particular case, from our having learnt
by experience what it means! Rengger, states[5] that the monkeys (Cebus azarœ),
which he kept in Paraguay, expressed astonishment by a half-piping,
half-snarling noise; anger or impatience, by repeating the sound hu hu in a
deeper, grunting voice; and fright or pain, by shrill screams. On the other
hand, with mankind, deep groans and high piercing screams equally express an agony
of pain. Laughter maybe either high or low; so that, with adult men, as Haller
long ago remarked,[6] the sound partakes of the character of the vowels (as
pronounced in German) O and A; whilst with children and women, it has more of
the character of E and I; and these latter vowel-sounds naturally have, as
Helmholtz has shown, a higher pitch than the former; yet both tones of laughter
equally express enjoyment or amusement.
In considering the mode
in which vocal utterances express emotion, we are naturally led to i the cause
of what is called "expression" in music. Upon this point Mr.
Litchfield, who has long attended to the subject of music, has been so kind as
to give me the following remarks:--"The question, what is the essence of musical
`expression' involves a number of obscure points, which, so far as I am aware,
are as yet unsolved enigmas. Up to a certain point, however, any law which is
found to hold as to the expression of the emotions by simple sounds must apply
to the more developed mode of expression in song, which may be taken as the
primary type of all music. A great part of the emotional effect of a song
depends on the character of the action by which the sounds are produced. In
songs, for instance, which express great vehemence of passion, the effect often
chiefly depends on the forcible utterance of some one or two characteristic
passages which demand great exertion of vocal force; and it will be frequently
noticed that a song of this character fails of its proper effect when sung by a
voice of sufficient power and range to give the characteristic passages without
much exertion. This is, no doubt, the secret of the loss of effect so often
produced by the transposition of a song from one key to another. The effect is
thus seen to depend not merely on the actual sounds, but also in part on the
nature of the action which produces the sounds. Indeed it is obvious that
whenever we feel the `expression' of a song to be due to its quickness or
slowness of movement --to smoothness of flow, loudness of utterance, and so
on--we are, in fact, interpreting the muscular actions which produce sound, in
the same way in which we interpret muscular action generally. But this leaves
unexplained the more subtle and more specific effect which we call the musical
expression of the song--the delight given by its melody, or even by the
separate sounds which make up the melody. This is an effect indefinable in
language--one which, so far as I am aware, no one has been able to analyse, and
which the ingenious speculation of Mr. Herbert Spencer as to the origin of
music leaves quite unexplained. For it is certain that the melodic effect of a
series of sounds does not depend in the least on their loudness or softness, or
on their absolute pitch. A tune is always the same tune, whether it is sung
loudly or softly, by a child or a man; whether it is played on a flute or on a
trombone. The purely musical effect of any sound depends on its place in what
is technically called a `scale;' the same sound producing absolutely different
effects on the ear, according as it is heard in connection with one or another
series of sounds.
"It is on this
relative association of the sounds that all the essentially characteristic
effects which are summed up in the phrase `musical expression,' depend. But why
certain associations of sounds have such-and-such effects, is a problem which
yet remains to be solved. These effects must indeed, in some way or other, be
connected with the well-known arithmetical relations between the rates of vibration
of the sounds which form a musical scale. And it is possible--but this is
merely a suggestion--that the greater or less mechanical facility with which
the vibrating apparatus of the human larynx passes from one state of vibration
to another, may have been a primary cause of the greater or less pleasure
produced by various sequences of sounds."
But leaving aside these
complex questions and confining ourselves to the simpler sounds, we can, at
least, see some reasons for the association of certain kinds of sounds with
certain states of mind. A scream, for instance, uttered by a young animal, or
by one of the members of a community, as a call for assistance, will naturally
be loud, prolonged, and high, so as to penetrate to a distance. For Helmholtz
has shown[7] that, owing to the shape of the internal cavity of the human ear
and its consequent power of resonance, high notes produce a particularly strong
impression. When male animals utter sounds in order to please the females, they
would naturally employ those which are sweet to the ears of the species; and it
appears that the same sounds are often pleasing to widely different animals,
owing to the similarity of their nervous systems, as we ourselves perceive in
the singing of birds and even in the chirping of certain tree-frogs giving us
pleasure. On the other hand, sounds produced in order to strike terror into an
enemy, would naturally be harsh or displeasing.
Whether the principle
of antithesis has come into play with sounds, as might perhaps have been
expected, is doubtful. The interrupted, laughing or tittering sounds made by
man and by various kinds of monkeys when pleased, are as different as possible
from the prolonged screams of these animals when distressed. The deep grunt of
satisfaction uttered by a pig, when pleased with its food, is widely different
from its harsh scream of pain or terror. But with the dog, as lately remarked,
the bark of anger and that of joy are sounds which by no means stand in
opposition to each other; and so it is in some other cases.
There is another
obscure point, namely, whether the sounds which are produced under various
states of the mind determine the shape of the mouth, or whether its shape is
not determined by independent causes, and the sound thus modified. When young
infants cry they open their mouths widely, and this, no doubt, is necessary for
pouring forth a full volume of sound; but the mouth then assumes, from a quite
distinct cause, an almost quadrangular shape, depending, as will hereafter be
explained, on the firm closing of the eyelids, and consequent drawing up of the
upper lip. How far this square shape of the mouth modifies the wailing or
crying sound, I am not prepared to say; but we know from the researches of
Helmholtz and others that the form of the cavity of the mouth and lips
determines the nature and pitch of the vowel sounds which are produced.
It will also be shown
in a future chapter that, under the feeling of contempt or disgust, there is a
tendency, from intelligible causes, to blow out of the mouth or nostrils, and
this produces sounds like pooh or pish. When any one is startled or suddenly
astonished, there is an instantaneous tendency, likewise from an intelligible
cause, namely, to be ready for prolonged exertion, to open the mouth widely, so
as to draw a deep and rapid inspiration. When the next full expiration follows,
the mouth is slightly closed, and the lips, from causes hereafter to be
discussed, are somewhat protruded; and this form of the mouth, if the voice be
at all exerted, produces, according to Helmholtz, the sound of the vowel O.
Certainly a deep sound of a prolonged Oh! may be heard from a whole crowd of
people immediately after witnessing any astonishing spectacle. If, together
with surprise, pain be felt, there is a tendency to contract all the muscles of
the body, including those of the face, and the lips will then be drawn back;
and this will perhaps account for the sound becoming higher and assuming the
character of Ah! or Ach! As fear causes all the muscles of the body to tremble,
the voice naturally becomes tremulous, and at the same time husky from the
dryness of the mouth, owing to the salivary glands failing to act. Why the
laughter of man and the tittering of monkeys should be a rapidly reiterated
sound, cannot be explained. During the utterance of these sounds, the mouth is
transversely elongated by the corners being drawn backwards and upwards; and of
this fact an explanation will be attempted in a future chapter. But the whole
subject of the differences of the sounds produced under different states of the
mind is so obscure, that I have succeeded in throwing hardly any light on it;
and the remarks which I have made, have but little significance.
All the sounds hitherto
noticed depend on the respiratory organs; but sounds produced by wholly
different means are likewise expressive. Rabbits stamp loudly on the ground as
a signal to their comrades; and if a man knows how to do so properly, he may on
a quiet evening hear the rabbits answering him all around. These animals, as
well as some others, also stamp on the ground when made angry. Porcupines
rattle their quills and vibrate their tails when angered; and one behaved in
this manner when a live snake was placed in its compartment. The tail of the
quills on the tail are very different from those on the body: they are short,
hollow, thin like a goose-quill, with their ends transversely truncated, so
that they are open; they are supported on long, thin, elastic foot-stalks. Now,
when the tail is rapidly shaken, these hollow quills strike against each other
and produce, as I heard in the presence of Mr. Bartlett, a peculiar continuous
sound. We can, I think, understand why porcupines have been provided, through
the modification of their protective spines, with this special sound-producing
instrument. They are nocturnal animals, and if they scented or heard a prowling
beast of prey, it would be a great advantage to them in the dark to give
warning to their enemy what they were, and that they were furnished with
dangerous spines. They would thus escape being attacked. They are, as I may
add, so fully conscious of the power of their weapons, that when enraged they
will charge backwards with their spines erected, yet still inclined backwards.
Many birds during their
courtship produce diversified sounds by means of specially adapted feathers.
Storks, when excited, make a loud clattering noise with their beaks. Some
snakes produce a grating or rattling noise. Many insects stridulate by rubbing
together specially modified parts of their hard integuments. This stridulation
generally serves as a sexual charm or call; but it is likewise used to express
different emotions.[8] Every one who has attended to bees knows that their
humming changes when they are angry; and this serves as a warning that there is
danger of being stung. I have made these few remarks because some writers have
laid so much stress on the vocal and respiratory organs as having been
specially adapted for expression, that it was advisable to show that sounds otherwise
produced serve equally well for the same purpose.
Erection of the dermal
appendages.--Hardly any expressive movement is so general as the involuntary
erection of the hairs, feathers and other dermal appendages; for it is common
throughout three of the great vertebrate classes. These appendages are erected
under the excitement of anger or terror; more especially when these emotions
are combined, or quickly succeed each other. The action serves to make the
animal appear larger and more frightful to its enemies or rivals, and is
generally accompanied by various voluntary movements adapted for the same
purpose, and by the utterance of savage sounds. Mr. Bartlett, who has had such
wide experience with animals of all kinds, does not doubt that this is the case;
but it is a different question whether the power of erection was primarily
acquired for this special purpose.
I will first give a
considerable body of facts showing how general this action is with mammals,
birds and reptiles; retaining what I have to say in regard to man for a future
chapter. Mr. Sutton, the intelligent keeper in the Zoological Gardens,
carefully observed for me the Chimpanzee and Orang; and he states that when
they are suddenly frightened, as by a thunderstorm, or when they are made
angry, as by being teased, their hair becomes erect. I saw a chimpanzee who was
alarmed at the sight of a black coalheaver, and the hair rose all over his
body; he made little starts forward as if to attack the man, without any real
intention of doing so, but with the hope, as the keeper remarked, of
frightening him. The Gorilla, when enraged, is described by Mr. Ford[9] as
having his crest of hair "erect and projecting forward, his nostrils
dilated, and his under lip thrown down; at the same time uttering his
characteristic yell, designed, it would seem, to terrify his antagonists."
I saw the hair on the Anubis baboon, when angered bristling along the back,
from the neck to the loins, but not on the rump or other parts of the body. I
took a stuffed snake into the monkey-house, and the hair on several of the
species instantly became erect; especially on their tails, as I particularly
noticed with the Cereopithecus nictitans. Brehm states[10] that the Midas ædipus
(belonging to the American division) when excited erects its mane, in order, as
he adds, to make itself as frightful as possible.
With the Carnivora the
erection of the hair seems to be almost universal, often accompanied by
threatening movements, the uncovering of the teeth and the utterance of savage
growls. In the Herpestes, I have seen the hair on end over nearly the whole
body, including the tail; and the dorsal crest is erected in a conspicuous
manner by the Hyæna and Proteles. The enraged lion erects his mane. The
bristling of the hair along the neck and back of the dog, and over the whole
body of the cat, especially on the tail, is familiar to every one. With the cat
it apparently occurs only under fear; with the dog, under anger and fear; but
not, as far as I have observed, under abject fear, as when a dog is going to be
flogged by a severe gamekeeper. If, however, the dog shows fight, as sometimes
happens, up goes his hair. I have often noticed that the hair of a dog is
particularly liable to rise, if he is half angry and half afraid, as on beholding
some object only indistinctly seen in the dusk.
I have been assured by
a veterinary surgeon that he has often seen the hair erected on horses and
cattle, on which he had operated and was again going to operate. When I showed
a stuffed snake to a Peccary, the hair rose in a wonderful manner along its
back; and so it does with the boar when enraged. An Elk which gored a man to
death in the United States, is described as first brandishing his antlers,
squealing with rage and stamping on the ground; "at length his hair was
seen to rise and stand on end," and then he plunged forward to the
attack.[11] The hair likewise becomes erect on goats, and, as I hear from Mr.
Blyth, on some Indian antelopes. I have seen it erected on the hairy Ant-eater;
and on the Agouti, one of the Rodents. A female Bat,[12] which reared her young
under confinement, when any one looked into the cage "erected the fur on
her back, and bit viciously at intruding fingers."
Birds belonging to all
the chief Orders ruffle their feathers when angry or frightened. Every one must
have seen two cocks, even quite young birds, preparing to fight with erected
neck-hackles; nor can these feathers when erected serve as a means of defence,
for cock-fighters have found by experience that it is advantageous to trim
them. The male Ruff (Machetes pugnax) likewise erects its collar of feathers
when fighting. When a dog approaches a common hen with her chickens, she
spreads out her wings, raises her tail, ruffles all her feathers, and looking
as ferocious as possible, dashes at the intruder. The tail is not always held
in exactly the same position; it is sometimes so much erected, that the central
feathers, as in the accompanying drawing, almost touch the back. Swans, when
angered, likewise raise their wings and tail, and erect their feathers. They
open their beaks, and make by paddling little rapid starts forwards, against
any one who approaches the water's edge too closely. Tropic birds[13] when
disturbed on their nests are said not to fly away, but "merely to stick
out their feathers and scream." The Barn-owl, when approached
"instantly swells out its plumage, extends its wings and tail, hisses and
clacks its mandibles with force and rapidity."[14] So do other kinds of
owls. Hawks, as I am informed by Mr. Jenner Weir, likewise ruffle their
feathers, and spread out their wings and tail under similar circumstances. Some
kinds of parrots erect their feathers; and I have seen this action in the
Cassowary, when angered at the sight of an Ant-eater. Young cuckoos in the
nest, raise their feathers, open their mouths widely, and make themselves as
frightful as possible.
Small birds, also, as I
hear from Mr. Weir, such as various finches, buntings and warblers, when angry,
ruffle all their feathers, or only those round the neck; or they spread out
their wings and tail-feathers. With their plumage in this state, they rush at
each other with open beaks and threatening gestures. Mr. Weir concludes from
his large experience that the erection of the feathers is caused much more by
anger than by fear. He gives as an instance a hybrid goldfinch of a most
irascible disposition, which when approached too closely by a servant,
instantly assumes the appearance of a ball of ruffled feathers. He believes
that birds when frightened, as a general rule, closely adpress all their
feathers, and their consequently diminished size is often astonishing. As soon
as they recover from their fear or surprise, the first thing which they do is
to shake out their feathers. The best instances of this adpression of the
feathers and apparent shrinking of the body from fear, which Mr. Weir has
noticed, has been in the quail and grass-parrakeet.[15] The habit is
intelligible in these birds from their being accustomed, when in danger, either
to squat on the ground or to sit motionless on a branch, so as to escape
detection. Though, with birds, anger may be the chief and commonest cause of
the erection of the feathers, it is probable that young cuckoos when looked at
in the nest, and a hen with her chickens when approached by a dog, feel at
least some terror. Mr. Tegetmeier informs me that with game-cocks, the erection
of the feathers on the head has long been recognized in the cock-pit as a sign
of cowardice.
The males of some
lizards, when fighting together during their courtship, expand their throat
pouches or frills, and erect their dorsal crests.[16] But Dr. Günther does not
believe that they can erect their separate spines or scales.
We thus see how
generally throughout the two higher vertebrate classes, and with some reptiles,
the dermal appendages are erected under the influence of anger and fear. The movement
is effected, as we know from Kölliker's interesting discovery, by the
contraction of minute, unstriped, involuntary muscles,[17] often called
arrectores pili, which are attached to the capsules of the separate hairs,
feathers, &c. By the contraction of these muscles the hairs can be
instantly erected, as we see in a dog, being at the same time drawn a little
out of their sockets; they are afterwards quickly depressed. The vast number of
these minute muscles over the whole body of a hairy quadruped is astonishing.
The erection of the hair is, however, aided in some cases, as with that on the
head of a man, by the striped and voluntary muscles of the underlying
panniculus carnosus. It is by the action of these latter muscles, that the
hedgehog erects its spines. It appears, also, from the researches of Leydig[18]
and others, that striped fibres extend from the panniculus to some of the
larger hairs, such as the vibrissæ of certain quadrupeds. The arrectores pili
contract not only under the above emotions, but from the application of cold to
the surface. I remember that my mules and dogs, brought from a lower and warmer
country, after spending a night on the bleak Cordillera, had the hair all over
their bodies as erect as under the greatest terror. We see the same action in
our own goose-skin during the chill before a fever-fit. Mr. Lister has also
found,[19] that tickling a neighbouring part of the skin causes the erection
and protrusion of the hairs.
From these facts it is
manifest that the erection of the dermal appendages is a reflex action,
independent of the will; and this action must be looked at, when, occurring
under the influence of anger or fear, not as a power acquired for the sake of
some advantage, but as an incidental result, at least to a large extent, of the
sensorium being affected. The result, in as far as it is incidental, may be
compared with the profuse sweating from an agony of pain or terror.
Nevertheless, it is remarkable how slight an excitement often suffices to cause
the hair to become erect; as when two dogs pretend to fight together in play.
We have, also, seen in a large number of animals, belonging to widely distinct
classes, that the erection of the hair or feathers is almost always accompanied
by various voluntary movements--by threatening gestures, opening the mouth,
uncovering the teeth, spreading out of the wings and tail by birds, and by the
utterance of harsh sounds; and the purpose of these voluntary movements is
unmistakable. Therefore it seems hardly credible that the coordinated erection
of the dermal appendages, by which the animal is made to appear larger and more
terrible to its enemies or rivals, should be altogether an incidental and
purposeless result of the disturbance of the sensorium. This seems almost as incredible
as that the erection by the hedgehog of its spines, or of the quills by the
porcupine, or of the ornamental plumes by many birds during their courtship.
should all be purposeless actions.
We here encounter a
great difficulty. How can the contraction of the unstriped and involuntary
arrectores pili have been coordinated with that of various voluntary muscles
for the same special purpose? If we could believe that the arrectores
primordially had been voluntary muscles, and had since lost their stripes and
become involuntary, the case would be comparatively simple. I am not, however,
aware that there is any evidence in favour of this view; although the reversed
transition would not have presented any great difficulty, as the voluntary
muscles are in an unstriped condition in the embryos of the higher animals, and
in the larvæ of some crustaceans. Moreover in the deeper layers of the skin of
adult birds, the muscular network is, according to Leydig,[20] in a
transitional condition; the fibres exhibiting only indications of transverse
striation.
Another explanation
seems possible. We may admit that originally the arrectores pili were slightly
acted on in a direct manner, under the influence of rage and terror, by the
disturbance of the nervous system; as is undoubtedly the case with our
so-called goose-skin before a fever-fit. Animals have been repeatedly excited
by rage and terror during many generations; and consequently the direct effects
of the disturbed nervous system on the dermal appendages will almost certainly
have been increased through habit and through the tendency of nerve-force to
pass readily along accustomed channels. We shall find this view of the force of
habit strikingly confirmed in a future chapter, where it will be shown that the
hair of the insane is affected in an extraordinary manner, owing to their
repeated accesses of fury and terror. As soon as with animals the power of
erection had thus been strengthened or increased, they must often have seen the
hairs or feathers erected in rival and enraged males, and the bulk of their
bodies thus increased. In this case it appears possible that they might have
wished to make themselves appear larger and more terrible to their enemies, by
voluntarily assuming a threatening attitude and uttering harsh cries; such
attitudes and utterances after a time becoming through habit instinctive. In
this manner actions performed by the contraction of voluntary muscles might
have been combined for the same special purpose with those effected by involuntary
muscles. It is even possible that animals, when excited and dimly conscious of
some change in the state of their hair, might act on it by repeated exertions
of their attention and will; for we have reason to believe that the will is
able to influence in an obscure manner the action of some unstriped or
involuntary muscles, as in the period of the peristaltic movements of the
intestines, and in the contraction of the bladder. Nor must we overlook the
part which variation and natural selection may have played; for the males which
succeeded in making themselves appear the most terrible to their rivals, or to
their other enemies, if not of overwhelming power, will on an average have left
more offspring to inherit their characteristic qualities, whatever these may be
and however first acquired, than have other males.
The inflation of the
body, and other means of exciting fear in an enemy.--Certain Amphibians and
Reptiles, which either have no spines to erect, or no muscles by which they can
be erected, enlarge themselves when alarmed or angry by inhaling air. This is
well known to be the case with toads and frogs. The latter animal is made, in Æsop's
fable of the `Ox and the Frog,' to blow itself up from vanity and envy until it
burst. This action must have been observed during the most ancient times, as,
according to Mr. Hensleigh Wedgwood,[21] the word toad expresses in all the
languages of Europe the habit of swelling. It has been observed with some of
the exotic species in the Zoological Gardens; and Dr. Günther believes that it
is general throughout the group. Judging from analogy, the primary purpose
probably was to make the body appear as large and frightful as possible to an
enemy; but another, and perhaps more important secondary advantage is thus gained.
When frogs are seized by snakes, which are their chief enemies, they enlarge
themselves wonderfully; so that if the snake be of small size, as Dr. Günther
informs me, it cannot swallow the frog, which thus escapes being devoured.
Chameleons and some other
lizards inflate themselves when angry. Thus a species inhabiting Oregon, the
Tapaya Douglasii, is slow in its movements and does not bite, but has a
ferocious aspect; "when irritated it springs in a most threatening manner
at anything pointed at it, at the same time opening its mouth wide and hissing
audibly, after which it inflates its body, and shows other marks of
anger."[22]
Several kinds of snakes
likewise inflate themselves when irritated. The puff-adder (Clotho arietans) is
remarkable in this respect; but I believe, after carefully watching these
animals, that they do not act thus for the sake of increasing their apparent
bulk, but simply for inhaling a large supply of air, so as to produce their
surprisingly loud, harsh, and prolonged hissing sound. The Cobras-de-capello,
when irritated, enlarge themselves a little, and hiss moderately; but, at the
same time they lift their heads aloft, and dilate by means of their elongated
anterior ribs, the skin on each side of the neck into a large flat disk,--the
so-called hood. With their widely opened mouths, they then assume a terrific
aspect. The benefit thus derived ought to be considerable, in order to
compensate for the somewhat lessened rapidity (though this is still great) with
which, when dilated, they can strike at their enemies or prey; on the same
principle that a broad, thin piece of wood cannot be moved through the air so
quickly as a small round stick. An innocuous snake, the Trovidonotus
macrophthalmus, an inhabitant of India, likewise dilates its neck when
irritated; and consequently is often mistaken for its compatriot, the deadly
Cobra.[23] This resemblance perhaps serves as some protection to the
Tropidonotus. Another innocuous species, the Dasypeltis of South Africa, blows
itself out, distends its neck, hisses and darts at an intruder.[24] Many other
snakes hiss under similar circumstances. They also rapidly vibrate their
protruded tongues; and this may aid in increasing their terrific appearance.
Snakes possess other
means of producing sounds besides hissing. Many years ago I observed in South
America that a venomous Trigonocephalus, when disturbed, rapidly vibrated the
end of its tail, which striking against the dry grass and twigs produced a
rattling noise that could be distinctly heard at the distance of six feet.[25]
The deadly and fierce Echis carinata of India produces "a curious
prolonged, almost hissing sound in a very different manner, namely by rubbing
"the sides of the folds of its body against each other," whilst the
head remains in almost the same position. The scales on the sides, and not on
other parts of the body, are strongly keeled, with the keels toothed like a
saw; and as the coiled-up animal rubs its sides together, these grate against
each other.[26] Lastly, we have the well- known case of the Rattle-snake. He
who has merely shaken the rattle of a dead snake, can form no just idea of the
sound produced by the living animal. Professor Shaler states that it is
indistinguishable from that made by the male of a large Cicada (an Homopterous
insect), which inhabits the same district.[27] In the Zoological Gardens, when
the Rattle-snakes and puff-adders were greatly excited at the same time, I was
much struck at the similarity of the sound produced by them; and although that made
by the Rattle-snake is louder and shriller than the hissing of the puff-adder,
yet when standing at some yards distance I could scarcely distinguish the two.
For whatever purpose the sound is produced by the one species, I can hardly
doubt that it serves for the same purpose in the other species; and I conclude
from the threatening gestures made at the same time by many snakes, that their
hissing,--the rattling of the Rattle-snake and of the tail of the
Trigonocephalus,-- the grating of the scales of the Echis,--and the dilatation
of the hood of the Cobra,--all subserve the same end, namely, to make them
appear terrible to their enemies.[28]
It seems at first a
probable conclusion that venomous snakes, such as the foregoing, from being
already so well defended by their poison-fangs, would never be attacked by any
enemy; and consequently would have no need to excite additional terror. But
this is far from being the case, for they are largely preyed on in all quarters
of the world by many animals. It is well known that pigs are employed in the
United States to clear districts infested with Rattle-snakes, which they do
most effectually.[29] In England the hedgehog attacks and devours the viper. In
India, as I hear from Dr. Jerdon, several kinds of hawks, and at least one
mammal, the Herpestes, kill cobras and other venomous species;[30] and so it is
in South Africa. Therefore it is by no means improbable that any sounds or
signs by which the venomous species could instantly make themselves recognized
as dangerous, would be of more service to them than to the innocuous species
which would not be able, if attacked, to inflict any real injury.
Having said thus much
about snakes, I am tempted to add a few remarks on the means by which the
rattle of the Rattle-snake was probably developed. Various animals, including
some lizards, either curl or vibrate their tails when excited. This is the case
with many kinds of snakes.[31] In the Zoological Gardens, an innocuous species,
the Coronella Sayi, vibrates its tail so rapidly that it becomes almost
invisible. The Trigonocephalus, before alluded to, has the same habit; and the
extremity of its tail is a little enlarged, or ends in a bead. In the Lachesis,
which is so closely allied to the Rattle-snake that it was placed by Linnæus in
the same genus, the tail ends in a single, large, lancet-shaped point or scale.
With some snakes the skin, as Professor Shaler remarks, "is more
imperfectly detached from the region about the tail than at other parts of the
body." Now if we suppose that the end of the tail of some ancient American
species was enlarged, and was covered by a single large scale, this could
hardly have been cast off at the successive moults. In this case it would have
been permanently retained, and at each period of growth, as the snake grew
larger, a new scale, larger than the last, would have been formed above it, and
would likewise have been retained. The foundation for the development of a
rattle would thus have been laid; and it would have been habitually used, if
the species, like so many others, vibrated its tail whenever it was irritated.
That the rattle has since been specially developed to serve as an efficient
sound-producing instrument, there can hardly be a doubt; for even the vertebræ
included within the extremity of the tail have been altered in shape and
cohere. But there is no greater improbability in various structures, such as
the rattle of the Rattle-snake,--the lateral scales of the Echis,--the neck
with the included ribs of the Cobra,--and the whole body of the
puff-adder,--having been modified for the sake of warning and frightening away
their enemies, than in a bird, namely, the wonderful Secretary-hawk
(Gypogeranus) having had its whole frame modified for the sake of killing
snakes with impunity. It is highly probable, judging from what we have before
seen, that this bird would ruffle its feathers whenever it attacked a snake;
and it is certain that the Herpestes, when it eagerly rushes to attack a snake,
erects the hair all over its body, and especially that on its tail.[32] We have
also seen that some porcupines, when angered or alarmed at the sight of a
snake, rapidly vibrate their tails, thus producing a peculiar sound by the
striking together of the hollow quills. So that here both the attackers and the
attacked endeavour to make themselves as dreadful as possible to each other;
and both possess for this purpose specialised means, which, oddly enough, are
nearly the same in some of these cases. Finally we can see that if, on the one
hand, those individual snakes, which were best able to frighten away their
enemies, escaped best from being devoured; and if, on the other hand, those
individuals of the attacking enemy survived in larger numbers which were the
best fitted for the dangerous task of killing and devouring venomous
snakes;--then in the one case as in the other, beneficial variations, supposing
the characters in question to vary, would commonly have been preserved through
the survival of the fittest.
The Drawing back and
pressure of the Ears to the Head.--The ears through their movements are highly
expressive in many animals; but in some, such as man, the higher apes, and many
ruminants, they fail in this respect. A slight difference in position serves to
express in the plainest manner a different state of mind, as we may daily see
in the dog; but we are here concerned only with the ears being drawn closely
backwards and pressed to the head. A savage frame of mind is thus shown, but
only in the case of those animals which fight with their teeth; and the care
which they take to prevent their ears being seized by their antagonists,
accounts for this position. Consequently, through habit and association,
whenever they feel slightly savage, or pretend in their play to be savage,
their ears are drawn back. That this is the true explanation may be inferred
from the relation which exists in very many animals between their manner of
fighting and the retraction of their ears.
All the Carnivora fight
with their canine teeth, and all, as far as I have observed, draw their ears
back when feeling savage. This may be continually seen with dogs when fighting
in earnest, and with puppies fighting in play. The movement is different from
the falling down and slight drawing back of the ears, when a dog feels pleased
and is caressed by his master. The retraction of the ears may likewise be seen
in kittens fighting together in their play, and in full-grown cats when really
savage, as before illustrated in fig. 9 (p. 58). Although their ears are thus
to a large extent protected, yet they often get much torn in old male cats
during their mutual battles. The same movement is very striking in tigers,
leopards, &c., whilst growling over their food in menageries. The lynx has
remarkably long ears; and their retraction, when one of these animals is
approached in its cage, is very conspicuous, and is eminently expressive of its
savage disposition. Even one of the Eared Seals, the Otariapusilla, which has
very small ears, draws them backwards, when it makes a savage rush at the legs
of its keeper.
When horses fight
together they use their incisors for biting, and their fore-legs for striking,
much more than they do their hind-legs for kicking backwards. This has been
observed when stallions have broken loose and have fought together, and may
likewise be inferred from the kind of wounds which they inflict on each other.
Every one recognizes the vicious appearance which the drawing back of the ears
gives to a horse. This movement is very different from that of listening to a
sound behind. If an ill-tempered horse in a stall is inclined to kick
backwards, his ears are retracted from habit, though he has no intention or
power to bite. But when a horse throws up both hind-legs in play, as when
entering an open field, or when just touched by the whip, he does not generally
depress his ears, for he does not then feel vicious. Guanacoes fight savagely
with their teeth; and they must do so frequently, for I found the hides of
several which I shot in Patagonia deeply scored. So do camels; and both these
animals, when savage, draw their ears closely backwards. Guanacoes, as I have
noticed, when not intending to bite, but merely to spit their offensive saliva
from a distance at an intruder, retract their ears. Even the hippopotamus, when
threatening with its widely-open enormous mouth a comrade, draws back its small
ears, just like a horse.
Now what a contrast is
presented between the foregoing animals and cattle, sheep, or goats, which
never use their teeth in fighting, and never draw back their ears when enraged!
Although sheep and goats appear such placid animals, the males often join in
furious contests. As deer form a closely related family, and as I did not know
that they ever fought with their teeth, I was much surprised at the account
given by Major Ross King of the Moose-deer in Canada. He says, when "two
males chance to meet, laying back their ears and gnashing their teeth together,
they rush at each other with appalling fury."[33] But Mr. Bartlett informs
me that some species of deer fight savagely with their teeth, so that the
drawing back of the ears by the moose accords with our rule. Several kinds of
kangaroos, kept in the Zoological Gardens, fight by scratching with their
fore-feet and by kicking with their hind-legs; but they never bite each other,
and the keepers have never seen them draw back their ears when angered. Rabbits
fight chiefly by kicking and scratching, but they likewise bite each other; and
I have known one to bite off half the tail of its antagonist. At the
commencement of their battles they lay back their ears, but afterwards, as they
bound over and kick each other, they keep their ears erect, or move them much
about.
Mr. Bartlett watched a
wild boar quarrelling rather savagely with his sow; and both had their mouths
open and their ears drawn backwards. But this does not appear to be a common
action with domestic pigs when quarrelling. Boars fight together by striking
upwards with their tusks; and Mr. Bartlett doubts whether they then draw back
their ears. Elephants, which in like manner fight with their tusks, do not
retract their ears, but, on the contrary, erect them when rushing at each other
or at an enemy.
The rhinoceroses in the
Zoological Gardens fight with their nasal horns, and have never been seen to
attempt biting each other except in play; and the keepers are convinced that
they do not draw back their ears, like horses and dogs, when feeling savage.
The following statement, therefore, by Sir S. Baker[34] is inexplicable,
namely, that a rhinoceros, which he shot in North Africa, "had no ears;
they had been bitten off close to the head by another of the same species while
fighting; and this mutilation is by no means uncommon."
Lastly, with respect to
monkeys. Some kinds, which have moveable ears, and which fight with their
teeth-- for instance the Cereopithecus ruber--draw back their ears when
irritated just like dogs; and they then have a very spiteful appearance. Other
kinds, as the Inuus ecaudatus, apparently do not thus act. Again, other kinds--and
this is a great anomaly in comparison with most other animals--retract their
ears, show their teeth, and jabber, when they are pleased by being caressed. I
observed this in two or three species of Macacus, and in the Cynopithecus
niger. This expression, owing to our familiarity with dogs, would never be
recognized as one of joy or pleasure by those unacquainted with monkeys.
Erection of the
Ears.--This movement requires hardly any notice. All animals which have the
power of freely moving their ears, when they are startled, or when they closely
observe any object, direct their ears to the point towards which they are
looking, in order to hear any sound from this quarter. At the same time they
generally raise their heads, as all their organs of sense are there situated,
and some of the smaller animals rise on their hind-legs. Even those kinds which
squat on the ground or instantly flee away to avoid danger, generally act
momentarily in this manner, in order to ascertain the source and nature of the danger.
The head being raised, with erected ears and eyes directed forwards, gives an
unmistakable expression of close attention to any animal.
[1] See the evidence on
this head in my `Variation of Animals and Plants under Domestication,' vol. i.
p. 27. On the cooing of pigeons, vol. i. pp. 154, 155.
[2] `Essays,
Scientific, Political, and Speculative,' 1858. `The Origin and Function of
Music,' p. 359.
[3] `The Descent of
Man,' 1870, vol. ii. p. 332. The words quoted are from Professor Owen. It has
lately been shown that some quadrupeds much lower in the scale than monkeys,
namely Rodents, are able to produce correct musical tones: see the account of a
singing Hesperomys, by the Rev. S. Lockwood, in the `American Naturalist,' vol.
v. December, 1871, p. 761.
[4] Mr. Tylor
(`Primitive Culture,' 1871, vol. i. p. 166), in his discussion on this subject,
alludes to the whining of the dog.
[5] `Naturgeschichte
der Säugethiere von Paraguay,' 1830, s. 46.
[6] Quoted by
Gratiolet, `De la Physionomie,' 1865, p. 115.
[7] `Théorie
Physiologique de la Musique,' Paris, 1868, P. 146. Helmholtz has also fully
discussed in this profound work the relation of the form of the cavity of the
mouth to the production of vowel-sounds.
[8] I have given some
details on this subject in my `Descent of Man,' vol. i. pp. 352, 384.
[9] As quoted in
Huxley's `Evidence as to Man's Place in Nature,' 1863, p. 52.
[10] Illust.
Thierleben, 1864, B. i. s. 130.
[11] The Hon. J. Caton,
Ottawa Acad. of Nat. Sciences, May, 1868, pp. 36, 40. For the Capra, Ægagrus,
`Land and Water,' 1867, p. 37.
[12] `Land and Water,'
July 20, 1867, p. 659.
[13] Phaeton
rubricauda: `Ibis,' vol. iii. 1861, p. 180.
[14] On the Strix
flammea, Audubon, `Ornithological Biography,' 1864, vol. ii. p. 407. I have
observed other cases in the Zoological Gardens.
[15] Melopsittacus
undulatus. See an account of its habits by Gould, `Handbook of Birds of
Australia,' 1865, vol. ii. p. 82.
[16] See, for instance,
the account which I have given (`Descent of Man,' vol. ii. p. 32) of an Anolis
and Draco.
[17] These muscles are
described in his well-known works. I am greatly indebted to this distinguished
observer for having given me in a letter information on this same subject.
[18] `Lehrbuch der
Histologie des Menschen,' 1857, s. 82. I owe to Prof. W. Turner's kindness an
extract from this work.
[19] `Quarterly Journal
of Microscopical Science,' 1853, vol. i. p. 262.
[20] `Lehrbuch der
Histologie,' 1857, s. 82.
[21] `Dictionary of
English Etymology,' p. 403.
[22] See the account of
the habits of this animal by Dr, Cooper, as quoted in `Nature,' April 27, 1871,
p. 512.
[23] Dr. Günther,
`Reptiles of British India,' p. 262.
[24] Mr. J. Mansel
Weale, `Nature,' April 27, 1871, p. 508.
[25] `Journal of
Researches during the Voyage of the "Beagle," ' 1845, p. 96. I have
compared the rattling thus produced with that of the Rattle-snake.
[26] See the account by
Dr. Anderson, Proc. Zool. Soc.1871, p. 196.
[27] The `American
Naturalist,' Jan. 1872, p. 32. I regret that I cannot follow Prof. Shaler in
believing that the rattle has been developed, by the aid of natural selection,
for the sake of producing sounds which deceive and attract birds, so that they
may serve as prey to the snake. I do not, however, wish to doubt that the
sounds may occasionally subserve this end. But the conclusion at which I have
arrived, viz. that the rattling serves as a warning to would-be devourers,
appears to me much more probable, as it connects together various classes of
facts. If this snake had acquired its rattle and the habit of rattling, for the
sake of attracting prey, it does not seem probable that it would have
invariably used its instrument when angered or disturbed. Prof. Shaler takes
nearly the same view as I do of the manner of development of the rattle; and I
have always held this opinion since observing the Trigonocephalus in South
America.
[28] From the accounts
lately collected, and given in the `Journal of the Linnean Society,' by Airs.
Barber, on the habits of the snakes of South Africa; and from the accounts
published by several writers, for instance by Lawson, of the Rattle-snake in
North America,--it does not seem improbable that the terrific appearance of
snakes and the sounds produced by them, may likewise serve in procuring prey,
by paralysing, or as it is sometimes called fascinating, the smaller animals.
[29] See the account by
Dr. R. Brown, in Proc. Zool. Soc. 1871, p. 39. He says that as soon as a pig
sees a snake it rushes upon it; and a snake makes off immediately on the
appearance of a pig.
[30] Dr. Günther
remarks (`Reptiles of British India,' p. 340) on the destruction of cobras by
the ichneumon or herpestes, and whilst the cobras are young by the jungle-
fowl. It is well known that the peacock also eagerly kills snakes.
[31] Prof. Cope
enumerates a number of kinds in his `Method of Creation of Organic Types,' read
before the American Phil. Soc., December 15th, 1871, p. 20. Prof. Cope takes
the same view as I do of the use of the gestures and sounds made by snakes. I
briefly alluded to this subject in the last edition of my `Origin of Species.'
Since the passages in the text above have been printed, I have been pleased to
find that Mr. Henderson (`The American Naturalist,' May, 1872, p. 260) also
takes a similar view of the use of the rattle, namely "in preventing an
attack from being made."
[32] Mr. des Vœux, in
Proc. Zool. Soc. 1871, p. 3.
[33] `The Sportsman and
Naturalist in Canada,' 1866, p. 53.
[34] `The Nile
Tributaries of Abyssinia,' 1867, p. 443.
The Dog.--I have
already described (figs. 5 and 1) the appearance of a dog approaching another
dog with hostile intentions, namely, with erected ears, eyes intently directed
forwards, hair on the neck and back bristling, gait remarkably stiff, with the
tail upright and rigid. So familiar is this appearance to us, that an angry man
is sometimes said "to have his back up." Of the above points, the
stiff gait and upright tail alone require further discussion. Sir C. Bell
remarks[1] that, when a tiger or wolf is struck by its keeper and is suddenly
roused to ferocity, every muscle is in tension, and the limbs are in an
attitude of strained exertion, prepared to spring. This tension of the muscles
and consequent stiff gait may be accounted for on the principle of associated
habit, for anger has continually led to fierce struggles, and consequently to
all the muscles of the body having been violently exerted. There is also reason
to suspect that the muscular system requires some short preparation, or some
degree of innervation, before being brought into strong action. My own
sensations lead me to this inference; but I cannot discover that it is a
conclusion admitted by physiologists. Sir J. Paget, however, informs me that
when muscles are suddenly contracted with the greatest force, without any preparation,
they are liable to be ruptured, as when a man slips unexpectedly; but that this
rarely occurs when an action, however violent, is deliberately performed.
With respect to the
upright position of the tail, it seems to depend (but whether this is really
the case I know not) on the elevator muscles being more powerful than the
depressors, so that when all the muscles of the hinder part of the body are in
a state of tension, the tail is raised. A dog in cheerful spirits, and trotting
before his master with high, elastic steps, generally carries his tail aloft,
though it is not held nearly so stiffly as when he is angered. A horse when
first turned out into an open field, may be seen to trot with long elastic
strides, the head and tail being held high aloft. Even cows when they frisk
about from pleasure, throw up their tails in a ridiculous fashion. So it is
with various animals in the Zoological Gardens. The position of the tail,
however, in certain cases, is determined by special circumstances; thus as soon
as a horse breaks into a gallop, at full speed, he always lowers his tail, so
that as little resistance as possible may be offered to the air.
When a dog is on the
point of springing on his antagonist, be utters a savage growl; the ears are
pressed closely backwards, and the upper lip (fig. 14) is retracted out of the
way of his teeth, especially of his canines. These movements may be observed
with dogs and puppies in their play. But if a dog gets really savage in his
play, his expression immediately changes. This, however, is simply due to the
lips and ears being drawn back with much greater energy. If a dog only snarls
another, the lip is generally retracted on one side alone, namely towards his
enemy.
The movements of a dog
whilst exhibiting affection towards his master were described (figs. 6 and 8)
in our second chapter. These consist in the head and whole body being lowered
and thrown into flexuous movements, with the tail extended and wagged from side
to side. The ears fall down and are drawn somewhat backwards, which causes the
eyelids to be elongated, and alters the whole appearance of the face. The lips
hang loosely, and the hair remains smooth. All these movements or gestures are
explicable, as I believe, from their standing in complete antithesis to those
naturally assumed by a savage dog under a directly opposite state of mind. When
a man merely speaks to, or just notices, his dog, we see the last vestige of
these movements in a slight wag of the tail, without any other movement of the
body, and without even the ears being lowered. Dogs also exhibit their
affection by desiring to rub against their masters, and to be rubbed or patted
by them.
Gratiolet explains the
above gestures of affection in the following manner: and the reader can judge
whether the explanation appears satisfactory. Speaking of animals in general,
including the dog, he says,[2] "C'est toujours la partie la plus sensible
de leurs corps qui recherche les caresses ou les donne. Lorsque toute la
longueur des flancs et du corps est sensible, l'animal serpente et rampe sous
les caresses; et ces ondulations se propageant le long des muscles analogues
des segments jusqu'aux extrémités de la colonne vertébrale, la queue se ploie
et s'agite." Further on, he adds, that dogs, when feeling affectionate,
lower their ears in order to exclude all sounds, so that their whole attention
may be concentrated on the caresses of their master!
Dogs have another and
striking way of exhibiting their affection, namely, by licking the hands or
faces of their masters. They sometimes lick other dogs, and then it is always
their chops. I have also seen dogs licking cats with whom they were friends.
This habit probably originated in the females carefully licking their
puppies--the dearest object of their love--for the sake of cleansing them. They
also often give their puppies, after a short absence, a few cursory licks,
apparently from affection. Thus the habit will have become associated with the
emotion of love, however it may afterwards be aroused. It is now so firmly
inherited or innate, That it is transmitted equally to both sexes. A female
terrier of mine lately had her puppies destroyed, and though at all times a
very affectionate creature, I was much struck with the manner in which she then
tried to satisfy her instinctive maternal love by expending it on me; and her
desire to lick my hands rose to an insatiable passion.
The same principle
probably explains why dogs, when feeling affectionate, like rubbing against
their masters and being rubbed or patted by them, for from the nursing of their
puppies, contact with a beloved object has become firmly associated in their
minds with the emotion of love.
The feeling of
affection of a dog towards his master is combined with a strong sense of
submission, which is akin to fear. Hence dogs not only lower their bodies and
crouch a little as they approach their masters, but sometimes throw themselves
on the ground with their bellies upwards. This is a movement as completely
opposite as is possible to any show of resistance. I formerly possessed a large
dog who was not at all afraid to fight with other dogs; but a wolf-like
shepherd-dog in the neighbourhood, though not ferocious and not so powerful as
my dog, had a strange influence over him. When they met on the road, my dog
used to run to meet him, with his tail partly tucked in between his legs and
hair not erected; and then be would throw himself on the ground, belly upwards.
By this action he seemed to say more plainly than by words, "Behold, I am
your slave."
A pleasurable and
excited state of mind, associated with affection, is exhibited by some dogs in
a very peculiar manner, namely, by grinning. This was noticed long ago by
Somerville, who says,
And with a courtly
grin, the fawning bound
Salutes thee cow'ring,
his wide op'ning nose
Upward he curls, and
his large sloe-back eyes
Melt in soft
blandishments, and humble joy.'
The Chase, book i.
Sir W. Scott's famous
Scotch greyhound, Maida, had this habit, and it is common with terriers. I have
also seen it in a Spitz and in a sheep-dog. Mr. Riviere, who has particularly
attended to this expression, informs me that it is rarely displayed in a
perfect manner, but is quite common in a lesser degree. The upper lip during
the act of grinning is retracted, as in snarling, so that the canines are
exposed, and the ears are drawn backwards; but the general appearance of the
animal clearly shows that anger is not felt. Sir C. Bell[3] remarks "Dogs,
in their expression of fondness, have a slight eversion of the lips, and grin
and sniff amidst their gambols, in a way that resembles laughter." Some
persons speak of the grin as a smile, but if it had been really a smile, we
should see a similar, though more pronounced, movement of the lips and ears,
when dogs utter their bark of joy; but this is not the case, although a bark of
joy often follows a grin. On the other hand, dogs, when playing with their
comrades or masters, almost always pretend to bite each other; and they then
retract, though not energetically, their lips and ears. Hence I suspect that
there is a tendency in some dogs, whenever they feel lively pleasure combined
with affection, to act through habit and association on the same muscles, as in
playfully biting each other, or their masters' hands.
I have described, in
the second chapter, the gait and appearance of a dog when cheerful, and the
marked antithesis presented by the same animal when dejected and disappointed,
with his head, ears, body, tail, and chops drooping, and eyes dull. Under the
expectation of any great pleasure, dogs bound and jump about in an extravagant
manner, and bark for joy. The tendency to bark under this state of mind is
inherited, or runs in the breed: greyhounds rarely bark, whilst the Spitz-dog
barks so incessantly on starting for a walk with his master that he becomes a
nuisance.
An agony of pain is
expressed by dogs in nearly the same way as by many other animals, namely, by
howling writhing, and contortions of the whole body.
Attention is shown by
the head being raised, with the ears erected, and eyes intently directed
towards the object or quarter under observation. If it be a sound and the
source is not known, the head is often turned obliquely from side to side in a
most significant manner, apparently in order to judge with more exactness from
what point the sound proceeds. But I have seen a dog greatly surprised at a new
noise, turning, his head to one side through habit, though he clearly perceived
the source of the noise. Dogs, as formerly remarked, when their attention is in
any way aroused, whilst watching some object, or attending to some sound, often
lift up one paw (fig. 4) and keep it doubled up, as if to make a slow and
stealthy approach.
A dog under extreme
terror will throw himself down, howl, and void his excretions; but the hair, I
believe, does not become erect unless some anger is felt. I have seen a dog
much terrified at a band of musicians who were playing loudly outside the
house, with every muscle of his body trembling, with his heart palpitating so
quickly that the beats could hardly be counted, and panting for breath with
widely open mouth, in the same manner as a terrified man does. Yet this dog had
not exerted himself; he had only wandered slowly and restlessly about the room,
and the day was cold.
Even a very slight
degree of fear is invariably shown by the tail being tucked in between the
legs. This tucking in of the fail is accompanied by the ears being drawn
backwards; but they are not pressed closely to the head, as in snarling, and
they are not lowered, as when a dog is pleased or affectionate. When two young
dogs chase each other in play, the one that runs away always keeps his tail
tucked inwards. So it is when a dog, in the highest spirits, careers like a mad
creature round and round his master in circles, or in figures of eight. He then
acts as if another dog were chasing him. This curious kind of play, which must
be familiar to every one who has attended to dogs, is particularly apt to be
excited, after the animal has been a little startled or frightened, as by his
master suddenly jumping out on him in the dusk. In this case, as well as when
two young dogs are chasing each other in play, it appears as if the one that
runs away was afraid of the other catching him by the tail; but as far as I can
find out, dogs very rarely catch each other in this manner. I asked a
gentleman, who had kept foxhounds all his life, and be applied to other experienced
sportsmen, whether they had ever seen hounds thus seize a fox; but they never
had. It appears that when a dog is chased, or when in danger of being struck
behind, or of anything falling on him, in all these cases he wishes to withdraw
as quickly as possible his whole hind-quarters, and that from some sympathy or
connection between the muscles, the tail is then drawn closely inwards.
A similarly connected
movement between the hind- quarters and the tail may be observed in the hyæna.
Mr. Bartlett informs me that when two of these animals fight together, they are
mutually conscious of the wonderful power of each other's jaws, and are
extremely cautious. They well know that if one of their legs were seized, the
bone would instantly be crushed into atoms; hence they approach each other
kneeling, with their legs turned as much as possible inwards, and with their
whole bodies bowed, so as not to present any salient point; the tail at the
same time being closely tucked in between the legs. In this attitude they
approach each other sideways, or even partly backwards. So again with deer,
several of the species, when savage and fighting, tuck in their tails. When one
horse in a field tries to bite the hind-quarters of another in play, or when a
rough boy strikes a donkey from behind, the hind-quarters and the tail are
drawn in, though it does not appear as if this were done merely to save the
tail from being injured. We have also seen the reverse of these movements; for
when an animal trots with high elastic steps, the tail is almost always carried
aloft.
As I have said, when a
dog is chased and runs away, he keeps his ears directed backwards but still
open; and this is clearly done for the sake of hearing the footsteps of his
pursuer. From habit the ears are often held in this same position, and the tail
tucked in, when the danger is obviously in front. I have repeatedly noticed,
with a timid terrier of mine, that when she is afraid of some object in front,
the nature of which she perfectly knows and does not need to reconnoitre, yet
she will for a long time hold her ears and tail in this position, looking the
image of discomfort. Discomfort, without any fear, is similarly expressed:
thus, one day I went out of doors, just at the time when this same dog knew that
her dinner would be brought. I did not call her, but she wished much to
accompany me, and at the same time she wished much for her dinner; and there
she stood, first looking one way and then the other, with her tail tucked in
and ears drawn back, presenting an unmistakable appearance of perplexed
discomfort.
Almost all the
expressive movements now described, with the exception of the grinning from
joy, are innate or instinctive, for they are common to all the individuals,
young and old, of all the breeds. Most of them are likewise common to the
aboriginal parents of the dog, namely the wolf and jackal; and some of them to
other species of the same group. Tamed wolves and jackals, when caressed by
their masters, jump about for joy, wag their tails, lower their ears, lick
their master's hands, crouch down, and even throw themselves on the ground
belly upwards.[4] I have seen a rather fox-like African jackal, from the
Gaboon, depress its ears when caressed. Wolves and jackals, when frightened,
certainly tuck in their tails; and a tamed jackal has been described as
careering round his master in circles and figures of eight, like a dog, with
his tail between his legs.
It has been stated[5]
that foxes, however tame, never display any of the above expressive movements;
but this is not strictly accurate. Many years ago I observed in the Zoological
Gardens, and recorded the fact at the time, that a very tame English fox, When
caressed by the keeper, wagged its tail, depressed its ears, and then threw
itself on the ground, belly upwards. The black fox of North America likewise
depressed its ears in a slight degree. But I believe that foxes never lick the
hands of their masters, and I have been assured that when frightened they never
tuck in their tails. If the explanation which I have given of the expression of
affection in dogs be admitted, then it would appear that animals which have
never been domesticated--namely wolves, jackals, and even foxes--have
nevertheless acquired, through the principle of antithesis, certain expressive
gestures; for it is Dot probable that these animals, confined in cages, should
have learnt them by imitating dogs. Cats.--I have already described the actions
of a cat (fig. 9), when feeling savage and not terrified. She assumes a
crouching attitude and occasionally protrudes her fore-feet, with the claws
exserted ready for striking. The tail is extended, being curled or lashed from
side to side. The hair is not erected--at least it was not so in the few cases
observed by me. The ears are drawn closely backwards and the teeth are shown.
Low savage growls are uttered. We can understand why the attitude assumed by a
cat when preparing to fight with another cat, or in any way greatly irritated,
is so widely different from that of a dog approaching another dog with hostile
intentions; for the cat uses her fore-feet for striking, and this renders a
crouching position convenient or necessary. She is also much more accustomed
than a dog to lie concealed and suddenly spring on her prey. No cause can be
assigned with certainty for the tail being lashed or curled from side to side.
This habit is common to many other animals--for instance, to the puma, when
prepared to spring;[1] but it is not common to dogs, or to foxes, as I infer
from Mr. St. John's account of a fox lying in wait and seizing a hare. We have
already seen that some kinds of lizards and various snakes, when excited,
rapidly vibrate the tips of their tails. It would appear as if, under strong
excitement, there existed an uncontrollable desire for movement of some kind,
owing to nerve-force being freely liberated from the excited sensorium; and
that as the tail is left free, and as its movement does not disturb the general
position of the body, it is curled or lashed about.
All the movements of a
cat, when feeling affectionate, are in complete antithesis to those just
described. She now stands upright, with slightly arched back, tail
perpendicularly raised, and ears erected; and she rubs her cheeks and flanks
against her master or mistress. The desire to rub something is so strong in
cats under this state of mind, that they may often be seen rubbing themselves
against the legs of chairs or tables, or against door-posts. This manner of
expressing affection probably originated through association, as in the case of
dogs, from the mother nursing and fondling her young; and perhaps from the
young themselves loving each other and playing together. Another and very
different gesture, expressive of pleasure, has already been described, namely,
the curious manner in which young and even old cats, when pleased, alternately
protrude their fore-feet, with separated toes, as if pushing against and
sucking their mother's teats. This habit is so far analogous to that of rubbing
against something, that both apparently are derived from actions performed
during the nursing period. Why cats should show affection by rubbing so much
more than do dogs, though the latter delight in contact with their masters, and
why cats only occasionally lick the hands of their friends, whilst dogs always
do so, I cannot say. Cats cleanse themselves by licking their own coats more
regularly than do dogs. On the other hand, their tongues seem less well fitted
for the work than the longer and more flexible tongues of dogs.
Cats, when terrified,
stand at full height, and arch their backs in a well-known and ridiculous
fashion. They spit, hiss, or growl. The hair over the whole body, and
especially on the tail, becomes erect. In the instances observed by me the
basal part of the tail was held upright, the terminal part being thrown on one
side; but sometimes the tail (see fig. 15) is only a little raised, and is bent
almost from the base to one side. The ears are drawn back, and the teeth
exposed. When two kittens are playing together, the one often thus tries to
frighten the other. From what we have seen in former chapters, all the above
points of expression are intelligible, except the extreme arching of the back.
I am inclined to believe that, in the same manner as many birds, whilst they
ruffle their feathers, spread out their wings and tail, to make themselves look
as big as possible, so cats stand upright at their full height, arch their
backs, often raise the basal part of the tail, and erect their hair, for the
same purpose. The lynx, when attacked, is said to arch its back, and is thus
figured by Brehm. But the keepers in the Zoological Gardens have never seen any
tendency to this action in the larger feline animals, such as tigers, lions,
&c.; and these have little cause to be afraid of any other animal.
Cats use their voices
much as a means of expression, and they utter, under various emotions and
desires, at least six or seven different sounds. The purr of satisfaction,
which is made during both inspiration and expiration, is one of the most
curious. The puma, cheetah, and ocelot likewise purr; but the tiger, when
pleased, "emits a peculiar short snuffle, accompanied by the closure of
the eyelids."[7] It is said that the lion, jaguar, and leopard, do not
purr.
Horses.--Horses when
savage draw their ears closely back, protrude their heads, and partially
uncover their incisor teeth, ready for biting. When inclined to kick behind,
they generally, through habit, draw back their ears; and their eyes are turned
backwards in a peculiar manner.[8] When pleased, as when some coveted food is
brought to them in the stable, they raise and draw in their heads, prick their
ears, and looking intently towards their friend, often whinny. Impatience is
expressed by pawing the ground.
The actions of a horse
when much startled are highly expressive. One day my horse was much frightened
at a drilling machine, covered by a tarpaulin, and lying on an open field. He
raised his head so high, that his neck became almost perpendicular; and this he
did from habit, for the machine lay on a slope below, and could not have been
seen with more distinctness through the raising of the head; nor if any sound
had proceeded from it, could the sound have been more distinctly heard. His
eyes and ears were directed intently forwards; and I could feel through the
saddle the palpitations of his heart. With red dilated nostrils he snorted
violently, and whirling round, would have dashed off at full speed, had I not
prevented him. The distension of the nostrils is not for the sake of scenting
the source of danger, for when a horse smells carefully at any object and is
not alarmed, he does not dilate his nostrils. Owing to the presence of a valve
in the throat, a horse when panting does not breathe through his open mouth, but
through his nostrils; and these consequently have become endowed with great
powers of expansion. This expansion of the nostrils, as well as the snorting,
and the palpitations of the heart, are actions which have become firmly
associated during a long series of generations with the emotion of terror; for
terror has habitually led the horse to the most violent exertion in dashing
away at full speed from the cause of danger.
Ruminants.--Cattle and
sheep are remarkable from displaying in so slight a degree their emotions or
sensations, excepting that of extreme pain. A bull when enraged exhibits his
rage only by the manner in which be holds his lowered head, with distended nostrils,
and by bellowing. He also often paws the ground; but this pawing seems quite
different from that of an impatient horse, for when the soil is loose, he
throws up clouds of dust. I believe that bulls act in this manner when
irritated by flies, for the sake of driving them away. The wilder breeds of
sheep and the chamois when startled stamp on the ground, and whistle through
their noses; and this serves as a danger-signal to their comrades. The musk-ox
of the Arctic regions, when encountered, likewise stamps on the ground.[9] How
this stamping action arose I cannot conjecture; for from inquiries which I have
made it does not appear that any of these animals fight with their fore-legs.
Some species of deer,
when savage, display far more expression than do cattle, sheep, or goats, for,
as has already been stated, they draw back their ears, grind their teeth, erect
their hair, squeal, stamp on the ground, and brandish their horns. One day in
the Zoological Gardens, the Formosan deer (Cervus pseudaxis) approached me in a
curious attitude, with his muzzle raised high up, so that the horns were
pressed back on his neck; the head being held rather obliquely. From the
expression of his eye I felt sure that he was savage; he approached slowly, and
as soon as he came close to the iron bars, he did not lower his head to butt at
me, but suddenly bent it inwards, and struck his horns with great force against
the railings. Mr. Bartlett informs me that some other species of deer place
themselves in the same attitude when enraged.
Monkeys.--The various
species and genera of monkeys express their feelings in many different ways;
and this fact is interesting, as in some degree bearing on the question,
whether the so-called races of man should be ranked as distinct species or
varieties; for, as we shall see in the following chapters, the different races
of man express their emotions and sensations with remarkable uniformity
throughout the world. Some of the expressive actions of monkeys are interesting
in another way, namely from being closely analogous to those of man. As I have
had no opportunity of observing any one species of the group under all
circumstances, my miscellaneous remarks will be best arranged under different
states of the mind.
Pleasure, joy,
affection--It is not possible to distinguish in monkeys, at least without more
experience than I have had, the expression of pleasure or joy from that of
affection. Young chimpanzees make a kind of barking noise, when pleased by the
return of any one to whom they are attached. When this noise, which the keepers
call a laugh, is uttered, the lips are protruded; but so they are under various
other emotions. Nevertheless I could perceive that when they were pleased the
form of the lips differed a little from that assumed when they were angered. If
a young chimpanzee be tickled--and the armpits are particularly sensitive to
tickling, as in the case of our children,--a more decided chuckling or laughing
sound is uttered; though the laughter is sometimes noiseless. The corners of
the mouth are then drawn backwards; and this sometimes causes the lower eyelids
to be slightly wrinkled. But this wrinkling, which is so characteristic of our
own laughter, is more plainly seen in some other monkeys. The teeth in the
upper jaw in the chimpanzee are not exposed when they utter their laughing
noise, in which respect they differ from us. But their eyes sparkle and grow
brighter, as Mr. W. L. Martin,[10] who has particularly attended to their
expression, states.
Young Orangs, when
tickled, likewise grin and make a chuckling sound; and Mr. Martin says that
their eyes grow brighter. As soon as their laughter ceases, an expression may
be detected passing over their faces, which, as Mr. Wallace remarked to me, may
be called a smile. I have also noticed something of the same kind with the
chimpanzee. Dr. Duchenne--and I cannot quote a better authority--informs me
that he kept a very tame monkey in his house for a year; and when he gave it
during meal-times some choice delicacy, he observed that the corners of its
mouth were slightly raised; thus an expression of satisfaction, partaking of
the nature of an incipient smile, and resembling that often seen on the face of
main, could be plainly perceived in this animal.
The Cebus azaræ,[11]
when rejoiced at again seeing a beloved person, utters a peculiar tittering
(kichernden) sound. It also expresses agreeable sensations, by drawing back the
corners of its mouth, without producing any sound. Rengger calls this movement
laughter, but it would be more appropriately called a smile. The form of the
mouth is different when either pain or terror is expressed, and high shrieks
are uttered. Another species of Cebus in the Zoological Gardens (C. hypoleucus)
when pleased, makes a reiterated shrill note, and likewise draws back the
corners of its mouth, apparently through the contraction of the same muscles as
with us. So does the Barbary ape (Inuus ecaudatus) to an extraordinary degree;
and I observed in this monkey that the skin of the lower eyelids then became
much wrinkled. At the same time it rapidly moved its lower jaw or lips in a
spasmodic manner, the teeth being exposed; but the noise produced was hardly
more distinct than that which we sometimes call silent laughter. Two of the
keepers affirmed that this slight sound was the animal's laughter, and when I
expressed some doubt on this head (being at the time quite inexperienced), they
made it attack or rather threaten a hated Entellus monkey, living in the same
compartment. Instantly the whole expression of the face of the Inuus changed;
the mouth was opened much more widely, the canine teeth were more fully
exposed, and a hoarse barking noise was uttered.
The Anubis baboon
(Cynocephalus anubis) was first insulted and put into a furious rage, as was
easily done, by his keeper, who then made friends with him and shook hands. As
the reconciliation was effected the baboon rapidly moved up and down his jaws
and lips, and looked pleased. When we laugh heartily, a similar movement, or
quiver, may be observed more or less distinctly in our jaws; but with man the
muscles of the chest are more particularly acted on, whilst with this baboon,
and with some other monkeys, it is the muscles of the jaws and lips which are
spasmodically affected.
I have already had occasion
to remark on the curious manner in which two or three species of Alacacus and
the Cynopithecus niger draw back their ears and utter a slight jabbering noise,
when they are pleased by being caressed. With the Cynopithecus (fig. 17), the
corners of the mouth are at the same time drawn backwards and upwards, so that
the teeth are exposed. Hence this expression would never be recognized by a
stranger as one of pleasure. The crest of long hairs on the forehead is
depressed, and apparently the whole skin of the head drawn backwards. The
eyebrows are thus raised a little, and the eyes assume a staring appearance.
The lower eyelids also become slightly wrinkled; but this wrinkling is not
conspicuous, owing to the permanent transverse furrows on the face.
Painful emotions and
sensations.--With monkeys the expression of slight pain, or of any painful
emotion, such as grief, vexation, jealousy, &c., is not easily
distinguished from that of moderate anger; and these states of mind readily and
quickly pass into each other. Grief, however, with some species is certainly
exhibited by weeping. A woman, who sold a monkey to the Zoological Society,
believed to have come from Borneo (Macacus maurus or M. inornatus of Gray),
said that it often cried; and Mr. Bartlett, as well as the keeper Mr. Sutton,
have repeatedly seen it, when grieved, or even when much pitied, weeping so
copiously that the tears rolled down its cheeks. There is, however, something
strange about this case, for two specimens subsequently kept in the Gardens,
and believed to be the same species, have never been seen to weep, though they
were carefully observed by the keeper and myself when much distressed and
loudly screaming. Rengger states[12] that the eyes of the Cebus azaræ fill with
tears, but not sufficiently to overflow, when it is prevented getting some much
desired object, or is much frightened. Humboldt also asserts that the eyes of
the Callithrix sciureus "instantly fill with tears when it is seized with
fear;" but when this pretty little monkey in the Zoological Gardens was
teased, so as to cry out loudly, this did not occur. I do not, however, wish to
throw the least doubt on the accuracy of Humboldt's statement.
The appearance of
dejection in young orangs and chimpanzees, when out of health, is as plain and
almost as pathetic as in the case of our children. This state of mind and body
is shown by their listless movements, fallen countenances, dull eyes, and
changed complexion.
Anger.--This emotion is
often exhibited by many kinds of monkeys, and is expressed, as Mr. Martin
remarks,[13] in many different ways. "Some species, when irritated, pout
the lips, gaze with a fixed and savage glare on their foe, and make repeated
short starts as if about to spring forward, uttering at the same time inward
guttural sounds. Many display their anger by suddenly advancing, making abrupt
starts, at the same time opening the mouth and pursing up the lips, so as to
conceal the teeth, while the eyes are daringly fixed on the enemy, as if in
savage defiance. Some again, and principally the long-tailed monkeys, or
Guenons, display their teeth, and accompany their malicious grins with a sharp,
abrupt, reiterated cry." Mr. Sutton confirms the statement that some
species uncover their teeth when enraged, whilst others conceal them by the
protrusion of their lips; and some kinds draw back their ears. The Cynopithecus
niger, lately referred to, acts in this manner, at the same time depressing the
crest of hair on its forehead, and showing its teeth; so that the movements of
the features from anger are nearly the same as those from pleasure; and the two
expressions can be distinguished only by those familiar with the animal.
Baboons often show
their passion and threaten their enemies in a very odd manner, namely, by opening
their mouths widely as in the act of yawning. Mr. Bartlett has often seen two
baboons, when first placed in the same compartment, sitting opposite to each
other and thus alternately opening their mouths; and this action seems
frequently to end in a real yawn. Mr. Bartlett believes that both animals wish
to show to each other that they are provided with a formidable set of teeth, as
is undoubtedly the case. As I could hardly credit the reality of this yawning
gesture, Mr. Bartlett insulted an old baboon and put him into a violent
passion; and he almost immediately thus acted. Some species of Macacus and of
Cereopithecus[14] behave in the same manner. Baboons likewise show their anger,
as was observed by Brehin with those which he kept alive in Abyssinia, in
another manner, namely, by striking the ground with one hand, "like an
angry man striking the table with his fist." I have seen this movement
with the baboons in the Zoological Gardens; but sometimes the action seems
rather to represent the searching for a stone or other object in their beds of
straw.
Mr. Sutton has often
observed the face of the Macacus rhesus, when much enraged, growing red. As he
was mentioning this to me, another monkey attacked a rhesus, and I saw its face
redden as plainly as that of a man in a violent passion. In the course of a few
minutes, after the battle, the face of this monkey recovered its natural tint.
At the same time that the face reddened, the naked posterior part of the body,
which is always red, seemed to grow still redder; but I cannot positively
assert that this was the case. When the Mandrill is in any way excited, the
brilliantly coloured, naked parts of the skin are said to become still more
vividly coloured.
With several species of
baboons the ridge of the forehead projects much over the eyes, and is studded
with a few long hairs, representing our eyebrows. These animals are always
looking about them, and in order to look upwards they raise their eyebrows.
They have thus, as it would appear, acquired the habit of frequently moving
their eyebrows. However this may be, many kinds of monkeys, especially the
baboons, when angered or in any way excited, rapidly and incessantly move their
eyebrows up and down, as well as the hairy skin of their foreheads.[15] As we associate
in the case of man the raising and lowering of the eyebrows with definite
states of the mind, the almost incessant movement of the eyebrows by monkeys
gives them a senseless expression. I once observed a man who had a trick of
continually raising his eyebrows without any corresponding emotion, and this
gave to him a foolish appearance; so it is with some persons who keep the
corners of their mouths a little drawn backwards and upwards, as if by an
incipient smile, though at the time they are not amused or pleased.
A young orang, made
jealous by her keeper attending to another monkey, slightly uncovered her
teeth, and, uttering a peevish noise like tish-shist, turned her back on him.
Both orangs and chimpanzees, when a little more angered, protrude their lips
greatly, and make a harsh barking noise. A young female chimpanzee, in a
violent passion, presented a curious resemblance to a child in the same state.
She screamed loudly with widely open mouth, the lips being retracted so that
the teeth were fully exposed. She threw her arms wildly about, sometimes
clasping them over her head. She rolled on the ground, sometimes on her back,
sometimes on her belly, and bit everything within reach. A young gibbon
(Hylobates syndactylus) in a passion has been described[16] as behaving in
almost exactly the same manner.
The lips of young
orangs and chimpanzees are protruded, sometimes to a wonderful degree, under
various circumstances. They act thus, not only when slightly angered, sulky, or
disappointed, but when alarmed at anything--in one instance, at the sight of a
turtle,[17]-- and likewise when pleased. But neither the degree of protrusion
nor the shape of the mouth is exactly the same, as I believe, in all cases; and
the sounds which are then uttered are different. The accompanying drawing
represents a chimpanzee made sulky by an orange having been offered him, and
then taken away. A similar protrusion or pouting of the lips, though to a much
slighter degree, may be seen in sulky children.
Many years ago, in the
Zoological Gardens, I placed a looking-glass on the floor before two young
orangs, who, as far as it was known, had never before seen one. At first they
gazed at their own images with the most steady surprise, and often changed
their point of view. They then approached close and protruded their lips
towards the image, as if to kiss it, in exactly the same manner as they had
previously done towards each other, when first placed, a few days before, in
the same room. They next made all sorts of grimaces, and put themselves in
various attitudes before the mirror; they pressed and rubbed the surface; they
placed their hands at different distances behind it; looked behind it; and
finally seemed almost frightened, started a little, became cross, and refused
to look any longer.
When we try to perform
some little action which is difficult and requires precision, for instance, to
thread a needle, we generally close our lips firmly, for the sake, I presume,
of not disturbing our movements by breathing; and I noticed the same action in
a young Orang. The poor little creature was sick, and was amusing itself by
trying to kill the flies on the window-panes with its knuckles; this was
difficult as the flies buzzed about, and at each attempt the lips were firmly compressed,
and at the same time slightly protruded.
Although the
countenances, and more especially the gestures, of orangs and chimpanzees are
in some respects highly expressive, I doubt whether on the whole they are so
expressive as those of some other kinds of monkeys. This may be attributed in
part to their ears being immovable, and in part to the nakedness of their
eyebrows, of which the movements are thus rendered less conspicuous. When,
however, they raise their eyebrows their foreheads become, as with us,
transversely wrinkled. In comparison with man, their faces are inexpressive,
chiefly owing to their not frowning under any emotion of the mind--that is, as
far as I have been able to observe, and I carefully attended to this point.
Frowning, which is one of the most important of all the expressions in man, is
due to the contraction of the corrugators by which the eyebrows are lowered and
brought together, so that vertical furrows are formed on the forehead. Both the
orang and chimpanzee are said[18] to possess this muscle, but it seems rarely
brought into action, at least in a conspicuous manner. I made my hands into a
sort of cage, and placing some tempting fruit within, allowed both a young
orang and chimpanzee to try their utmost to get it out; but although they grew
rather cross, they showed not a trace of a frown. Nor was there any frown when
they were enraged. Twice I took two chimpanzees from their rather dark room
suddenly into bright sunshine, which would certainly have caused us to frown; they
blinked and winked their eyes, but only once did I see a very slight frown. On
another occasion, I tickled the nose of a chimpanzee with a straw, and as it
crumpled up its face, slight vertical furrows appeared between the eyebrows. I
have never seen a frown on the forehead of the orang.
The gorilla, when
enraged, is described as erecting its crest of hair, throwing down its under
lip, dilating its nostrils, and uttering terrific yells. Messrs. Savage and
Wyman[19] state that the scalp can be freely moved backwards and forwards, and
that when the animal is excited it is strongly contracted; but I presume that
they mean by this latter expression that the scalp is lowered; for they
likewise speak of the young chimpanzee, when crying out, as having the eyebrows
strongly contracted." The great power of movement in the scalp of the
gorilla, of many baboons and other monkeys, deserves notice in relation to the
power possessed by some few men, either through reversion or persistence, of
voluntarily moving their scalps.[20]
Astonishment, Terror--A
living fresh-water turtle was placed at my request in the same compartment in
the Zoological Gardens with many monkeys; and they showed unbounded
astonishment, as well as some fear. This was displayed by their remaining
motionless, staring intently with widely opened eyes, their eyebrows being
often moved up and down. Their faces seemed somewhat lengthened. They
occasionally raised themselves on their hind-legs to get abetter view. They
often retreated a few feet, and then turning their heads over one shoulder,
again stared intently. It was curious to observe how much less afraid they were
of the turtle than of a living snake which I had formerly placed in their
compartment;[21] for in the course of a few minutes some of the monkeys
ventured to approach and touch the turtle. On the other hand, some of the
larger baboons were greatly terrified, and grinned as if on the point of
screaming out. When I showed a little dressed- up doll to the Cynopithecus
niger, it stood motionless, stared intently with widely opened eyes, and
advanced its ears a little forwards. But when the turtle was placed in its
compartment, this monkey also moved its lips in an odd, rapid, jabbering
manner, which the keeper declared was meant to conciliate or please the turtle.
I was never able
clearly to perceive that the eyebrows of astonished monkeys were kept
permanently raised, though they were frequently moved up and down. Attention,
which precedes astonishment, is expressed by man by a slight raising of the
eyebrows; and Dr. Duchenne informs me that when he gave to the monkey formerly
mentioned some quite new article of food, it elevated its eyebrows a little,
thus assuming an appearance of close attention. It then took the food in its
fingers, and, with lowered or rectilinear eyebrows, scratched, smelt, and
examined it,--an expression of reflection being thus exhibited. Sometimes it
would throw back its head a little, and again with suddenly raised eyebrows
re-examine and finally taste the food.
In no case did any
monkey keep its mouth open when it was astonished. Mr. Sutton observed for me a
young orang and chimpanzee during a considerable length of time; and however
much they were astonished, or whilst listening intently to some strange sound, they
did not keep their mouths open. This fact is surprising, as with mankind hardly
any expression is more general than a widely open mouth under the sense of
astonishment. As far as I have been able to observe, monkeys breathe more
freely through their nostrils than men do; and this may account for their not
opening their mouths when they are astonished; for, as we shall see in a future
chapter, man apparently acts in this manner when startled, at first for the
sake of quickly drawing a full inspiration, and afterwards for the sake of
breathing as quietly as possible.
Terror is expressed by
many kinds of monkeys by the utterance of shrill screams; the lips being drawn
back, so that the teeth are exposed. The hair becomes erect, especially when
some anger is likewise felt. Mr. Sutton has distinctly seen the face of the
Macacus rhesus grow pale from fear. Monkeys also tremble from fear; and
sometimes they void their excretions. I have seen one which, when caught,
almost fainted from an excess of terror.
Sufficient facts have
now been given with respect to the expressions of various animals. It is
impossible to agree with Sir C. Bell when he says[22] that "the faces of
animals seem chiefly capable of expressing rage and fear;" and again, when
he says that all their expressions "may be referred, more or less plainly,
to their acts of volition or necessary instincts." He who will look at a
dog preparing to attack another dog or a man, and at the same animal when
caressing his master, or will watch the countenance of a monkey when insulted,
and when fondled by his keeper, will be forced to admit that the movements of
their features and their gestures are almost as expressive as those of man.
Although no explanation can be given of some of the expressions in the lower
animals, the greater number are explicable in accordance with the three
principles given at the commencement of the first chapter.
[1] `The Anatomy of
Expression,' 1844, p. 190.
[2] `De la
Physionomie,' 1865, pp. 187, 218.
[3] `The Anatomy of
Expression,' 1844, p. 140.
[4] Many particulars
are given by Gueldenstädt in his account of the jackal in Nov. Comm. Acad. Sc.
Imp. Petrop. 1775, tom. xx. p. 449. See also another excellent account of the
manners of this animal and of its play, in `Land and Water,' October, 1869.
Lieut. Annesley, R. A., has also communicated to me some particulars with
respect to the jackal. I have made many inquiries about wolves and jackals in
the Zoological Gardens, and have observed them for myself.
[5] `Land and Water,'
November 6, 1869.
[6] Azara, `Quadrupèdes
du Paraquay,' 1801, tom. 1. p. 136.
[7] `Land and Water,'
1867, p. 657. See also Azara on the Puma, in the work above quoted.
[8] Sir C. Bell,
`Anatomy of Expression,' 3rd edit. p. 123. See also p. 126, on horses not
breathing through their mouths, with reference to their distended nostrils.
[9] `Land and Water,'
1869, p. 152.
[10] `Natural History
of Mammalia,' 1841, vol. 1. pp. 383, 410.
[11] Rengger (`Sägetheire
von Paraquay', 1830, s. 46) kept these monkeys in confinement for seven years
in their native country of Paraguay.
[12] Rengger, ibid. s.
46. Humboldt, `Personal Narrative, Eng. translat. vol. iv. p. 527.
[13] Nat. Hist. of
Mammalia, 1841, p. 351.
[14] Brehm,
`Thierleben,' B. i. s. 84. On baboons striking the ground, s. 61.
[15] Brehm remarks
(`Thierleben,' s. 68) that the eyebrows of the Inuus ecaudatus are frequently
moved up and down when the animal is angered.
[16] G. Bennett,
`Wanderings in New South Wales,' &c. vol. ii. 1834, p. 153.
[17] W. L. Martin, Nat.
Hist. of Mamm. Animals, 1841, p. 405.
[18] Prof. Owen on the
Orang, Proc. Zool. Soc. 1830, p. 28. On the Chimpanzee, see Prof. Macalister,
in Annals and Mag. of Nat. Hist. vol. vii. 1871, p. 342, who states that the
corrugator supercilii is inseparable from the orbicularis palpebrarum.
[19] Boston Journal of
Nat. Hist. 1845--47, vol. v. p. 423. On the Chimpanzee, ibid. 1843--44, vol.
iv. p. 365.
[20] See on this
subject, `Descent of Man,' vol. i. p. 20.
[21] `Descent of Man,'
vol, i. p, 43.
[22] `Anatomy of
Expression,' 3rd edit. 1844, pp. 138, 121.
IN this and the
following chapters the expressions exhibited by Man under various states of the
mind will be described and explained, as far as lies in my power. My
observations will be arranged according to the order which I have found the
most convenient; and this will generally lead to opposite emotions and
sensations succeeding each other.
Suffering of the body
and mind: weeping.--I have already described in sufficient detail, in the third
chapter, the signs of extreme pain, as shown by screams or groans, with the
writhing of the whole body and the teeth clenched or ground together. These
signs are often accompanied or followed by profuse sweating, pallor, trembling,
utter prostration, or faintness. No suffering is greater than that from extreme
fear or horror, but here a distinct emotion comes into play, and will be
elsewhere considered. Prolonged suffering, especially of the mind, passes into
low spirits, grief, dejection, and despair, and these states will be the
subject of the following chapter. Here I shall almost confine myself to weeping
or crying, more especially in children.
Infants, when suffering
even slight pain, moderate hunger, or discomfort, utter violent and prolonged
screams. Whilst thus screaming their eyes are firmly closed, so that the skin
round them is wrinkled, and the forehead contracted into a frown. The mouth is
widely opened with the lips retracted in a peculiar manner, which causes it to
assume a squarish form; the gums or teeth being more or less exposed. The
breath is inhaled almost spasmodically. It is easy to observe infants whilst
screaming; but I have found photographs made by the instantaneous process the
best means for observation, as allowing more deliberation. I have collected
twelve, most of them made purposely for me; and they all exhibit the same
general characteristics. I have, therefore, had six of them[1] (Plate I.)
reproduced by the heliotype process.
The firm closing of the
eyelids and consequent compression of the eyeball,--and this is a most
important element in various expressions,--serves to protect the eyes from
becoming too much gorged with blood, as will presently be explained in detail.
With respect to the order in which the several muscles contract in firmly
compressing the eyes, I am indebted to Dr. Langstaff, of Southampton, for some
observations, which I have since repeated. The best plan for observing the
order is to make a person first raise his eyebrows, and this produces
transverse wrinkles across the forehead; and then very gradually to contract
all the muscles round the elves with as much force as possible. The reader who
is unacquainted with the anatomy of the face, ought to refer to p. 24, and look
at the woodcuts 1 to 3. The corrugators of the brow (corrugator supercilii)
seem to be the first muscles to contract; and these draw the eyebrows downwards
and inwards towards the base of the nose, causing vertical furrows, that is a
frown, to appear between the eyebrows; at the same time they cause the
disappearance of the transverse wrinkles across the forehead. The orbicular
muscles contract almost simultaneously with the corrugators, and produce wrinkles
all round the eyes; they appear, however, to be enabled to contract with
greater force, as soon as the contraction of the corrugators has given them
some support. Lastly, the pyramidal muscles of the nose contract; and these
draw the eyebrows and the skin of the forehead still lower down, producing
short transverse wrinkles across the base of the nose.[2] For the sake of
brevity these muscles will generally be spoken of as the orbiculars, or as
those surrounding the eyes.
When these muscles are
strongly contracted, those running to the upper lip[3] likewise contract and
raise the upper lip. This might have been expected from the manner in which at
least one of them, the malaris, is connected with the orbiculars. Any one who
will gradually contract the muscles round his eyes, will feel, as he increases
the force, that his upper lip and the wings of his nose (which are partly acted
on by one of the same muscles) are almost always a little drawn up. If he keeps
his mouth firmly shut whilst contracting the muscles round the eyes, and then
suddenly relaxes his lips, he will feel that the pressure on his eyes
immediately increases. So again when a person on a bright, glaring day wishes
to look at a distant object, but is compelled partially to close his eyelids,
the upper lip may almost always be observed to be somewhat raised. The mouths
of some very short-sighted persons, who are forced habitually to reduce the
aperture of their eyes, wear from this same reason a grinning expression.
The raising of the upper
lip draws upwards the flesh of the upper parts of the cheeks, and produces a
strongly marked fold on each cheek,--the naso-labial fold,-- which runs from
near the wings of the nostrils to the corners of the mouth and below them. This
fold or furrow may be seen in all the photographs, and is very characteristic
of the expression of a crying child; though a nearly similar fold is produced
in the act of laughing or Smiling.[4]
As the upper lip is
much drawn up during the act of screaming, in the manner just explained, the
depressor muscles of the angles of the mouth (see K in woodcuts 1 and 2) are
strongly contracted in order to keep the mouth widely open, so that a full
volume of sound may be poured forth. The action of these opposed muscles, above
and below, tends to give to the mouth an oblong, almost squarish outline, as
may be seen in the accompanying photographs. An excellent observer,[5] in
describing a baby crying whilst being fed, says, "it made its mouth like a
square, and let the porridge run out at all four corners." I believe, but
we shall return to this point in a future chapter, that the depressor muscles
of the angles of the mouth are less under the separate control of the will than
the adjoining muscles; so that if a young child is only doubtfully inclined to
cry, this muscle is generally the first to contract, and is the last to cease
contracting. When older children commence crying, the muscles which run to the
upper lip are often the first to contract; and this may perhaps be due to older
children not having so strong a tendency to scream loudly, and consequently to
keep their mouths widely open; so that the above-named depressor muscles are
not brought into such strong action.
With one of my own
infants, from his eighth day and for some time afterwards, I often observed
that the first sign of a screaming-fit, when it could be observed coming on
gradually, was a little frown, owing to the contraction of the corrugators of
the brows; the capillaries of the naked head and face becoming at the same time
reddened with blood. As soon as the screaming-fit actually began, all the
muscles round the eyes were strongly contracted, and the mouth widely opened in
the manlier above described; so that at this early period the features assumed
the same form as at a more advanced age.
Dr. Piderit[6] lays
great stress on the contraction of certain muscles which draw down the nose and
narrow the nostrils, as eminently characteristic of a crying expression. The
depressores anguli oris, as we have just seen, are usually contracted at the same
time, and they indirectly tend, according to Dr. Duchenne, to act in this same
manner on the nose. With children having bad colds a similar pinched appearance
of the nose may be noticed, which is at least partly due, as remarked to me by
Dr. Langstaff, to their constant snuffling, and the consequent pressure of the
atmosphere on the two sides. The purpose of this contraction of the nostrils by
children having bad colds, or whilst crying, seems to be to cheek the downward
flow of the mucus and tears, and to prevent these fluids spreading over the
upper lip.
After a prolonged and
severe screaming-fit, the scalp, face, and eyes are reddened, owing to the
return of the blood from the head having been impeded by the violent expiratory
efforts; but the redness of the stimulated eyes is chiefly due to the copious
effusion of tears. The various muscles of the face which have been strongly
contracted, still twitch a little, and the upper lip is still slightly drawn up
or everted,[7] with the corners of the mouth still a little drawn downwards. I
have myself felt, and have observed in other grown-up persons, that when tears
are restrained with difficulty, as in reading a pathetic story, it is almost
impossible to prevent the various muscles. which with young children are
brought into strong action during their screaming-fits, from slightly twitching
or trembling.
Infants whilst young do
not shed tears or weep, as is well known to nurses and medical men. This
circumstance is not exclusively due to the lacrymal glands being as yet
incapable of secreting tears. I first noticed this fact from having
accidentally brushed with the cuff of my coat the open eye of one of my
infants, when seventy-seven days old, causing this eye to water freely; and
though the child screamed violently, the other eye remained dry, or was only
slightly suffused with tears. A similar slight effusion occurred ten days
previously in both eyes during a screaming-fit. The tears did not run over the
eyelids and roll down the cheeks of this child, whilst screaming badly, when
122 days old. This first happened 17 days later, at the age of 139 days. A few
other children have been observed for me, and the period of free weeping
appears to be very variable. In one case, the eyes became slightly suffused at
the age of only 20 days; in another, at 62 days. With two other children, the
tears did not run down the face at the ages of 84 and 110 days; but in a third
child they did run down at the age of 104 days. In one instance, as I was
positively assured, tears ran down at the unusually early age of 42 days. It
would appear as if the lacrymal glands required some practice in the individual
before they are easily excited into action, in somewhat the same manner as
various inherited consensual movements and tastes require some exercise before
they are fixed and perfected. This is all the more likely with a habit like
weeping, which must have been acquired since the period when man branched off
from the common progenitor of the genus Homo and of the non-weeping anthropomorphous
apes.
The fact of tears not
being shed at a very early age from pain or any mental emotion is remarkable,
as, later in life, no expression is more general or more strongly marked than
weeping. When the habit has once been acquired by an infant, it expresses in
the clearest manner suffering of all kinds, both bodily pain and mental
distress, even though accompanied by other emotions, such as fear or rage. The
character of the crying, however, changes at a very early age, as I noticed in
my own infants,--the passionate cry differing from that of grief. A lady
informs me that her child, nine months old, when in a passion screams loudly,
but does not weep; tears, however, are shed when she is punished by her chair
being turned with its back to the table. This difference may perhaps be
attributed to weeping being restrained, as we shall immediately see, at a more
advanced age, under most circumstances excepting grief; and to the influence of
such restraint being transmitted to an earlier period of life, than that at
which it was first practised.
With adults, especially
of the male sex, weeping soon ceases to be caused by, or to express, bodily
pain. This may be accounted for by its being thought weak and unmanly by men,
both of civilized and barbarous races, to exhibit bodily pain by any outward
sign. With this exception, savages weep copiously from very slight causes, of
which fact Sir J. Lubbock[8] has collected instances. A New Zealand chief
"cried like a child because the sailors spoilt his favourite cloak by
powdering it with flour." I saw in Tierra del Fuego a native who had
lately lost a brother, and who alternately cried with hysterical violence, and
laughed heartily at anything which amused him. With the civilized nations of
Europe there is also much difference in the frequency of weeping. Englishmen
rarely cry, except under the pressure of the acutest grief; whereas in some
parts of the Continent the men shed tears much more readily and freely.
The insane notoriously
give way to all their emotions with little or no restraint; and I am informed
by Dr. J. Crichton Browne, that nothing is more characteristic of simple
melancholia, even in the male sex, than a tendency to weep on the slightest
occasions, or from no cause. They also weep disproportionately on the
occurrence of any real cause of grief. The length of time during which some
patients weep is astonishing, as well as the amount of tears which they shed.
One melancholic girl wept for a whole day, and afterwards confessed to Dr. Browne,
that it was because she remembered that she had once shaved off her eyebrows to
promote their growth. Many patients in the asylum sit for a long time rocking
themselves backwards and forwards; "and if spoken to, they stop their
movements, purse up their eyes, depress the corners of the mouth, and burst out
crying." In some of these cases, the being spoken to or kindly greeted
appears to suggest some fanciful and sorrowful notion; but in other cases an
effort of any kind excites weeping, independently of any sorrowful idea.
Patients suffering from acute mania likewise have paroxysms of violent crying
or blubbering, in the midst of their incoherent ravings. We must not, however,
lay too much stress on the copious shedding of tears by the insane, as being due
to the lack of all restraint; for certain brain-diseases, as hemiplegia,
brain-wasting, and senile decay, have a special tendency to induce weeping.
Weeping is common in the insane, even after a complete state of fatuity has
been reached and the power of speech lost. Persons born idiotic likewise
weep;[9] but it is said that this is not the case with cretins.
Weeping seems to be the
primary and natural expression, as we see in children, of suffering of any
kind, whether bodily pain short of extreme agony, or mental distress. But the
foregoing facts and common experience show us that a frequently repeated effort
to restrain weeping, in association with certain states of the mind, does much
in checking the habit. On the other hand, it appears that the power of weeping
can be increased through habit; thus the Rev. R. Taylor,[10] who long resided
in New Zealand, asserts that the women can voluntarily shed tears in abundance;
they meet for this purpose to mourn for the dead, and they take pride in crying
"in the most affecting manner."
A single effort of
repression brought to bear on the lacrymal glands does little, and indeed seems
often to lead to an opposite result. An old and experienced physician told me
that he had always found that the only means to check the occasional bitter
weeping of ladies who consulted him, and who themselves wished to desist, was
earnestly to beg them not to try, and to assure them that nothing would relieve
them so much as prolonged and copious crying.
The screaming of
infants consists of prolonged expirations, with short and rapid, almost
spasmodic inspirations, followed at a somewhat more advanced age by sobbing.
According to Gratiolet,[11] the glottis is chiefly affected during the act of
sobbing. This sound is heard "at the moment when the inspiration conquers
the resistance of the glottis, and the air rushes into the chest." But the
whole act of respiration is likewise spasmodic and violent. The shoulders are
at the same time generally raised, as by this movement respiration is rendered
easier. With one of my infants, when seventy- seven days old, the inspirations
were so rapid and strong that they approached in character to sobbing; when 138
days old I first noticed distinct sobbing, which subsequently followed every
bad crying-fit. The respiratory movements are partly voluntary and partly
involuntary, and I apprehend that sobbing is at least in part due to children
having some power to command after early infancy their vocal organs and to stop
their screams, but from having less power over their respiratory muscles, these
continue for a time to act in an involuntary or spasmodic manner, after having
been brought into violent action. Sobbing seems to be peculiar to the human
species; for the keepers in the Zoological Gardens assure me that they have
never heard a sob from any kind of monkey; though monkeys often scream loudly
whilst being chased and caught, and then pant for a long time. We thus see that
there is a close analogy between sobbing and the free shedding of tears; for
with children, sobbing does not commence during early infancy, but afterwards
comes on rather suddenly and then follows every bad crying-fit, until the habit
is checked with advancing years.
On the cause of the
contraction of the muscles round the eyes during screaming.--We have seen that
infants and young children, whilst screaming, invariably close their eyes
firmly, by the contraction of the surrounding muscles, so that the skin becomes
wrinkled all around. With older children, and even with adults, whenever there
is violent and unrestrained crying, a tendency to the contraction of these same
muscles may be observed; though this is often checked in order not to interfere
with vision.
Sir C. Bell
explains[12] this action in the following manner:--"During every violent
act of expiration, whether in hearty laughter, weeping, coughing, or sneezing,
the eyeball is firmly compressed by the fibres of the orbicularis; and this is
a provision for supporting and defending the vascular system of the interior of
the eye from a retrograde impulse communicated to the blood in the veins at
that time. When we contract the chest and expel the air, there is a retardation
of the blood in the veins of the neck and head; and in the more powerful acts
of expulsion, the blood not only distends the vessels, but is even regurgitated
into the minute branches. Were the eye not properly compressed at that time,
and a resistance given to the shock, irreparable injury might be inflicted on
the delicate textures of the interior of the eye." He further adds,
"If we separate the eyelids of a child to examine the eye, while it cries
and struggles with passion, by taking off the natural support to the vascular
system of the eye, and means of guarding it against the rush of blood then occurring,
the conjunctiva becomes suddenly filled with blood, and the eyelids
everted."
Not only are the
muscles round the eyes strongly contracted, as Sir C. Bell states and as I have
often observed, during screaming, loud laughter, coughing, and sneezing, but
during several other analogous actions. A man contracts these muscles when he
violently blows his nose. I asked one of my boys to shout as loudly as he
possibly could, and as soon as he began, he firmly contracted his orbicular
muscles; I observed this repeatedly, and on asking him why he had every time so
firmly closed his eyes, I found that he was quite unaware of the fact: he had
acted instinctively or unconsciously.
It is not necessary, in
order to lead to the contraction of these muscles, that air should actually be
expelled from the chest; it suffices that the muscles of the chest and abdomen
should contract with great force, whilst by the closure of the glottis no air
escapes. In violent vomiting or retching the diaphragm is made to descend by
the chest being filled with air; it is then held in this position by the
closure of the glottis, "as well as by the contraction of its own
fibres."[13] The abdominal muscles now contract strongly upon the stomach,
its proper muscles likewise contracting, and the contents are thus ejected.
During each effort of vomiting "the head becomes greatly congested, so
that the features are red and swollen, and the large veins of the face and
temples visibly dilated." At the same time, as I know from observation, the
muscles round the eyes are strongly contracted. This is likewise the case when
the abdominal muscles act downwards with unusual force in expelling the
contents of the intestinal canal.
The greatest exertion
of the muscles of the body, if those of the chest are not brought into strong
action in expelling or compressing the air within the lungs, does not lead to
the contraction of the muscles round the eyes. I have observed my sons using
great force in gymnastic exercises, as in repeatedly raising their suspended
bodies by their arms alone, and in lifting heavy weights from the ground, but
there was hardly any trace of contraction in the muscles round the eyes.
As the contraction of
these muscles for the protection of the eyes during violent expiration is
indirectly, as we shall hereafter see, a fundamental element in several of our
most important expressions, I was extremely anxious to ascertain how far Sir C.
Bell's view could be substantiated. Professor Donders, of Utrecht,[14] well
known as one of the highest authorities in Europe on vision and on the
structure of the eye, has most kindly undertaken for me this investigation with
the aid of the many ingenious mechanisms of modern science, and has published
the results.[15] He shows that during violent expiration the external, the
intra-ocular, and the retro- ocular vessels of the eye are all affected in two
ways, namely by the increased pressure of the blood in the arteries, and by the
return of the blood in the veins being impeded. It is, therefore, certain that
both the arteries and the veins of the eye are more or less distended during
violent expiration. The evidence in detail may be found in Professor Donders'
valuable memoir. We see the effects on the veins of the head, in their
prominence, and in the purple colour of the face of a man who coughs violently
from being half choked. I may mention, on the same authority, that the whole
eye certainly advances a little during each violent expiration. This is due to
the dilatation of the retro-ocular vessels, and might have been expected from
the intimate connection of the eye and brain; the brain being known to rise and
fall with each respiration, when a portion of the skull has been removed; and
as may be seen along the unclosed sutures of infants' heads. This also, I
presume, is the reason that the eyes of a strangled man appear as if they were
starting from their sockets.
With respect to the
protection of the eye during violent expiratory efforts by the pressure of the
eyelids, Professor Donders concludes from his various observations that this
action certainly limits or entirely removes the dilatation of the vessels.[16]
At such times, he adds, we not unfrequently see the hand involuntarily laid
upon the eyelids, as if the better to support and defend the eyeball.
Nevertheless much
evidence cannot at present be advanced to prove that the eye actually suffers
injury from the want of support during violent expiration; but there is some.
It is "a fact that forcible expiratory efforts in violent coughing or
vomiting, and especially in sneezing, sometimes give rise to ruptures of the
little (external) vessels" of the eye.[17] With respect to the internal
vessels, Dr. Gunning has lately recorded a case of exophthalmos in consequence
of whooping-cough, which in his opinion depended on the rupture of the deeper
vessels; and another analogous case has been recorded. But a mere sense of
discomfort would probably suffice to lead to the associated habit of protecting
the eyeball by the contraction of the surrounding muscles. Even the expectation
or chance of injury would probably be sufficient, in the same manner as an
object moving too near the eye induces involuntary winking of the eyelids. We
may, therefore, safely conclude from Sir C. Bell's observations, and more
especially from the more careful investigations by Professor Donders, that the
firm closure of the eyelids during the screaming of children is an action full
of meaning and of real service.
We have already seen
that the contraction of the orbicular muscles leads to the drawing up of the
upper lip, and consequently, if the mouth is kept widely open, to the drawing
down of the corners by the contraction of the depressor muscles. The formation
of the naso- labial fold on the cheeks likewise follows from the drawing up of
the upper lip. Thus all the chief expressive movements of the face during
crying apparently result from the contraction of the muscles round the eyes. We
shall also find that the shedding of tears depends on, or at least stands in
some connection with, the contraction of these same muscles.
In some of the
foregoing cases, especially in those of sneezing and coughing, it is possible
that the contraction of the orbicular muscles may serve in addition to protect
the eyes from too severe a jar or vibration. I think so, because dogs and cats,
in crunching hard bones, always close their eyelids, and at least sometimes in
sneezing; though dogs do not do so whilst barking loudly. Mr. Sutton carefully
observed for me a young orang and chimpanzee, and he found that both always
closed their eyes in sneezing and coughing, but not whilst screaming violently.
I gave a small pinch of snuff to a monkey of the American division, namely, a
Cebus, and it closed its eyelids whilst sneezing; but not on a subsequent
occasion whilst uttering loud cries.
Cause of the secretion
of tears.--It is an important fact which must be considered in any theory of
the secretion of tears from the mind being affected, that whenever the muscles
round the eyes are strongly and involuntarily contracted in order to compress
the blood-vessels and thus to protect the eyes, tears are secreted, often in
sufficient abundance to roll down the cheeks. This occurs under the most
opposite emotions, and under no emotion at all. The sole exception, and this is
only a partial one, to the existence of a relation between the involuntary and
strong contraction of these muscles and the secretion of tears is that of young
infants, who, whilst screaming violently with their eyelids firmly closed, do not
commonly weep until they have attained the age of from two to three or four
months. Their eyes, however, become suffused with tears at a much earlier age.
It would appear, as already remarked, that the lacrymal glands do not, from the
want of practice or some other cause, come to full functional activity at a
very early period of life. With children at a somewhat later age, crying out or
wailing from any distress is so regularly accompanied by the shedding of tears,
that weeping and crying are synonymous terms.[18]
Under the opposite
emotion of great joy or amusement, as long as laughter is moderate there is
hardly any contraction of the muscles round the eyes, so that there is no
frowning; but when peals of loud laughter are uttered, with rapid and violent
spasmodic expirations, tears stream down the face. I have more than once
noticed the face of a person, after a paroxysm of violent laughter, and I could
see that the orbicular muscles and those running to the upper lip were still
partially contracted, which together with the tear-stained cheeks gave to the
upper half of the face an expression not to be distinguished from that of a
child still blubbering from grief. The fact of tears streaming down the face
during violent laughter is common to all the races of mankind, as we shall see
in a future chapter.
In violent coughing
especially when a person is half- choked, the face becomes purple, the veins
distended, the orbicular muscles strongly contracted, and tears run down the
cheeks. Even after a fit of ordinary coughing, almost every one has to wipe his
eyes. In violent vomiting or retching, as I have myself experienced and seen in
others, the orbicular muscles are strongly contracted, and tears sometimes flow
freely down the cheeks. It has been suggested to me that this may be due to
irritating matter being injected into the nostrils, and causing by reflex
action the secretion of tears. Accordingly I asked one of my informants, a
surgeon, to attend to the effects of retching when nothing was thrown up from
the stomach; and, by an odd coincidence, he himself suffered the next morning
from an attack of retching, and three days subsequently observed a lady under a
similar attack; and he is certain that in neither case an atom of matter was
ejected from the stomach; yet the orbicular muscles were strongly contracted,
and tears freely secreted. I can also speak positively to the energetic
contraction of these same muscles round the eyes, and to the coincident free
secretion of tears, when the abdominal muscles act with unusual force in a
downward direction on the intestinal canal.
Yawning commences with
a deep inspiration, followed by a long and forcible expiration; and at the same
time almost all the muscles of the body are strongly contracted, including those
round the eyes. During this act tears are often secreted, and I have seen them
even rolling down the cheeks.
I have frequently
observed that when persons scratch some point which itches intolerably, they
forcibly close their eyelids; but they do not, as I believe, first draw a deep
breath and then expel it with force; and I have never noticed that the eyes
then become filled with tears; but I am not prepared to assert that this does
not occur. The forcible closure of the eyelids is, perhaps, merely a part of
that general action by which almost all the muscles of the body are at the same
time rendered rigid. It is quite different from the gentle closure of the eyes
which often accompanies, as Gratiolet remarks,[19] the smelling a delicious
odour, or the tasting a delicious morsel, and which probably originates in the
desire to shut out any disturbing impression through the eyes.
Professor Donders
writes to me to the following effect: "I have observed some cases of a
very curious affection when, after a slight rub (attouchement), for example,
from the friction of a coat, which caused neither a wound nor a contusion,
spasms of the orbicular muscles occurred, with a very profuse flow of tears,
lasting about one hour. Subsequently, sometimes after an interval of several
weeks, violent spasms of the same muscles re-occurred, accompanied by the
secretion of tears, together with primary or secondary redness of the
eye." Mr. Bowman informs me that be has occasionally observed closely
analogous cases, and that, in some of these, there was no redness or
inflammation of the eyes.
I was anxious to
ascertain whether there existed in any of the lower animals a similar relation
between the contraction of the orbicular muscles during violent expiration and
the secretion of tears; but there are very few animals which contract these
muscles in a prolonged manner, or which shed tears. The Macacus maurus, which
formerly wept so copiously in the Zoological Gardens, would have been a fine
case for observation; but the two monkeys now there, and which are believed to
belong to the same species, do not weep. Nevertheless they were carefully
observed by Mr. Bartlett and myself, whilst screaming loudly, and they seemed
to contract these muscles; but they moved about their cages so rapidly, that it
was difficult to observe with certainty. No other monkey, as far as I have been
able to ascertain, contracts its orbicular muscles whilst screaming.
The Indian elephant is
known sometimes to weep. Sir E. Tennent, in describing these which he saw
captured and bound in Ceylon, says, some "lay motionless on the ground,
with no other indication of suffering than the tears which suffused their eyes
and flowed incessantly." Speaking of another elephant he says, "When
overpowered and made fast, his grief was most affecting; his violence sank to
utter prostration, and he lay on the ground, uttering choking cries, with tears
trickling down his cheeks."[20] In the Zoological Gardens the keeper of
the Indian elephants positively asserts that he has several times seen tears
rolling down the face of the old female, when distressed by the removal of the
young one. Hence I was extremely anxious to ascertain, as an extension of the
relation between the contraction of the orbicular muscles and the shedding of
tears in man, whether elephants when screaming or trumpeting loudly contract
these muscles. At Mr. Bartlett's desire the keeper ordered the old and the
young elephant to trumpet; and we repeatedly saw in both animals that, just as
the trumpeting began, the orbicular muscles, especially the lower ones, were
distinctly contracted. On a subsequent occasion the keeper made the old
elephant trumpet much more loudly, and invariably both the upper and lower
orbicular muscles were strongly contracted, and now in an equal degree. It is a
singular fact that the African elephant, which, however, is so different from
the Indian species that it is placed by some naturalists in a distinct
sub-genus, when made on two occasions to trumpet loudly, exhibited no trace of
the contraction of the orbicular muscles.
From the several
foregoing cases with respect to Man, there can, I think, be no doubt that the
contraction of the muscles round the eyes, during violent expiration or when
the expanded chest is forcibly compressed, is, in some manner, intimately
connected with the secretion of tears. This holds good under widely different
emotions, and independently of any emotion. It is not, of course, meant that
tears cannot be secreted without the contraction of these muscles; for it is
notorious that they are often freely shed with the eyelids not closed, and with
the brows unwrinkled. The contraction must be both involuntary and prolonged,
as during a choking fit, or energetic, as during a sneeze. The mere involuntary
winking of the eyelids, though often repeated, does not bring tears into the
eyes. Nor does the voluntary and prolonged contraction of the several
surrounding muscles suffice. As the lacrymal glands of children are easily
excited, I persuaded my own and several other children of different ages to
contract these muscles repeatedly with their utmost force, and to continue
doing so as long as they possibly could; but this produced hardly any effect.
There was sometimes a little moisture in the eyes, but not more than apparently
could be accounted for by the squeezing out of the already secreted tears
within the glands.
The nature of the
relation between the involuntary and energetic contraction of the muscles round
the eyes, and the secretion of tears, cannot be positively ascertained, but a
probable view may be suggested. The primary function of the secretion of tears,
together with some mucus, is to lubricate the surface of the eye; and a
secondary one, as some believe, is to keep the nostrils damp, so that the inhaled
air may be moist,[21] and likewise to favour the power of smelling. But
another, and at least equally important function of tears, is to wash out
particles of dust or other minute objects which may get into the eyes. That
this is of great importance is clear from the cases in which the cornea has
been rendered opaque through inflammation, caused by particles of dust not
being removed, in consequence of the eye and eyelid becoming immovable.[22] The
secretion of tears from the irritation of any foreign body in the eye is a
reflex action;--that is, the body irritates a peripheral nerve which sends an
impression to certain sensory nerve-cells; these transmit an influence to other
cells, and these again to the lacrymal glands. The influence transmitted to these
glands causes, as there is good reason to believe, the relaxation of the
muscular coats of the smaller arteries; this allows more blood to permeate the
glandular tissue, and this induces a free secretion of tears. When the small
arteries of the face, including those of the retina, are relaxed under very
different circumstances, namely, during an intense blush, the lacrymal glands
are sometimes affected in a like manner, for the eyes become suffused with
tears.
It is difficult to
conjecture how many reflex actions have originated, but, in relation to the
present case of the affection of the lacrymal glands through irritation of the
surface of the eye, it may be worth remarking that, as soon as some primordial
form became semi- terrestrial in its habits, and was liable to get particles of
dust into its eyes, if these were not washed out they would cause much
irritation; and on the principle of the radiation of nerve-force to adjoining
nerve-cells, the lacrymal glands would be stimulated to secretion. As this
would often recur, and as nerve-force readily passes along accustomed channels,
a slight irritation would ultimately suffice to cause a free secretion of
tears.
As soon as by this, or
by some other means, a reflex action of this nature had been established and
rendered easy, other stimulants applied to the surface of the eye --such as a
cold wind, slow inflammatory action, or a blow on the eyelids--would cause a
copious secretion of tears, as we know to be the case. The glands are also
excited into action through the irritation of adjoining parts. Thus when the
nostrils are irritated by pungent vapours, though the eyelids may be kept
firmly closed, tears are copiously secreted; and this likewise follows from a blow
on the nose, for instance from a boxing- glove. A stinging switch on the face
produces, as I have seen, the same effect. In these latter cases the secretion
of tears is an incidental result, and of no direct service. As all these parts
of the face, including the lacrymal glands, are supplied with branches of the
same nerve, namely, the fifth, it is in some degree intelligible that the
effects of the excitement of any one branch should spread to the nerve-cells or
roots of the other branches.
The internal parts of
the eye likewise act, under certain conditions, in a reflex manner on the
lacrymal glands. The following statements have been kindly communicated to me
by Mr. Bowman; but the subject is a very intricate one, as all the parts of the
eye are so intimately related together, and are so sensitive to various
stimulants. A strong light acting on the retina, when in a normal condition,
has very little tendency to cause lacrymation; but with unhealthy children
having small, old-standing ulcers on the cornea, the retina becomes excessively
sensitive to light, and exposure even to common daylight causes forcible and
sustained closure of the lids, and a profuse flow of tears. When persons who
ought to begin the use of convex glasses habitually strain the waning power of
accommodation, an undue secretion of tears very often follows, and the retina
is liable to become unduly sensitive to light. In general, morbid affections of
the surface of the eye, and of the ciliary structures concerned in the
accommodative act, are prone to be accompanied with excessive secretion of
tears. Hardness of the eyeball, not rising to inflammation, but implying a want
of balance between the fluids poured out and again taken up by the intra-ocular
vessels, is not usually attended with any lacrymation. When the balance is on
the other side, and the eye becomes too soft, there is a greater tendency to
lacrymation. Finally, there are numerous morbid states and structural
alterations of the eyes, and even terrible inflammations, which may be attended
with little or no secretion of tears.
It also deserves
notice, as indirectly bearing on our subject, that the eye and adjoining parts
are subject to an extraordinary number of reflex and associated movements,
sensations, and actions, besides those relating to the lacrymal glands. When a
bright light strikes the retina of one eye alone, the iris contracts, but the
iris of the other eye moves after a measurable interval of time. The iris
likewise moves in accommodation to near or distant vision, and when the two
eyes are made to converge.[23] Every one knows how irresistibly the eyebrows
are drawn down under an intensely bright light. The eyelids also involuntarily
wink when an object is moved near the eyes, or a sound is suddenly heard. The well-known
case of a bright light causing some persons to sneeze is even more curious; for
nerve-force here radiates from certain nerve-cells in connection with the
retina, to the sensory nerve-cells of the nose, causing it to tickle; and from
these, to the cells which command the various respiratory muscles (the
orbiculars included) which expel the air in so peculiar a manner that it rushes
through the nostrils alone.
To return to our point:
why are tears secreted during a screaming-fit or other violent expiratory
efforts? As a slight blow on the eyelids causes a copious secretion of tears,
it is at least possible that the spasmodic contraction of the eyelids, by
pressing strongly on the eyeball, should in a similar manner cause some
secretion. This seems possible, although the voluntary contraction of the same
muscles does not produce any such effect. We know that a man cannot voluntarily
sneeze or cough with nearly the same force as he does automatically; and so it
is with the contraction of the orbicular muscles: Sir C. Bell experimented on
them, and found that by suddenly and forcibly closing the eyelids in the dark,
sparks of light are seen, like those caused by tapping the eyelids with the
fingers; "but in sneezing the compression is both more rapid and more
forcible, and the sparks are more brilliant." That these sparks are due to
the contraction of the eyelids is clear, because if they "are held open
during the act of sneezing, no sensation of light will be experienced." In
the peculiar cases re- ferred to by Professor Donders and Mr. Bowman, we have
seen that some weeks after the eye has been very slightly injured, spasmodic
contractions of the eyelids ensue, and these are accompanied by a profuse flow
of tears. In the act of yawning, the tears are apparently due solely to the
spasmodic contraction of the muscles round the eyes. Notwithstanding these
latter cases, it seems hardly credible that the pressure of the eyelids on the
surface of the eye, although effected spasmodically and therefore with much
greater force than can be done voluntarily, should be sufficient to cause by
reflex action the secretion of tears in the many cases in which this occurs
during violent expiratory efforts.
Another cause may come
conjointly into play. We have seen that the internal parts of the eye, under
certain conditions act in a reflex manner on the lacrymal glands. We know that
during violent expiratory efforts the pressure of the arterial blood within the
vessels of the eye is increased, and that the return of the venous blood is
impeded. It seems, therefore, not improbable that the distension of the ocular
vessels, thus induced, might act by reflection on the lacrymal glands--the
effects due to the spasmodic pressure of the eyelids on the surface of the eye
being thus increased.
In considering how far
this view is probable, we should bear in mind that the eyes of infants have
been acted on in this double manner during numberless generations, whenever
they have screamed; and on the principle of nerve-force readily passing along
accustomed channels, even a moderate compression of the eyeballs and a moderate
distension of the ocular vessels would ultimately come, through habit, to act
on the glands. We have an analogous case in the orbicular muscles being almost
always contracted in some slight degree, even during a gentle crying-fit, when
there can be no distension of the vessels and no uncomfortable sensation
excited within the eyes.
Moreover, when complex
actions or movements have long been performed in strict association together,
and these are from any cause at first voluntarily and afterwards habitually
checked, then if the proper exciting conditions occur, any part of the action
or movement which is least under the control of the will, will often still be
involuntarily performed. The secretion by a gland is remarkably free from the
influence of the will; therefore, when with the advancing age of the
individual, or with the advancing culture of the race, the habit of crying out
or screaming is restrained, and there is consequently no distension of the
blood-vessels of the eye, it may nevertheless well happen that tears should
still be secreted. We may see, as lately remarked, the muscles round the eyes
of a person who reads a pathetic story, twitching or trembling in so slight a
degree as hardly to be detected. In this case there has been no screaming and
no distension of the blood-vessels, yet through habit certain nerve-cells send
a small amount of nerve-force to the cells commanding the muscles round the
eyes; and they likewise send some to the cells commanding the lacrymal glands,
for the eyes often become at the same time just moistened with tears. If the
twitching of the muscles round the eyes and the secretion of tears had been
completely prevented, nevertheless it is almost certain that there would have
been some tendency to transmit nerve-force in these same directions; and as the
lacrymal glands are remarkably free from the control of the will, they would be
eminently liable still to act, thus betraying, though there were no other
outward signs, the pathetic thoughts which were passing through the person's
mind.
As a further
illustration of the view here advanced, I may remark that if, during an early
period of life, when habits of all kinds are readily established, our infants,
when pleased, had been accustomed to utter loud peals of laughter (during which
the vessels of their eyes are distended) as often and as continuously as they
have yielded when distressed to screaming-fits, then it is probable that in after
life tears would have been as copiously and as regularly secreted under the one
state of mind as under the other. Gentle laughter, or a smile, or even a
pleasing thought, would have sufficed to cause a moderate secretion of tears.
There does indeed exist an evident tendency in this direction, as will be seen
in a future chapter, when we treat of the tender feelings. With the Sandwich
Islanders, according to Freycinet,[24] tears are actually recognized as a sign
of happiness; but we should require better evidence on this head than that of a
passing voyager. So again if our infants, during many generations, and each of
them during several years, had almost daily suffered from prolonged
choking-fits, during which the vessels of the eye are distended and tears
copiously secreted, then it is probable, such is the force of associated habit,
that during after life the mere thought of a choke, without any distress of
mind, would have sufficed to bring tears into our eyes.
To sum up this chapter,
weeping is probably the result of some such chain of events as follows.
Children, when wanting food or suffering in any way, cry out loudly, like the
young of most other animals, partly as a call to their parents for aid, and
partly from any great exertion serving relief. Prolonged screaming inevitably
leads to the gorging of the blood-vessels of the eye; and this will have led,
at first consciously and at last habitually, to the contraction of the muscles
round the eyes in order to protect them. At the same time the spasmodic
pressure on the surface of the eye, and the distension of the vessels within
the eye, without necessarily entailing any conscious sensation, will have
affected, through reflex action, the lacrymal glands. Finally, through the
three principles of nerve-force readily passing along accustomed channels--of
association, which is so widely extended in its power--and of certain actions,
being more under the control of the will than others--it has come to pass that
suffering readily causes the secretion of tears, without being necessarily
accompanied by any other action.
Although in accordance
with this view we must look at weeping as an incidental result, as purposeless
as the secretion of tears from a blow outside the eye, or as a sneeze from the
retina being affected by a bright light, yet this does not present any
difficulty in our understanding how the secretion of tears serves as a relief
to suffering. And by as much as the weeping is more violent or hysterical, by
so much will the relief be greater, --on the same principle that the writhing
of the whole body, the grinding of the teeth, and the uttering of piercing
shrieks, all give relief under an agony of pain.
[1] The best
photographs in my collection are by Mr. Rejlander, of Victoria Street, London,
and by Herr Kindermann, of Hamburg. Figs. 1, 3, 4, and 6 are by the former; and
figs. 2 and 5, by the latter gentleman. Fig. 6 is given to show moderate crying
in an older child.
[2] Henle (`Handbuch d.
Syst. Anat. 1858, B. i. s. 139) agrees with Duchenne that this is the effect of
the contraction of the pyramidalis nasi.
[3] These consist of
the levator labii superioris alæque nasi, the levator labii proprius, the
malaris, and the zygomaticus minor, or little zygomatic. This latter muscle
runs parallel to and above the great zygomatic, and is attached to the outer
part of the upper lip. It is represented in fig. 2 (I. p. 24), but not in figs.
1 and 3. Dr. Duchenne first showed (`Mécanisme de la Physionomie Humaine,'
Album, 1862, p. 39) the importance of the contraction of this muscle in the
shape assumed by the features in crying. Henle considers the above-named
muscles (excepting the malaris) as subdivisions of the quadratus labii
superioris.
[4] Although Dr.
Duchenne has so carefully studied the contraction of the different muscles
during the act of crying, and the furrows on the face thus produced, there
seems to be something incomplete in his account; but what this is I cannot say.
He has given a figure (Album, fig. 48) in which one half of the face is made,
by galvanizing the proper muscles, to smile; whilst the other half is similarly
made to begin crying. Almost all those (viz. nineteen out of twenty-one
persons) to whom I showed the smiling half of the face instantly recognized the
expression; but, with respect to the other half, only six persons out of
twenty-one recognized it,--that is, if we accept such terms as
"grief," "misery," "annoyance," as
correct;--whereas, fifteen persons were ludicrously mistaken; some of them
saying the face expressed "fun," "satisfaction,"
"cunning," "disgust," &c. We may infer from this that
there is something wrong in the expression. Some of the fifteen persons may,
however, have been partly misled by not expecting to see an old man crying, and
by tears not being secreted. With respect to another figure by Dr. Duchenne
(fig. 49), in which the muscles of half the face are galvanized in order to
represent a man beginning to cry, with the eyebrow on the same side rendered
oblique, which is characteristic of misery, the expression was recognized by a
greater proportional number of persons. Out of twenty- three persons, fourteen
answered correctly, "sorrow," "distress,"
"grief," "just going to cry," "endurance of
pain," &c. On the other hand, nine persons either could form no
opinion or were entirely wrong, answering, "cunning leer,"
"jocund," "looking at an intense light," "looking at a
distant object," &c.
[5] Mrs. Gaskell, `Mary
Barton,' new edit. p. 84.
[6] `Mimik und
Physiognomik,' 1867, s. 102. Duchenne, Mécanisme de la Phys. Humaine, Album, p.
34.
[7] Dr. Duchenne makes
this remark, ibid. p. 39.
[8] `The Origin of
Civilization,' 1870, p. 355.
[9] See, for instance,
Mr. Marshall's account of an idiot in Philosoph. Transact. 1864, p. 526. With
respect to cretins, see Dr. Piderit, `Mimik und Physiognomik,' 1867, s. 61.
[10] `New Zealand and
its Inhabitants,' 1855, p. 175.
[11] `De la
Physionomie,' 1865, p. 126.
[12] `The Anatomy of
Expression,' 1844, p. 106. See also his paper in the `Philosophical
Transactions,' 1822, p. 284, ibid. 1823, pp. 166 and 289. Also `The Nervous
System of the Human Body,' 3rd edit. 1836, p. 175.
[13] See Dr. Brinton's
account of the act of vomiting, in Todd's Cyclop. of Anatomy and Physiology,
1859, vol. v. Supplement, p. 318.
[14] I am greatly
indebted to Mr. Bowman for having introduced me to Prof. Donders, and for his
aid in persuading this great physiologist to undertake the investigation of the
present subject. I am likewise much indebted to Mr. Bowman for having given me,
with the utmost kindness, information on many points.
[15] This memoir first
appeared in the `Nederlandsch Archief voor Genees en Natuurkiinde,' Deel 5,
1870. It has been translated by Dr. W. D. Moore, under the title of "On
the Action of the Eyelids in determination of Blood from expiratory
effort," in `Archives of Medicine,' edited by Dr. L. S. Beale, 1870, vol.
v. p. 20.
[16] Prof. Donders
remarks (ibid. p. 28), that, "After injury to the eye, after operations,
and in some forms of internal inflammation, we attach great value to the
uniform support of the closed eyelids, and we increase this in many instances
by the application of a bandage. In both cases we carefully endeavour to avoid
great expiratory pressure, the disadvantage of which is well known." Mr. Bowman
informs me that in the excessive photophobia, accompanying what is called
scrofulous ophthalmia in children, when the light is so very painful that
during weeks or months it is constantly excluded by the most forcible closure
of the lids, he has often been struck on opening the lids by the paleness of
the eye, --not an unnatural paleness, but an absence of the redness that might
have been expected when the surface is somewhat inflamed, as is then usually
the case; and this paleness he is inclined to attribute to the forcible closure
of the eyelids.
[17] Donders, ibid. p.
36.
[18] Mr. Hensleigh
Wedgwood (Dict. of English Etymology, 1859, vol. i. p. 410) says, "the
verb to weep comes from Anglo-Saxon wop, the primary meaning of which is simply
outcry."
[19] `De la
Physionomie,' 1865, p. 217.
[20] `Ceylon,' 3rd
edit. 1859, vol. ii. pp. 364, 376. I applied to Mr. Thwaites, in Ceylon, for
further information with respect to the weeping of the elephant; and in
consequence received a letter from the Rev. Mr Glenie, who, with others, kindly
observed for me a herd of recently captured elephants. These, when irritated,
screamed violently; but it is remarkable that they never when thus screaming
contracted the muscles round the eyes. Nor did they shed tears; and the native
hunters asserted that they had never observed elephants weeping. Nevertheless,
it appears to me impossible to doubt Sir E. Tennent's distinct details about
their weeping, supported as they are by the positive assertion of the keeper in
the Zoological Gardens. It is certain that the two elephants in the Gardens,
when they began to trumpet loudly, invariably contracted their orbicular
muscles. I can reconcile these conflicting statements only by supposing that
the recently captured elephants in Ceylon, from being enraged or frightened, desired
to observe their persecutors, and consequently did not contract their orbicular
muscles, so that their vision might not be impeded. Those seen weeping by Sir
E. Tennent were prostrate, and had given up the contest in despair. The
elephants which trumpeted in the Zoological Gardens at the word of command,
were, of course, neither alarmed nor enraged.
[21] Bergeon, as quoted
in the `Journal of Anatomy and Physiology,' Nov. 1871, p. 235.
[22] See, for instance,
a case given by Sir Charles Bell, `Philosophical Transactions,' 1823, p. 177.
[23] See, on these
several points, Prof. Donders `On the Anomalies of Accommodation and Refraction
of the Eye,' 1864, p. 573.
[24] Quoted by Sir J.
Lubbock, `Prehistoric Times,' 1865, p. 458.
AFTER the mind has
suffered from an acute paroxysm of grief, and the cause still continues, we
fall into a state of low spirits; or we may be utterly cast down and dejected.
Prolonged bodily pain, if not amounting to an agony, generally leads to the
same state of mind. If we expect to suffer, we are anxious; if we have no hope
of relief, we despair.
Persons suffering from
excessive grief often seek relief by violent and almost frantic movements, as
described in a former chapter; but when their suffering is somewhat mitigated,
yet prolonged, they no longer wish for action, but remain motionless and
passive, or may occasionally rock themselves to and fro. The circulation
becomes languid; the face pale; the muscles flaccid; the eyelids droop; the
head hangs on the contracted chest; the lips, checks, and lower jaw all sink
downwards from their own weight. Hence all the features are lengthened; and the
face of a person who hears bad news is said to fall. A party of natives in
Tierra del Fuego endeavoured to explain to us that their friend, the captain of
a sealing vessel, was out of spirits, by pulling down their cheeks with both
hands, so as to make their faces as long as possible. Mr. Bunnet informs me
that the Australian aborigines when out of spirits have a chop-fallen
appearance. After prolonged suffering the eyes become dull and lack expression,
and are often slightly suffused with tears. The eyebrows not rarely are
rendered oblique, which is due to their inner ends being raised. This produces
peculiarly- formed wrinkles on the forehead, which are very different from
those of a simple frown; though in some cases a frown alone may be present. The
corners of the mouth are drawn downwards, which is so universally recognized as
a sign of being out of spirits, that it is almost proverbial.
The breathing becomes
slow and feeble, and is often interrupted by deep sighs. As Gratiolet remarks,
whenever our attention is long concentrated on any subject, we forget to
breathe, and then relieve ourselves by a deep inspiration; but the sighs of a
sorrowful person, owing to his slow respiration and languid circulation, are
eminently characteristic.[1] As the grief of a person in this state
occasionally recurs and increases into a paroxysm, spasms affect the
respiratory muscles, and he feels as if something, the so-called globus
hystericus, was rising in his throat. These spasmodic movements are clearly
allied to the sobbing of children, and are remnants of those severer spasms
which occur when a person is said to choke from excessive grief.[2]
Obliquity of the eyebrows.--Two
points alone in the above description require further elucidation, and these
are very curious ones; namely, the raising of the inner ends of the eyebrows,
and the drawing down of the corners of the mouth. With respect to the eyebrows,
they may occasionally be seen to assume an oblique position in persons
suffering from deep dejection or anxiety; for instance, I have observed this
movement in a mother whilst speaking about her sick son; and it is sometimes
excited by quite trifling or momentary causes of real or pretended distress.
The eyebrows assume this position owing to the contraction of certain muscles
(namely, the orbiculars, corrugators, and pyramidals of the nose, which
together tend to lower and contract the eyebrows) being partially checked by
the more powerful action of the central fascim of the frontal muscle. These
latter fasciæ by their contraction raise the inner ends alone of the eyebrows;
and as the corrugators at the same time draw the eyebrows together, their inner
ends become puckered into a fold or lump. This fold is a highly characteristic
point in the appearance of the eyebrows when rendered oblique, as may be seen
in figs. 2 and 5, Plate II. The eyebrows are at the same time somewhat
roughened, owing to the hairs being made to project. Dr. J. Crichton Browne has
also often noticed in melancholic patients who keep their eyebrows persistently
oblique, "a peculiar acute arching of the upper eyelid." A trace of
this may be observed by comparing the right and left eyelids of the young man
in the photograph (fig. 2, Plate II.); for he was not able to act equally on
both eyebrows. This is also shown by the unequal furrows on the two sides of
his forehead. The acute arching of the eyelids depends, I believe, on the inner
end alone of the eyebrows being raised; for when the whole eyebrow is elevated
and arched, the upper eyelid follows in a slight degree the same movement.
But the most
conspicuous result of the opposed contraction of the above-named muscles, is
exhibited by the peculiar furrows formed on the forehead. These muscles, when
thus in conjoint yet opposed action, may be called, for the sake of brevity,
the grief-muscles. When a person elevates his eyebrows by the contraction of
the whole frontal muscle, transverse wrinkles extend across the whole breadth
of the forehead; but in the present case the middle fasciæ alone are
contracted; consequently, transverse furrows are formed across the middle part
alone of the forehead. The skin over the exterior parts of both eyebrows is at
the same time drawn downwards and smooth, by the contraction of the outer
portions of the orbicular muscles. The eyebrows are likewise brought together
through the simultaneous contraction of the corrugators;[3] and this latter
action generates vertical furrows, separating the exterior and lowered part of
the skin of the forehead from the central and raised part. The union of these
vertical furrows with the central and transverse furrows (see figs. 2 and 3)
produces a mark on the forehead which has been compared to a horse-shoe; but
the furrows more strictly form three sides of a quadrangle. They are often
conspicuous on the foreheads of adult or nearly adult persons, when their
eyebrows are made oblique; but with young children, owing to their skin not easily
wrinkling, they are rarely seen, or mere traces of them can be detected.
These peculiar furrows
are best represented in fig. 3, Plate II., on the forehead of a young lady who
has the power in an unusual degree of voluntarily acting on the requisite muscles.
As she was absorbed in the attempt, whilst being photographed, her expression
was not at all one of grief; I have therefore given the forehead alone. Fig. 1
on the same plate, copied from Dr. Duchenne's work,[4] represents, on a reduced
scale, the face, in its natural state, of a young man who was a good actor. In
fig. 2 he is shown simulating grief, but the two eyebrows, as before remarked,
are not equally acted on. That the expression is true, may be inferred from the
fact that out of fifteen persons, to whom the original photograph was shown,
without any clue to what was intended being given them, fourteen immediately
answered, "despairing sorrow," "suffering endurance,"
"melancholy," and so forth. The history of fig. 5 is rather curious:
I saw the photograph in a shop-window, and took it to Mr. Rejlander for the
sake of finding out by whom it had been made; remarking to him how pathetic the
expression was. He answered, "I made it, and it was likely to be pathetic,
for the boy in a few minutes burst out crying." He then showed me a
photograph of the same boy in a placid state, which I have had (fig. 4)
reproduced. In fig. 6, a trace of obliquity in the eyebrows may be detected;
but this figure, as well as fig. 7, is given to show the depression of the
corners of the mouth, to which subject I shall presently refer.
Few persons, without
some practice, can voluntarily act on their grief-muscles; but after repeated
trials a considerable number succeed, whilst others never can. The degree of
obliquity in the eyebrows, whether assumed voluntarily or unconsciously,
differs much in different persons. With some who apparently have unusually
strong pyramidal muscles, the contraction of the central fasciæ of the frontal
muscle, although it may be energetic, as shown by the quadrangular furrows on
the forehead, does not raise the inner ends of the eyebrows, but only prevents
their being so much lowered as they otherwise would have been. As far as I have
been able to observe, the grief-muscles are brought into action much more
frequently by children and women than by men. They are rarely acted on, at
least with grown-up persons, from bodily pain, but almost exclusively from
mental distress. Two persons who, after some practice, succeeded in acting on
their grief-muscles, found by looking at a mirror that when they made their
eyebrows oblique, they unintentionally at the same time depressed the corners
of their mouths; and this is often the case when the expression is naturally
assumed.
The power to bring the
grief-muscles freely into play appears to be hereditary, like almost every
other human faculty. A lady belonging to a family famous for having produced an
extraordinary number of great actors and actresses, and who can herself give
this expression "with singular precision," told Dr. Crichton Browne
that all her family had possessed the power in a remarkable degree. The same
hereditary tendency is said to have extended, as I likewise hear from Dr.
Browne, to the last descendant of the family, which gave rise to Sir Walter
Scott's novel of `Red Gauntlet;' but the hero is described as contracting his
forehead into a horseshoe mark from any strong emotion. I have also seen a
young woman whose forehead seemed almost habitually thus contracted,
independently of any emotion being at the time felt.
The grief-muscles are
not very frequently brought into play; and as the action is often momentary, it
easily escapes observation. Although the expression, when observed, is
universally and instantly recognized as that of grief or anxiety, yet not one
person out of a thousand who has never studied the subject, is able to say
precisely what change passes over the sufferer's face. Hence probably it is
that this expression is not even alluded to, as far as I have noticed, in any
work of fiction, with the exception of `Red Gauntlet' and of one other novel;
and the authoress of the latter, as I am informed, belongs to the famous family
of actors just alluded to; so that her attention may have been specially called
to the subject.
The ancient Greek
sculptors were familiar with the expression, as shown in the statues of the
Laocoon and Arretino; but, as Duchenne remarks, they carried the transverse
furrows across the whole breadth of the forehead, and thus committed a great
anatomical mistake: this is likewise the case in some modern statues. It is,
however, more probable that these wonderfully accurate observers intentionally
sacrificed truth for the sake of beauty, than that they made a mistake; for
rectangular furrows on the forehead would not have had a grand appearance on
the marble. The expression, in its fully developed condition, is, as far as I
can discover, not often represented in pictures by the old masters, no doubt
owing to the same cause; but a lady who is perfectly familiar with this
expression, informs me that in Fra Angelico's `Descent from the Cross,' in
Florence, it is clearly exhibited in one of the figures on the right- hand; and
I could add a few other instances.
Dr. Crichton Browne, at
my request, closely attended to this expression in the numerous insane patients
under his care in the West Riding Asylum; and he is familiar with Duchenne's
photographs of the action of the grief- muscles. He informs me that they may
constantly be seen in energetic action in cases of melancholia, and especially
of hypochondria; and that the persistent lines or furrows, due to their
habitual contraction, are characteristic of the physiognomy of the insane
belonging to these two classes. Dr. Browne carefully observed for me during a
considerable period three cases of hypochondria, in which the grief-muscles
were persistently contracted. In one of these, a widow, aged 51, fancied that
she had lost all her viscera, and that her whole body was empty. She wore an
expression of great distress, and beat her semi-closed hands rhythmically
together for hours. The grief-muscles were permanently contracted, and the
upper eyelids arched. This condition lasted for months; she then recovered, and
her countenance resumed its natural expression. A second case presented nearly
the same peculiarities, with the addition that the corners of the mouth were
depressed.
Mr. Patrick Nicol has
also kindly observed for me several cases in the Sussex Lunatic Asylum, and has
communicated to me full details with respect to three of them; but they need
not here be given. From his observations on melancholic patients, Mr. Nicol
concludes that the inner ends of the eyebrows are almost always more or less
raised, with the wrinkles on the forehead more or less plainly marked. In the
case of one young woman, these wrinkles were observed to be in constant slight
play or movement. In some cases the corners of the mouth are depressed, but
often only in a slight degree. Some amount of difference in the expression of
the several melancholic patients could almost always be observed. The eyelids
generally droop; and the skin near their outer corners and beneath them is
wrinkled. The naso-labial fold, which runs from the wings of the nostrils to
the corners of the mouth, and which is so conspicuous in blubbering children,
is often plainly marked in these patients.
Although with the
insane the grief-muscles often act persistently; yet in ordinary cases they are
sometimes brought unconsciously into momentary action by ludicrously slight
causes. A gentleman rewarded a young lady by an absurdly small present; she
pretended to be offended, and as she upbraided him, her eyebrows became
extremely oblique, with the forehead properly wrinkled. Another young lady and
a youth, both in the highest spirits, were eagerly talking together with
extraordinary rapidity; and I noticed that, as often as the young lady was
beaten, and could not get out her words fast enough, her eyebrows went
obliquely upwards, and rectangular furrows were formed on her forehead. She
thus each time hoisted a flag of distress; and this she did half-a-dozen times
in the course of a few minutes. I made no remark on the subject, but on a
subsequent occasion I asked her to act on her grief-muscles; another girl who
was present, and who could do so voluntarily, showing her what was intended.
She tried repeatedly, but utterly failed; yet so slight a cause of distress as
not being able to talk quickly enough, sufficed to bring these muscles over and
over again into energetic action.
The expression of
grief, due to the contraction of the grief-muscles, is by no means confined to
Europeans, but appears to be common to all the races of mankind. I have, at
least, received trustworthy accounts in regard to Hindoos, Dhangars (one of the
aboriginal hill- tribes of India, and therefore belonging to a quite distinct
race from the Hindoos), Malays, Negroes and Australians. With respect to the
latter, two observers answer my query in the affirmative, but enter into no
details. Mr. Taplin, however, appends to my descriptive remarks the words
"this is exact." With respect to negroes, the lady who told me of Fra
Angelico's picture, saw a negro towing a boat on the Nile, and as he
encountered an obstruction, she observed his grief-muscles in strong action,
with the middle of the forehead well wrinkled. Mr. Geach watched a Malay man in
Malacca, with the corners of his mouth much depressed, the eyebrows oblique,
with deep short grooves on the forehead. This expression lasted for a very
short time; and Mr. Geach remarks it "was a strange one, very much like a
person about to cry at some great loss."
In India Mr. H. Erskine
found that the natives were familiar with this expression; and Mr. J. Scott, of
the Botanic Gardens, Calcutta, has obligingly sent me a full description of two
cases. He observed during some time, himself unseen, a very young Dhangar woman
from Nagpore, the wife of one of the gardeners, nursing her baby who was at the
point of death; and he distinctly saw the eyebrows raised at the inner corners,
the eyelids drooping, the forehead wrinkled in the middle, the mouth slightly
open, with the corners much depressed. He then came from behind a screen of
plants and spoke to the poor woman, who started, burst into a bitter flood of
tears, and besought him to cure her baby. The second case was that of a
Hindustani man, who from illness and poverty was compelled to sell his
favourite goat. After receiving the money, he repeatedly looked at the money in
his hand and then at the goat, as if doubting whether he would not return it.
He went to the goat, which was tied up ready to be led away, and the animal
reared up and licked his hands. His eyes then wavered from side to side; his
"mouth was partially closed, with the corners very decidedly depressed."
At last the poor man seemed to make up his mind that he must part with his
goat, and then, as Mr. Scott saw, the eyebrows became slightly oblique, with
the characteristic puckering or swelling at the inner ends, but the wrinkles on
the forehead were not present. The man stood thus for a minute, then heaving a
deep sigh, burst into tears, raised up his two hands, blessed the goat, turned
round, and without looking again, went away.
On the cause of the
obliquity of the eyebrows under suffering.--During several years no expression
seemed to me so utterly perplexing as this which we are here considering. Why
should grief or anxiety cause the central fasciæ alone of the frontal muscle
together with those round the eyes, to contract? Here we seem to have a complex
movement for the sole purpose of ex- pressing grief; and yet it is a
comparatively rare expression, and often overlooked. I believe the explanation
is not so difficult as it at first appears. Dr. Duchenne gives a photograph of
the young man before referred to, who, when looking upwards at a strongly
illuminated surface, involuntarily contracted his grief-muscles in an
exaggerated manner. I had entirely forgotten this photograph, when on a very
bright day with the sun behind me, I met, whilst on horseback, a girl whose
eyebrows, as she looked up at me, became extremely oblique, with the proper
furrows on her forehead. I have observed the same movement under similar
circumstances on several subsequent occasions. On my return home I made three of
my children, without giving them any clue to my object, look as long and as
attentively as they could, at the summit of a tall tree standing against an
extremely bright sky. With all three, the orbicular, corrugator, and pyramidal
muscles were energetically contracted, through reflex action, from the
excitement of the retina, so that their eyes might be protected from the bright
light. But they tried their utmost to look upwards; and now a curious struggle,
with spasmodic twitchings, could be observed between the whole or only the
central portion of the frontal muscle, and the several muscles which serve to
lower the eyebrows and close the eyelids. The involuntary contraction of the
pyramidal caused the basal part of their noses to be transversely and deeply
wrinkled. In one of the three children, the whole eyebrows were momentarily
raised and lowered by the alternate contraction of the whole frontal muscle and
of the muscles surrounding the eyes, so that the whole breadth of the forehead
was alternately wrinkled and smoothed. In the other two children the forehead
became wrinkled in the middle part alone, rectangular furrows being thus
produced; and the eyebrows were rendered oblique, with their inner extremities
puckered and swollen,--in the one child in a slight degree, in the other in a
strongly marked manner. This difference in the obliquity of the eyebrows
apparently depended on a difference in their general mobility, and in the
strength of the pyramidal muscles. In both these cases the eyebrows and forehead
were acted on under the influence of a strong light, in precisely the same
manner, in every characteristic detail, as under the influence of grief or
anxiety.
Duchenne states that
the pyramidal muscle of the nose is less under the control of the will than are
the other muscles round the eyes. He remarks that the young man who could so
well act on his grief-muscles, as well as on most of his other facial muscles,
could not contract the pyramidals.[5] This power, however, no doubt differs in
different persons. The pyramidal muscle serves to draw down the skin of the
forehead between the eyebrows, together with their inner extremities. The
central fasciæ of the frontal are the antagonists of the pyramidal; and if the
action of the latter is to be specially checked, these central fasciæ must be
contracted. So that with persons having powerful pyramidal muscles, if there is
under the influence of a bright light an unconscious desire to prevent the
lowering of the eyebrows, the central fasciæ of the frontal muscle must be
brought into play; and their contraction, if sufficiently strong to overmaster
the pyramidals, together with the contraction of the corrugator and orbicular
muscles, will act in the manner just described on the eyebrows and forehead.
When children scream or
cry out, they contract, as we know, the orbicular, corrugator, and pyramidal
muscles, primarily for the sake of compressing their eyes, and thus protecting
them from being gorged with blood, and secondarily through habit. I therefore
expected to find with children, that when they endeavoured either to prevent a
crying-fit from coming on, or to stop crying, they would cheek the contraction
of the above-named muscles, in the same manner as when looking upwards at a
bright light; and consequently that the central fasciæ of the frontal muscle
would often be brought into play. Accordingly, I began myself to observe
children at such times, and asked others, including some medical men, to do the
same. It is necessary to observe carefully, as the peculiar opposed action of
these muscles is not nearly so plain in children, owing to their foreheads not
easily wrinkling, as in adults. But I soon found that the grief-muscles were
very frequently brought into distinct action on these occasions. It would be
superfluous to give all the cases which have been observed; and I will specify
only a few. A little girl, a year and a half old, was teased by some other
children, and before bursting into tears her eyebrows became decidedly oblique.
With an older girl the same obliquity was observed, with the inner ends of the
eyebrows plainly puckered; and at the same time the corners of the mouth were
drawn downwards. As soon as she burst into tears, the features all changed and
this peculiar expression vanished. Again, after a little boy had been
vaccinated, which made him scream and cry violently, the surgeon gave him an
orange brought for the purpose, and this pleased the child much; as he stopped
crying all the characteristic movements were observed, including the formation
of rectangular wrinkles in the middle of the forehead. Lastly, I met on the
road a little girl three or four years old, who had been frightened by a dog,
and when I asked her what was the mat-- ter, she stopped whimpering, and her
eyebrows instantly became oblique to an extraordinary degree.
Here then, as I cannot
doubt, we have the key to the problem why the central fasciæ of the frontal
muscle and the muscles round the eyes contract in opposition to each other
under the influence of grief;--whether their contraction be prolonged, as with
the melancholic insane, or momentary, from some trifling cause of distress. We
have all of us, as infants, repeatedly contracted our orbicular, corrugator,
and pyramidal muscles, in order to protect our eyes whilst screaming; our
progenitors before us have done the same during many generations; and though
with advancing years we easily prevent, when feeling distressed, the utterance
of screams, we cannot from long habit always prevent a slight contraction of the
above-named muscles; nor indeed do we observe their contraction in ourselves,
or attempt to stop it, if slight. But the pyramidal muscles seem to be less
under the command of the will than the other related muscles; and if they be
well developed, their contraction can be checked only by the antagonistic
contraction of the central fasciæ of the frontal muscle. The result which
necessarily follows, if these fasciæ contract energetically, is the oblique
drawing up of the eyebrows, the puckering of their inner ends, and the
formation of rectangular furrows on the middle of the forehead. As children and
women cry much more freely than men, and as grown-up persons of both sexes
rarely weep except from mental distress, we can understand why the
grief-muscles are more frequently seen in action, as I believe to be the case,
with children and women than with men; and with adults of both sexes from
mental distress alone. In some of the cases before recorded, as in that of the
poor Dhangar woman and of the Hindustani man, the action of the grief-muscles
was quickly followed by bitter weeping. In all cases of distress, whether great
or small, our brains tend through long habit to send an order to certain
muscles to contract, as if we were still infants on the point of screaming out;
but this order we, by the wondrous power of the will, and through habit, are
able partially to counteract; although this is effected unconsciously, as far
as the means of counteraction are concerned.
On the depression of
the corners of the mouth.--This action is effected by the depressores anguili
oris (see letter K in figs. 1 and 2). The fibres of this muscle diverge
downwards, with the upper convergent ends attached round the angles of the
mouth, and to the lower lip a little way within the angles.[6] Some of the
fibres appear to be antagonistic to the great zygomatic muscle, and others to
the several muscles running to the outer part of the upper lip. The contraction
of this muscle draws downwards and outwards the corners of the mouth, including
the outer part of the upper lip, and even in a slight degree the wings of the
nostrils. When the mouth is closed and this muscle acts, the commissure or line
of junction of the two lips forms a curved line with the concavity
downwards,[7] and the lips themselves are generally somewhat protruded,
especially the lower one. The mouth in this state is well represented in the
two photographs (Plate II., figs. 6 and 7) by Mr. Rejlander. The upper boy
(fig. 6) had just stopped crying, after receiving a slap on the face from
another boy; and the right moment was seized for photographing him.
The expression of low
spirits, grief or dejection, due to the contraction of this muscle has been
noticed by every one who has written on the subject. To say that a person
"is down in the mouth," is synonymous with saying that he is out of
spirits. The depression of the corners may often be seen, as already stated on
the authority of Dr. Crichton Browne and Mr. Nicol, with the melancholic
insane, and was well exhibited in some photographs sent to me by the former
gentleman, of patients with a strong tendency to suicide. It has been observed
with men belonging to various races, namely with Hindoos, the dark hill-tribes
of India, Malays, and, as the Rev. Mr. Hagenauer informs me, with the
aborigines of Australia.
When infants scream
they firmly contract the muscles round their eyes, and this draws up the upper
lip; and as they have to keep their mouths widely open, the depressor muscles
running to the corners are likewise brought into strong action. This generally,
but not invariably, causes a slight angular bend in the lower lip on both
sides, near the corners of the mouth. The result of the upper and lower lip
being thus acted on is that the mouth assumes a squarish outline. The
contraction of the depressor muscle is best seen in infants when not screaming
violently, and especially just before they begin, or when they cease to scream.
Their little faces then acquire an extremely piteous expression, as I
continually observed with my own infants between the ages of about six weeks
and two or three months. Sometimes, when they are struggling against a crying-
fit, the outline of the mouth is curved in so exaggerated a manner as to be
like a horseshoe; and the expression of misery then becomes a ludicrous
caricature.
The explanation of the
contraction of this muscle, under the influence of low spirits or dejection,
apparently follows from the same general principles as in the case of the
obliquity of the eyebrows. Dr. Duchenne informs me that he concludes from his
observations, now prolonged during many years, that this is one of the facial
muscles which is least under the control of the will. This fact may indeed be
inferred from what has just been stated with respect to infants when doubtfully
beginning to cry, or endeavouring to stop crying; for they then generally
command all the other facial muscles more effectually than they do the
depressors of the corners of the mouth. Two excellent observers who had no
theory on the subject, one of them a surgeon, carefully watched for me some
older children and women as with some opposed struggling they very gradually
approached the point of bursting out into tears; and both observers felt sure
that the depressors began to act before any of the other muscles. Now as the
depressors have been repeatedly brought into strong action during infancy in
many generations, nerve-force will tend to flow, on the principle of long
associated habit, to these muscles as well as to various other facial muscles,
whenever in after life even a slight feeling of distress is experienced. But as
the depressors are somewhat less under the control of the will than most of the
other muscles, we might expect that they would often slightly contract, whilst
the others remained passive. It is remarkable how small a depression of the
corners of the mouth gives to the countenance an expression of low spirits or
dejection, so that an extremely slight contraction of these muscles would be
sufficient to betray this state of mind.
I may here mention a
trifling observation, as it will serve to sum up our present subject. An old
lady with a comfortable but absorbed expression sat nearly opposite to me in a
railway carriage. Whilst I was looking at her, I saw that her depressores
anguli oris became very slightly, yet decidedly, contracted; but as her
countenance remained as placid as ever, I reflected how meaningless was this
contraction, and how easily one might be deceived. The thought had hardly
occurred to me when I saw that her eyes suddenly became suffused with tears
almost to overflowing, and her whole countenance fell. There could now be no
doubt that some painful recollection, perhaps that of a long-lost child, was
passing through her mind. As soon as her sensorium was thus affected, certain
nerve-cells from long habit instantly transmitted an order to all the
respiratory muscles, and to those round the mouth, to prepare for a fit of
crying. But the order was countermanded by the will, or rather by a later
acquired habit, and all the muscles were obedient, excepting in a slight degree
the depressores anguli oris. The mouth was not even opened; the respiration was
not hurried; and no muscle was affected except those which draw down the
corners of the mouth.
As soon as the mouth of
this lady began, involuntarily and unconsciously on her part, to assume the proper
form for a crying-fit, we may feel almost sure that some nerve-influence would
have been transmitted through the long accustomed channels to the various
respiratory muscles, as well as to those round the eyes, and to the vaso-motor
centre which governs the supply of blood sent to the lacrymal glands. Of this
latter fact we have indeed clear evidence in her eyes becoming slightly
suffused with tears; and we can understand this, as the lacrymal glands are
less under the control of the will than the facial muscles. No doubt there
existed at the same time some tendency in the muscles round the eyes at
contract, as if for the sake of protecting them from being gorged with blood,
but this contraction was completely overmastered, and her brow remained unruffled.
Had the pyramidal, corrugator, and orbicular muscles been as little obedient to
the will, as they are in many persons, they would have been slightly acted on;
and then the central fasciæ of the frontal muscle would have contracted in
antagonism, and her eyebrows would have become oblique, with rectangular
furrows on her forehead. Her countenance would then have expressed still more
plainly than it did a state of dejection, or rather one of grief.
Through steps such as
these we can understand how it is, that as soon as some melancholy thought
passes through the brain, there occurs a just perceptible drawing down of the
corners of the mouth, or a slight raising up of the inner ends of the eyebrows,
or both movements combined, and immediately afterwards a slight suffusion of
tears. A thrill of nerve-force is transmitted along several habitual channels,
and produces an effect on any point where the will has not acquired through
long habit much power of interference. The above actions may be considered as rudimental
vestiges of the screaming- fits, which are so frequent and prolonged during
infancy. In this case, as well as in many others, the links are indeed
wonderful which connect cause and effect in giving rise to various expressions
on the human countenance; and they explain to us the meaning of certain
movements, which we involuntarily and unconsciously perform, whenever certain
transitory emotions pass through our minds.
[1] The above
descriptive remarks are taken in part from my own observations, but chiefly
from Gratiolet (`De la Physionomie,' pp. 53, 337; on Sighing, 232), who has
well treated this whole subject. See, also, Huschke. `Mimices et
Physiognomices, Fragmentum Physiologicitim,' 1821, p. 21. On the dulness of the
eyes, Dr. Piderit, `Mimik und Physiognomik,' 1867, s. 65.
[2] On the action of
grief on the organs of respiration, see more especially Sir C. Bell, `Anatomy
of Expression,' 3rd edit. 1844, p. 151.
[3] In the foregoing
remarks on the manner in which the eyebrows are made oblique, I have followed
what seems to be the universal opinion of all the anatomists, whose works I
have consulted on the action of the above- named muscles, or with whom I have
conversed. Hence throughout this work I shall take a similar view of the action
of the corrugator supercilii, orbicularis, pyramidalis nasi, and frontalis
muscles. Dr. Duchenne, however, believes, and every conclusion at which he
arrives deserves serious consideration, that it is the corrugator, called by
him the sourcilier, which raises the inner corner of the eyebrows and is
antagonistic to the upper and inner part of the orbicular muscle, as well as to
the pyramidalis nasi (see Mécanisme de la Phys. Humaine, 1862, folio, art. v.,
text and figures 19 to 29: octavo edit. 1862, p. 43 text). He admits, however,
that the corrugator draws together the eyebrows, causing vertical furrows above
the base of the nose, or a frown. He further believes that towards the outer
two-thirds of the eyebrow the corrugator acts in conjunction with the upper orbicular
muscle; both here standing in antagonism to the frontal muscle. I am unable to
understand, judging from Henle's drawings (woodcut, fig. 3), how the corrugator
can act in the manner described by Duchenue. See, also, oil this subject, Prof.
Donders' remarks in the `Archives of Medicine,' 1870, vol. v. p. 34. Mr. J.
Wood, who is so well known for his careful study of the muscles of the human
frame, informs me that he believes the account which I have given of the action
of the corrugator to be correct. But this is not a point of any importance with
respect to the expression which is caused by the obliquity of the eyebrows, nor
of much importance to the theory of its origin.
[4] I am greatly
indebted to Dr. Duchenne for permission to have these two photographs (figs. 1
and 2) reproduced by the heliotype process from his work in folio. Many of the
foregoing remarks on the furrowing of the skin, when the eyebrows are rendered
oblique, are taken from his excellent discussion on this subject.
[5] Mécanisme de la
Phys. Humaine, Album, p. 15.
[6] Henle, Handbuch der
Anat. des Menschen, 1858, B. i. s. 148, figs. 68 and 69.
[7] See the account of
the action of this muscle by Dr. Duchenne, `Mécanisme de la Physionomie
Humaine, Album (1862), viii. p. 34.
JOY, when intense,
leads to various purposeless movements-- to dancing about, clapping the hands,
stamping, &c., and to loud laughter. Laughter seems primarily to be the
expression of mere joy or happiness. We clearly see this in children at play,
who are almost incessantly laughing. With young persons past childhood, when
they are in high spirits, there is always much meaningless laughter. The
laughter of the gods is described by Homer as "the exuberance of their
celestial joy after their daily banquet." A man smiles--and smiling, as we
shall see, graduates into laughter--at meeting an old friend in the street, as
he does at any trifling pleasure, such as smelling a sweet perfume.[1] Laura
Bridgman, from her blindness and deafness, could not have acquired any
expression through imitation, yet when a letter from a beloved friend was
communicated to her by gesture-language, she "laughed and clapped her
hands, and the colour mounted to her cheeks." On other occasions she has
been seen to stamp for joy.[2]
Idiots and imbecile
persons likewise afford good evidence that laughter or smiling primarily
expresses mere happiness or joy. Dr. Crichton Browne, to whom, as on so many
other occasions, I am indebted for the results of his wide experience, informs
me that with idiots laughter is the most prevalent and frequent of all the
emotional expressions. Many idiots are morose, passionate, restless, in a
painful state of mind, or utterly stolid, and these never laugh. Others
frequently laugh in a quite senseless manner. Thus an idiot boy, incapable of
speech, complained to Dr. Browne, by the aid of signs, that another boy in the
asylum had given him a black eye; and this was accompanied by "explosions
of laughter and with his face covered with the broadest smiles." There is
another large class of idiots who are persistently joyous and benign, and who
are constantly laughing or smiling.[3] Their countenances often exhibit a stereotyped
smile; their joyousness is increased, and they grin, chuckle, or giggle,
whenever food is placed before them, or when they are caressed, are shown
bright colours, or hear music. Some of them laugh more than usual when they
walk about, or attempt any muscular exertion. The joyousness of most of these
idiots cannot possibly be associated, as Dr. Browne remarks, with any distinct
ideas: they simply feel pleasure, and express it by laughter or smiles. With
imbeciles rather higher in the scale, personal vanity seems to be the commonest
cause of laughter, and next to this, pleasure arising from the approbation of
their conduct.
With grown-up persons
laughter is excited by causes considerably different from those which suffice
during childhood; but this remark hardly applies to smiling. Laughter in this
respect is analogous with weeping, which with adults is almost confined to
mental distress, whilst with children it is excited by bodily pain or any
suffering, as well as by fear or rage. Many curious discussions have been
written on the causes of laughter with grown-up persons. The subject is
extremely complex. Something incongruous or unaccountable, exciting surprise
and some sense of superiority in the laugher, who must be in a happy frame of
mind, seems to be the commonest cause.[4] The circumstances must not be of a
momentous nature: no poor man would laugh or smile on suddenly hearing that a
large fortune had been bequeathed to him. If the mind is strongly excited by
pleasurable feelings, and any little unexpected event or thought occurs, then,
as Mr. Herbert Spencer remarks,[5] "a large amount of nervous energy,
instead of being allowed to expend itself in producing an equivalent amount of
the new thoughts and emotion which were nascent, is suddenly checked in its
flow." . . . "The excess must discharge itself in some other
direction, and there results an efflux through the motor nerves to various
classes of the muscles, producing the half-convulsive actions we term
laughter." An observation, bearing on this point, was made by a
correspondent during the recent siege of Paris, namely, that the German
soldiers. after strong excitement from exposure to extreme danger, were
particularly apt to burst out into loud laughter at the smallest joke. So again
when young children are just beginning to cry, an unexpected event will
sometimes suddenly turn their crying into laughter, which apparently serves
equally well to expend their superfluous nervous energy.
The imagination is
sometimes said to be tickled by a ludicrous idea; and this so-called tickling
of the mind is curiously analogous with that of the body. Every one knows how
immoderately children laugh, and how their whole bodies are convulsed when they
are tickled. The anthropoid apes, as we have seen, likewise utter a reiterated
sound, corresponding with our laughter, when they are tickled, especially under
the armpits. I touched with a bit of paper the sole of the foot of one of my
infants, when only seven days old, and it was suddenly jerked away and the toes
curled about, as in an older child. Such movements, as well as laughter from
being tickled, are manifestly reflex actions; and this is likewise shown by the
minute unstriped muscles, which serve to erect the separate hairs on the body,
contracting near a tickled surface.[6] Yet laughter from a ludicrous idea,
though involuntary, cannot be called a strictly reflex action. In this case,
and in that of laughter from being tickled, the mind must be in a pleasurable
condition; a young child, if tickled by a strange man, would scream from fear.
The touch must be light, and an idea or event, to be ludicrous, must not be of
grave import. The parts of the body which are most easily tickled are those
which are not commonly touched, such as the armpits or between the toes, or
parts such as the soles of the feet, which are habitually touched by a broad
surface; but the surface on which we sit offers a marked exception to this
rule. According to Gratiolet,[7] certain nerves are much more sensitive to
tickling than others. From the fact that a child can hardly tickle itself, or
in a much less degree than when tickled by another person, it seems that the
precise point to be touched must not be known; so with the mind, something
unexpected--a novel or incongruous idea which breaks through an habitual train
of thought--appears to he a strong element in the ludicrous.
The sound of laughter
is produced by a deep inspiration followed by short, interrupted, spasmodic
contractions of the chest, and especially of the diaphragm.[8] Hence we hear of
"laughter holding both his sides." From the shaking of the body, the
head nods to and fro. The lower jaw often quivers up and down, as is likewise
the case with some species of baboons, when they are much pleased.
During laughter the mouth
is opened more or less widely, with the corners drawn much backwards, as well
as a little upwards; and the upper lip is somewhat raised. The drawing back of
the corners is best seen in moderate laughter, and especially in a broad
smile-- the latter epithet showing how the mouth is widened. In the
accompanying figs. 1--3, Plate III., different degrees of moderate laughter and
smiling have been photographed. The figure of the little girl, with the hat is
by Dr. Wallich, and the expression was a genuine one; the other two are by Mr.
Rejlander. Dr. Duchenne repeatedly insists[9] that, under the emotion of joy,
the mouth is acted on exclusively by the great zygomatic muscles, which serve
to draw the corners backwards and upwards; but judging from the manner in which
the upper teeth are always exposed during laughter and broad smiling, as well
as from my own sensations, I cannot doubt that some of the muscles running to
the upper lip are likewise brought into moderate action. The upper and lower
orbicular muscles of the eyes are at the same time more or less contracted; and
there is an intimate connection, as explained in the chapter on weeping,
between the orbiculars, especially the lower ones and some of the muscles
running to the upper lip. Henle remarks[10] on this head, that when a man
closely shuts one eye he cannot avoid retracting the upper lip on the same
side; conversely, if any one will place his finger on his lower eyelid, and
then uncover his upper incisors as much as possible, he will feel, as his upper
lip is drawn strongly upwards, that the muscles of the lower eyelid contract.
In Henle's drawing, given in woodcut, fig. 2, the musculus malaris (H) which
runs to the upper lip may be seen to form an almost integral part of the lower
orbicular muscle.
Dr. Duchenne has given
a large photograph of an old man (reduced on Plate III. fig 4), in his usual
passive condition, and another of the same man (fig. 5), naturally smiling. The
latter was instantly recognized by every one to whom it was shown as true to
nature. He has also given, as an example of an unnatural or false smile,
another photograph (fig. 6) of the same old man, with the corners of his mouth
strongly retracted by the galvanization of the great zygomatic muscles. That
the expression is not natural is clear, for I showed this photograph to
twenty-four persons, of whom three could not in the least tell what was meant,
whilst the others, though they perceived that the expression was of the nature
of a smile, answered in such words as "a wicked joke," "trying
to laugh," "grinning laughter ... .. half- amazed laughter,"
&c. Dr. Duchenne attributes the falseness of the expression altogether to
the orbicular muscles of the lower eyelids not being sufficiently contracted;
for he justly lays great stress on their contraction in the expression of joy.
No doubt there is much truth in this view, but not, as it appears to me, the
whole truth. The contraction of the lower orbiculars is always accompanied, as
we have seen, by the drawing up of the upper lip. Had the upper lip, in fig. 6,
been thus acted on to a slight extent, its curvature would have been less
rigid, the naso-labial farrow would have been slightly different, and the whole
expression would, as I believe, have been more natural, independently of the
more conspicuous effect from the stronger contraction of the lower eyelids. The
corruptor muscle, moreover, in fig. 6, is too much contracted, causing a frown;
and this muscle never acts under the influence of joy except during strongly
pronounced or violent laughter.
By the drawing
backwards and upwards of the corners of the mouth, through the contraction of
the great zygomatic muscles, and by the raising of the upper lip, the cheeks
are drawn upwards. Wrinkles are thus formed under the eyes, and, with old
people, at their outer ends; and these are highly characteristic of laughter or
smiling. As a gentle smile increases into a strong one, or into a laugh, every
one may feel and see, if he will attend to his own sensations and look at
himself in a mirror, that as the upper lip is drawn up and the lower orbiculars
contract, the wrinkles in the lower eyelids and those beneath the eyes are much
strengthened or increased. At the same time, as I have repeatedly observed, the
eyebrows are slightly lowered, which shows that the upper as well as the lower
orbiculars contract at least to some degree, though this passes unperecived, as
far as our sensations are concerned. If the original photograph of the old man,
with his countenance in its usual placid state (fig. 4), be compared with that
(fig. 5) in which he is naturally smiling, it may be seen that the eyebrows in
the latter are a little lowered. I presume that this is owing to the upper
orbiculars being impelled, through the force of long-associated habit, to act
to a certain extent in concert with the lower orbiculars, which themselves
contract in connection with the drawing up of the upper lip.
The tendency in the
zygomatic muscles to contract under pleasurable emotions is shown by a curious
fact, communicated to me by Dr. Browne, with respect to patients suffering from
general paralysis of the insane.[11] "In this malady there is almost
invariably optimism-- delusions as to wealth, rank, grandeur--insane
joyousness, benevolence, and profusion, while its very earliest physical
symptom is trembling at the corners of the mouth and at the outer corners of
the eyes. This is a well-recognized fact. Constant tremulous agitation of the
inferior palpebral and great zygomatic muscles is pathognomic of the earlier
stages of general paralysis. The countenance has a pleased and benevolent
expression. As the disease advances other muscles become involved, but until
complete fatuity is reached, the prevailing expression is that of feeble
benevolence."
As in laughing and
broadly smiling the cheeks and upper lip are much raised, the nose appears to
be shortened, and the skin on the bridge becomes finely wrinkled in transverse
lines, with other oblique longitudinal lines on the sides. The upper front
teeth are commonly exposed. A well-marked naso-labial fold is formed, which
runs from the wing of each nostril to the corner of the mouth; and this fold is
often double in old persons.
A bright and sparkling
eye is as characteristic of a pleased or amused state of mind, as is the
retraction of the corners of the mouth and upper lip with the wrinkles thus
produced. Even the eyes of microcephalous idiots, who are so degraded that they
never learn to speak, brighten slightly when they are pleased.[12] Under
extreme laughter the eyes are too much suffused with tears to sparkle; but the
moisture squeezed out of the glands during moderate laughter or smiling may aid
in giving them lustre; though this must be of altogether subordinate
importance, as they become dull from grief, though they are then often moist.
Their brightness seems to be chiefly due to their tenseness,[13] owing to the
contraction of the orbicular muscles and to the pressure of the raised cheeks.
But, according to Dr. Piderit, who has discussed this point more fully than any
other writer,[14] the tenseness may be largely attributed to the eyeballs
becoming filled with blood and other fluids, from the acceleration of the
circulation, consequent on the excitement of pleasure. He remarks on the
contrast in the appearance of the eyes of a hectic patient with a rapid
circulation, and of a man suffering from cholera with almost all the fluids of
his body drained from him. Any cause which lowers the circulation deadens the
eye. I remember seeing a man utterly prostrated by prolonged and severe
exertion during a very hot day, and a bystander compared his eyes to those of a
boiled codfish.
To return to the sounds
produced during laughter. We can see in a vague manner how the utterance of
sounds of some kind would naturally become associated with a pleasurable state
of mind; for throughout a large part of the animal kingdom vocal or
instrumental sounds are employed either as a call or as a charm by one sex for
the other. They are also employed as the means for a joyful meeting between the
parents and their offspring, and between the attached members of the same
social community. But why the sounds which man utters when he is pleased have
the peculiar reiterated character of laughter we do not know. Nevertheless we
can see that they would naturally be as different as possible from the screams
or cries of distress; and as in the production of the latter, the expirations
are prolonged and continuous, with the inspirations short and interrupted, so
it might perhaps have been expected with the sounds uttered from joy, that the
expirations would have been short and broken with the inspirations prolonged;
and this is the case.
It is an equally
obscure point why the corners of the mouth are retracted and the upper lip
raised during ordinary laughter. The mouth must not be opened to its utmost
extent, for when this occurs during a paroxysm of excessive laughter hardly any
sound is emitted; or it changes its tone and seems to come from deep down in
the throat. The respiratory muscles, and even those of the limbs, are at the
same time thrown into rapid vibratory movements. The lower jaw often partakes
of this movement, and this would tend to prevent the mouth from being widely
opened. But as a full volume of sound has to be poured forth, the orifice of
the mouth must be large; and it is perhaps to gain this end that the corners
are retracted and the upper lip raised. Although we can hardly account for the
shape of the mouth during laughter, which leads to wrinkles being formed
beneath the eyes, nor for the peculiar reiterated sound of laughter, nor for
the quivering of the jaws, nevertheless we may infer that all these effects are
due to some common cause. For they are all characteristic and expressive of a
pleased state of mind in various kinds of monkeys.
A graduated series can
be followed from violent to moderate laughter, to a broad smile, to a gentle
smile, and to the expression of mere cheerfulness. During excessive laughter
the whole body is often thrown backward and shakes, or is almost convulsed; the
respiration is much disturbed; the head and face become gorged with blood, with
the veins distended; and the orbicular muscles are spasmodically contracted in
order to protect the eyes. Tears are freely shed. Hence, as formerly remarked,
it is scarcely possible to point out any difference between the tear-stained
face of a person after a paroxysm of excessive laughter and after a bitter
crying- fit.[15] It is probably due to the close similarity of the spasmodic
movements caused by these widely different emotions that hysteric patients
alternately cry and laugh with violence, and that young children sometimes pass
suddenly from the one to the other state. Mr. Swinhoe informs me that he has
often seen the Chinese, when suffering from deep grief, burst out into
hysterical fits of laughter.
I was anxious to know
whether tears are freely shed during excessive laughter by most of the races of
men, and I hear from my correspondents that this is the case. One instance was
observed with the Hindoos, and they themselves said that it often occurred. So
it is with the Chinese. The women of a wild tribe of Malays in the Malacca
peninsula, sometimes shed tears when they laugh heartily, though this seldom
occurs. With the Dyaks of Borneo it must frequently be the case, at least with
the women, for I hear from the Rajah C. Brooke that it is a common expression
with them to say "we nearly made tears from laughter." The aborigines
of Australia express their emotions freely, and they are described by my
correspondents as jumping about and clapping their hands for joy, and as often
roaring with laughter. No less than four observers have seen their eyes freely
watering on such occasions; and in one instance the tears rolled down their
cheeks. Mr. Bulmer, a missionary in a remote part of Victoria, remarks,
"that they have a keen sense of the ridiculous; they are excellent mimics,
and when one of them is able to imitate the peculiarities of some absent member
of the tribe, it is very common to hear all in the camp convulsed with laughter."
With Europeans hardly anything excites laughter so easily as mimicry; and it is
rather curious to find the same fact with the savages of Australia, who
constitute one of the most distinct races in the world.
In Southern Africa with
two tribes of Kafirs, especially with the women, their eyes often fill with
tears during laughter. Gaika, the brother of the chief Sandilli, answers my
query on this bead, with the words, "Yes, that is their common
practice." Sir Andrew Smith has seen the painted face of a Hottentot woman
all furrowed with tears after a fit of laughter. In Northern Africa, with the
Abyssinians, tears are secreted under the same circumstances. Lastly, in North
America, the same fact has been observed in a remarkably savage and isolated tribe,
but chiefly with the women; in another tribe it was observed only on a single
occasion.
Excessive laughter, as
before remarked, graduates into moderate laughter. In this latter case the
muscles round the eyes are much less contracted, and there is little or no
frowning. Between a gentle laugh and a broad smile there is hardly any
difference, excepting that in smiling no reiterated sound is uttered, though a
single rather strong expiration, or slight noise--a rudiment of a laugh--may
often be heard at the commencement of a smile. On a moderately smiling
countenance the contraction of the upper orbicular muscles can still just be
traced by a slight lowering of the eyebrows. The contraction of the lower
orbicular and palpebral muscles is much plainer, and is shown by the wrinkling
of the lower eyelids and of the skin beneath them, together with a slight
drawing up of the upper lip. From the broadest smile we pass by the finest
steps into the gentlest one. In this latter case the features are moved in a much
less degree, and much more slowly, and the mouth is kept closed. The curvature
of the naso-labial furrow is also slightly different in the two cases. We thus
see that no abrupt line of demarcation can be drawn between the movement of the
features during the most violent laughter and a very faint smile.[16]
A smile, therefore, may
be said to be the first stage in the development of a laugh. But a different
and more probable view may be suggested; namely, that the habit of uttering
load reiterated sounds from a sense of pleasure, first led to the retraction of
the corners of the mouth and of the upper lip, and to the contraction of the
orbicular muscles; and that now, through association and long-continued habit,
the same muscles are brought into slight play whenever any cause excites in us
a feeling which, if stronger, would have led to laughter; and the result is a
smile.
Whether we look at
laughter as the full development of a smile, or, as is more probable, at a
gentle smile as the last trace of a habit, firmly fixed during many
generations, of laughing whenever we are joyful, we can follow in our infants
the gradual passage of the one into the other. It is well known to those who
have the charge of young infants, that it is difficult to feel sure when
certain movements about their mouths are really expressive; that is, when they
really smile. Hence I carefully watched my own infants. One of them at the age
of forty-five days, and being at the time in a happy frame of mind, smiled;
that is, the corners of the mouth were retracted, and simultaneously the eyes
became decidedly bright. I observed the same thing on the following day; but on
the third day the child was not quite well and there was no trace of a smile,
and this renders it probable that the previous smiles were real. Eight days
subsequently and during the next succeeding week, it was remarkable how his
eyes brightened whenever he smiled, and his nose became at the same time
transversely wrinkled. This was now accompanied by a little bleating noise,
which perhaps represented a laugh. At the age of 113 days these little noises,
which were always made during expiration, assumed a slightly different
character, and were more broken or interrupted, as in sobbing; and this was
certainly incipient laughter. The change in tone seemed to me at the time to be
connected with the greater lateral extension of the mouth as the smiles became
broader.
In a second infant the
first real smile was observed at about the same age, viz. forty-five days; and
in a third, at a somewhat earlier age. The second infant, when sixty-five days
old, smiled much more broadly and plainly than did the one first mentioned at
the same age; and even at this early age uttered noises very like laughter. In
this gradual acquirement, by infants, of the habit of laughing, we have a case
in some degree analogous to that of weeping. As practice is requisite with the
ordinary movements of the body, such as walking, so it seems to be with
laughing and weeping. The art of screaming, on the other hand, from being of
service to infants, has become finely developed from the earliest days.
High spirits,
cheerfulness.--A man in high spirits, though he may not actually smile,
commonly exhibits some tendency to the retraction of the corners of his mouth.
From the excitement of pleasure, the circulation becomes more rapid; the eyes
are bright, and the colour of the face rises. The brain, being stimulated by
the increased flow of blood, reacts on the mental powers; lively ideas pass
still more rapidly through the mind, and the affections are warmed. I heard a
child, a little under four years old, when asked what was meant by being in
good spirits, answer, "It is laughing, talking, and kissing." It
would be difficult to give a truer and more practical definition. A man in this
state holds his body erect, his head upright, and his eyes open. There is no
drooping of the features, and no contraction of the eyebrows. On the contrary,
the frontal muscle, as Moreau observes,[17] tends to contract slightly; and this
smooths the brow, removes every trace of a frown, arches the eyebrows a little,
and raises the eyelids. Hence the Latin phrase, exporrigere frontem--to
unwrinkle the brow--means, to be cheerful or merry. The whole expression of a
man in good spirits is exactly the opposite of that of one suffering from
sorrow. According to Sir C. Bell, "In all the exhilarating emotions the
eyebrows, eyelids, the nostrils, and the angles of the mouth are raised. In the
depressing passions it is the reverse." Under the influence of the latter
the brow is heavy, the eyelids, cheeks, mouth, and whole head droop; the eyes
are dull; the countenance pallid, and the respiration slow. In joy the face
expands, in grief it lengthens. Whether the principle of antithesis has here come
into play in producing these opposite expressions, in aid of the direct causes
which have been specified and which are sufficiently plain, I will not pretend
to say.
With all the races of
man the expression of good spirit appears to be the same, and is easily
recognized. My informants, from various parts of the Old and New Worlds, answer
in the affirmative to my queries on this head, and they give some particulars
with respect to Hindoos, Malays, and New Zealanders. The brightness of the eyes
of the Australians has struck four observers, and the same fact has been
noticed with Hindoos, New Zealanders, and the Dyaks of Borneo.
Savages sometimes
express their satisfaction not only by smiling, but by gestures derived from
the pleasure of eating. Thus Mr. Wedgwood[18] quotes Petherick that the negroes
on the Upper Nile began a general rubbing of their bellies when he displayed
his beads; and Leichhardt says that the Australians smacked and clacked their
mouths at the sight of his horses and bullocks, and more especially of his
kangaroo dogs. The Greenlanders, "when they affirm anything with pleasure,
suck down air with a certain sound;"[19] and this may be an imitation of
the act of swallowing savoury food.
Laughter is suppressed
by the firm contraction of the orbicular muscles of the mouth, which prevents
the great zygomatic and other muscles from drawing the lips backwards and
upwards. The lower lip is also sometimes held by the teeth, and this gives a
roguish expression to the face, as was observed with the blind and deaf Laura
Bridgman.[20] The great zygomatic muscle is sometimes variable in its course,
and I have seen a young woman in whom the depressores anguli oris were brought
into strong action in suppressing a smile; but this by no means gave to her
countenance a melancholy expression, owing to the brightness of her eyes.
Laughter is frequently
employed in a forced manner to conceal or mask some other state of mind, even
anger. We often see persons laughing in order to conceal their shame or shyness.
When a person purses up his mouth, as if to prevent the possibility of a smile,
though there is nothing to excite one, or nothing to prevent its free
indulgence, an affected, solemn, or pedantic expression is given; but of such
hybrid expressions nothing more need here be said. In the case of derision, a
real or pretended smile or laugh is often blended with the expression proper to
contempt, and this may pass into angry contempt or scorn. In such cases the
meaning of the laugh or smile is to show the offending person that he excites
only amusement.
Love, tender feelings,
&c.--Although the emotion of love, for instance that of a mother for her
infant, is one of the strongest of which the mind is capable, it can hardly be
said to have any proper or peculiar means of expression; and this is
intelligible, as it has not habitually led to any special line of action. No
doubt, as affection is a pleasurable sensation, it generally causes a gentle
smile and some brightening of the eyes. A strong desire to touch the beloved
person is commonly felt; and love is expressed by this means more plainly than
by any other.[21] Hence we long to clasp in our arms those whom we tenderly
love. We probably owe this desire to inherited habit, in association with the
nursing and tending of our children, and with the mutual caresses of lovers.
With the lower animals
we see the same principle of pleasure derived from contact in association with
love. Dogs and cats manifestly take pleasure in rubbing against their masters
and mistresses, and in being rubbed or patted by them. Many kinds of monkeys,
as I am assured by the keepers in the Zoological Gardens, delight in fondling
and being fondled by each other, and by persons to whom they are attached. Mr.
Bartlett has described to me the behaviour of two chimpanzees, rather older
animals than those generally imported into this country, when they were first
brought together. They sat opposite, touching each other with their much
protruded lips; and the one put his hand on the shoulder of the other. They
then mutually folded each other in their arms. Afterwards they stood up, each
with one arm on the shoulder of the other, lifted up their heads, opened their
mouths, and yelled with delight.
We Europeans are so
accustomed to kissing as a mark of affection, that it might be thought to be
innate in mankind; but this is not the case. Steele was mistaken when he said
"Nature was its author, and it began with the first courtship." Jemmy
Button, the Fuegian, told me that this practice was unknown in his land. It is
equally unknown with the New Zealanders, Tahitians, Papuans, Australians,
Somals of Africa, and the Esquimaux.[22] But it is so far innate or natural
that it apparently depends on pleasure from close contact with a beloved
person; and it is replaced in various parts of the world, by the rubbing of
noses, as with the New Zealanders and Laplanders, by the rubbing or patting of
the arms, breasts, or stomachs, or by one man striking his own face with the
hands or feet of another. Perhaps the practice of blowing, as a mark of
affection, on various parts of the body may depend on the same principle.[23]
The feelings which are
called tender are difficult to analyse; they seem to be compounded of
affection, joy, and especially of sympathy. These feelings are in themselves of
a pleasurable nature, excepting when pity is too deep, or horror is aroused, as
in hearing of a tortured man or animal. They are remarkable under our present
point of view from so readily exciting the secretion of tears. Many a father
and son have wept on meeting after a long separation, especially if the meeting
has been unexpected. No doubt extreme joy by itself tends to act on the
lacrymal glands; but on such occasions as the foregoing vague thoughts of the
grief which would have been felt had the father and son never met, will
probably have passed through their minds; and grief naturally leads to the
secretion of tears. Thus on the return of Ulysses:--
"Telemachus
Rose, and clung weeping
round his father's breast.
There the pent grief
rained o'er them, yearning thus.
* * * * * *
Thus piteously they
wailed in sore unrest,
And on their weepings
had gone down the day,
But that at last
Telemachus found words to say."
Worsley's Translation
of the Odyssey,
Book xvi. st. 27.
So again when Penelope
at last recognized her husband:--
"Then from her
eyelids the quick tears did start
And she ran to him from
her place, and threw
Her arms about his
neck, and a warm dew
Of kisses poured upon
him, and thus spake:"
Book xxiii. st. 27.
The vivid recollection
of our former home, or of long-past happy days, readily causes the eyes to be
suffused with tears; but here, again, the thought naturally occurs that these
days will never return. In such cases we may be said to sympathize with
ourselves in our present, in comparison with our former, state. Sympathy with
the distresses of others, even with the imaginary distresses of a heroine in a
pathetic story, for whom we feel no affection, readily excites tears. So does
sympathy with the happiness of others, as with that of a lover, at last
successful after many hard trials in a well-told tale.
Sympathy appears to
constitute a separate or distinct emotion; and it is especially apt to excite
the lacrymal glands. This holds good whether we give or receive sympathy. Every
one must have noticed how readily children burst out crying if we pity them for
some small hurt. With the melancholic insane, as Dr. Crichton Browne informs
me, a kind word will often plunge them into unrestrained weeping. As soon as we
express our pity for the grief of a friend, tears often come into our own eyes.
The feeling of sympathy is commonly explained by assuming that, when we see or
hear of suffering in another, the idea of suffering is called up so vividly in
our own minds that we ourselves suffer. But this explanation is hardly
sufficient, for it does not account for the intimate alliance between sympathy
and affection. We undoubtedly sympathize far more deeply with a beloved than
with an indifferent person; and the sympathy of the one gives us far more
relief than that of the other. Yet assuredly we can sympathize with those for
whom we feel no affection.
Why suffering, when
actually experienced by ourselves, excites weeping, has been discussed in a
former chapter. With respect to joy, its natural and universal expression is
laughter; and with all the races of man loud laughter leads to the secretion of
tears more freely than does any other cause excepting distress. The suffusion
of the eyes with tears, which undoubtedly occurs under great joy, though there
is no laughter, can, as it seems to me, be explained through habit and
association on the same principles as the effusion of tears from grief, although
there is no screaming. Nevertheless it is not a little remarkable that sympathy
with the distresses of others should excite tears more freely than our own
distress; and this certainly is the case. Many a man, from whose eyes no
suffering of his own could wring a tear, has shed tears at the sufferings of a
beloved friend. It is still more remarkable that sympathy with the happiness or
good fortune of those whom we tenderly love should lead to the same result,
whilst a similar happiness felt by ourselves would leave our eyes dry. We
should, however, bear in mind that the long- continued habit of restraint which
is so powerful in checking the free flow of tears from bodily pain, has not
been brought into play in preventing a moderate effusion of tears in sympathy
with the sufferings or happiness of others.
Music has a wonderful
power, as I have elsewhere attempted to show,[24] of recalling in a vague and
indefinite manner, those strong emotions which were felt during long-past ages,
when, as is probable, our early progenitors courted each other by the aid of
vocal tones. And as several of our strongest emotions--grief, great joy, love,
and sympathy--lead to the free secretion of tears, it is not surprising that
music should be apt to cause our eyes to become suffused with tears, especially
when we are already softened by any of the tenderer feelings. Music often
produces another peculiar effect. We know that every strong sensation, emotion,
or excitement--extreme pain, rage, terror, joy, or the passion of love--all
have a special tendency to cause the muscles to tremble; and the thrill or
slight shiver which runs down the backbone and limbs of many persons when they
are powerfully affected by music, seems to bear the same relation to the above
trembling of the body, as a slight suffusion of tears from the power of music
does to weeping from any strong and real emotion.
Devotion.--As devotion
is, in some degree, related to affection, though mainly consisting of
reverence, often combined with fear, the expression of this state of mind may
here be briefly noticed. With some sects, both past and present, religion and
love have been strangely combined; and it has even been maintained, lamentable
as the fact may be, that the holy kiss of love differs but little from that
which a man bestows on a woman, or a woman on a man.[25] Devotion is chiefly
expressed by the face being directed towards the heavens, with the eyeballs
upturned. Sir C. Bell remarks that, at the approach of sleep, or of a
fainting-fit, or of death, the pupils are drawn upwards and inwards; and he
believes that "when we are wrapt in devotional feelings, and outward
impressions are unheeded, the eyes are raised by an action neither taught nor
acquired." and that this is due to the same cause as in the above
cases.[26] That the eyes are upturned during sleep is, as I hear from Professor
Donders, certain. With babies, whilst sucking their mother's breast, this
movement of the eyeballs often gives to them an absurd appearance of ecstatic
delight; and here it may be clearly perceived that a struggle is going on
against the position naturally assumed during sleep. But Sir C. Bell's
explanation of the fact, which rests on the assumption that certain muscles are
more under the control of the will than others is, as I hear from Professor
Donders, incorrect. As the eyes are often turned up in prayer, without the mind
being so much absorbed in thought as to approach to the unconsciousness of
sleep, the movement is probably a conventional one--the result of the common
belief that Heaven, the source of Divine power to which we pray, is seated
above us.
A humble kneeling
posture, with the hands upturned and palms joined, appears to us, from long
habit, a gesture so appropriate to devotion, that it might be thought to be
innate; but I have not met with any evidence to this effect with the various
extra-European races of mankind. During the classical period of Roman history
it does not appear, as I hear from an excellent classic, that the hands were
thus joined during prayer. Mr. Rensleigh Wedgwood has apparently given[27] the
true explanation, though this implies that the attitude is one of slavish
subjection. "When the suppliant kneels and holds up his hands with the
palms joined, he represents a captive who proves the completeness of his
submission by offering up his hands to be bound by the victor. It is the
pictorial representation of the Latin dare manus, to signify submission."
Hence it is not probable that either the uplifting of the eyes or the joining
of the open hands, under the influence of devotional feelings, are innate or
truly expressive actions; and this could hardly have been expected, for it is
very doubtful whether feelings, such as we should now rank as devotional,
affected the hearts of men, whilst they remained during past ages in an
uncivilized condition.
[1] Herbert Spencer,
`Essays Scientific,' &c., 1858, p. 360.
[2] F. Lieber on the
vocal sounds of L. Bridgman, `Smithsonian Contributions,' 1851, vol. ii. p. 6.
[3] See, also, Mr.
Marshall, in Phil. Transact. 1864, p. 526.
[4] Mr. Bain (`The
Emotions and the Will,' 1865, p. 247) has a long and interesting discussion on
the Ludicrous. The quotation above given about the laughter of the gods is
taken from this work. See, also, Mandeville, `The Fable of the Bees,' vol. ii.
p. 168.
[5] `The Physiology of
Laughter,' Essays, Second Series, 1863, p. 114.
[6] J. Lister in
`Quarterly Journal of Microscopical Science,' 1853, vol. 1. p. 266.
[7] `De la
Physionomie,' p. 186.
[8] Sir C. Bell (Anat.
of Expression, p. 147) makes some remarks on the movement of the diaphragm
during laughter.
[9] `Mécanisme de la
Physionomie Humaine,' Album, Légende vi.
[10] Handbuch der
System. Anat. des Menschen, 1858, B. i. s. 144. See my woodcut (H. fig. 2).
[11] See, also, remarks
to the same effect by Dr. J. Crichton Browne in `Journal of Mental Science,'
April, 1871, p. 149.
[12] C. Vogt, `Mémoire
sur les Microcéphales,' 1867, p. 21.
[13] Sir C. Bell,
`Anatomy of Expression,' p. 133.
[14] `Mimik und
Physiognomik,' 1867, s. 63-67.
[15] Sir T. Reynolds
remarks (`Discourses,' xii. p. 100), it is curious to observe, and it is
certainly true, that the extremes of contrary passions are, with very little
variation, expressed by the same action." He gives as an instance the frantic
joy of a Bacchante and the grief of a Mary Magdalen.
[16] Dr. Piderit has
come to the same conclusion, ibid. s. 99.
[17] `La Physionomie,'
par G. Lavater, edit. of 1820, vol. iv. p. 224. See, also, Sir C. Bell,
`Anatomy of Expression,' p. 172, for the quotation given below.
[18] A `Dictionary of
English Etymology,' 2nd edit. 1872, Introduction, p. xliv.
[19] Crantz, quoted by
Tylor, `Primitive Culture,' 1871, Vol. i. P. 169.
[20] F. Lieber,
`Smithsonian Contributions,' 1851, vol. ii. p. 7.
[21] Mr. Bain remarks
(`Mental and Moral Science,' 1868, p. 239), "Tenderness is a pleasurable
emotion, variously stimulated, whose effort is to draw human beings into mutual
embrace."
[22] Sir J. Lubbock,
`Prehistoric Times,' 2nd edit. 1869, p. 552, gives full authorities for these
statements. The quotation from Steele is taken from this work.
[23] See a full
acount,{sic} with references, by E. B. Tylor, `Researches into the Early History
of Mankind,' 2nd edit. 1870, p. 51.
[24] `The Descent of
Man,' vol. ii. p. 336.
[25] Dr. Mandsley has a
discussion to this effect in his `Body and Mind,' 1870, p. 85.
[26] `The Anatomy of
Expression,' p. 103, and `Philosophical Transactions,' 1823, p. 182.
[27] `The Origin of
Language,' 1866, p. 146. Mr. Tylor (`Early History of Mankind,' 2nd edit. 1870,
p. 48) gives a more complex origin to the position of the hands during prayer.
THE corrugators, by
their contraction, lower the eyebrows and bring them together, producing
vertical furrows on the forehead--that is, a frown. Sir C. Bell, who
erroneously thought that the corrugator was peculiar to man, ranks it as
"the most remarkable muscle of the human face. It knits the eyebrows with
an energetic effort, which unaccountably, but irresistibly, conveys the idea of
mind." Or, as he elsewhere says, "when the eyebrows are knit, energy
of mind is apparent, and there is the mingling of thought and emotion with the
savage and brutal rage of the mere animal."[1] There is much truth in
these remarks, but hardly the whole truth. Dr. Duchenne has called the
corrugator the muscle of reflection;[2] but this name, without some limitation,
cannot be considered as quite correct.
A man may be absorbed
in the deepest thought, and his brow will remain smooth until he encounters
some obstacle in his train of reasoning, or is interrupted by some disturbance,
and then a frown passes like a shadow over his brow. A half-starved man may
think intently how to obtain food, but he probably will not frown unless he
encounters either in thought or action some difficulty, or finds the food when
obtained nauseous. I have noticed that almost everyone instantly frowns if he
perceives a strange or bad taste in what he is eating. I asked several persons,
without explaining my object, to listen intently to a very gentle tapping
sound, the nature and source of which they all perfectly knew, and not one
frowned; but a man who joined us, and who could not conceive what we were all
doing in profound silence, when asked to listen, frowned much, though not in an
ill-temper, and said he could not in the least understand what we all wanted.
Dr. Piderit[3] who has published remarks to the same effect, adds that
stammerers generally frown in speaking, and that a man in doing even so
trifling a thing as pulling on a boot, frowns if he finds it too tight. Some
persons are such habitual frowners, that the mere effort of speaking almost
always causes their brows to contract.
Men of all races frown
when they are in any way perplexed in thought, as I infer from the answers
which I have received to my queries; but I framed them badly, confounding
absorbed meditation with perplexed reflection. Nevertheless, it is clear that
the Australians, Malays, Hindoos, and Kafirs of South Africa frown, when they
are puzzled. Dobritzhoffer remarks that the Guaranies of South America on like
occasions knit their brows.[4]
From these
considerations, we may conclude that frowning is not the expression of simple
reflection, however profound, or of attention, however close, but of something
difficult or displeasing encountered in a train of thought or in action. Deep
reflection can, however, seldom be long carried on without some difficulty, so
that it will generally be accompanied by a frown. Hence it is that frowning
commonly gives to the countenance, as Sir C. Bell remarks, an aspect of
intellectual energy. But in order that this effect may be produced, the eyes
must be clear and steady, or they may be cast downwards, as often occurs in
deep thought. The countenance must not be otherwise disturbed, as in the case
of an ill-tempered or peevish man, or of one who shows the effects of prolonged
suffering, with dulled eyes and drooping jaw, or who perceives a bad taste in
his food, or who finds it difficult to perform some trifling act, such as
threading a needle. In these cases a frown may often be seen, but it will be
accompanied by some other expression, which will entirely prevent the
countenance having an appearance of intellectual energy or of profound thought.
We may now inquire how
it is that a frown should express the perception of something difficult or
disagreeable, either in thought or action. In the same way as naturalists find
it advisable to trace the embryological development of an organ in order fully
to understand its structure, so with the movements of expression it is
advisable to follow as nearly as possible the same plan. The earliest and
almost sole expression seen during the first days of infancy, and then often
exhibited is that displayed during the act of screaming; and screaming is
excited, both at first and for some time afterwards, by every distressing or
displeasing sensation and emotion,--by hunger, pain, anger, jealousy, fear,
&c. At such times the muscles round the eyes are strongly contracted; and
this, as I believe, explains to a large extent the act of frowning during the
remainder of our lives. I repeatedly observed my own infants, from under the
age of one week to that of two or three months, and found that when a
screaming-fit came on gradually, the first sign was the contraction of the
corrugators, which produced a slight frown, quickly followed by the contraction
of the other muscles round the eyes. When an infant is uncomfortable or unwell,
little frowns--as I record in my notes--may be seen incessantly passing like
shadows over its face; these being generally, but not always, followed sooner
or later by a crying-fit. For instance, I watched for some time a baby, between
seven and eight weeks old, sucking some milk which was cold, and therefore
displeasing to him; and a steady little frown was maintained all the time. This
was never developed into an actual crying-fit, though occasionally every stage
of close approach could be observed.
As the habit of
contracting the brows has been followed by infants during innumerable
generations, at the commencement of every crying or screaming fit, it has
become firmly associated with the incipient sense of something distressing or
disagreeable. Hence under similar circumstances it would be apt to be continued
during maturity, although never then developed into a crying-fit. Screaming or
weeping begins to be voluntarily restrained at an early period of life, whereas
frowning is hardly ever restrained at any age. It is perhaps worth notice that
with children much given to weeping, anything which perplexes their minds, and
which would cause most other children merely to frown, readily makes them weep.
So with certain classes of the insane, any effort of mind, however slight,
which with an habitual frowner would cause a slight frown, leads to their
weeping in an unrestrained manner. It is not more surprising that the habit of
contracting the brows at the first perception of something distressing,
although gained during infancy, should be retained during the rest of our
lives, than that many other associated habits acquired at an early age should
be permanently retained both by man and the lower animals. For instance, full-
grown cats, when feeling warm and comfortable, often retain the habit of
alternately protruding their fore-feet with extended toes, which habit they
practised for a definite purpose whilst sucking their mothers.
Another and distinct
cause has probably strengthened the habit of frowning, whenever the mind is
intent on any subject and encounters some difficulty. Vision is the most
important of all the senses, and during primeval times the closest attention
must have been incessantly: directed towards distant objects for the sake of
obtaining prey and avoiding danger. I remember being struck, whilst travelling
in parts of South America, which were dangerous from the presence of Indians,
how incessantly, yet as it appeared unconsciously, the half-wild Gauchos
closely scanned the whole horizon. Now, when any one with no covering on his
head (as must have been aboriginally the case with mankind), strives to the
utmost to distinguish in broad daylight, and especially if the sky is bright, a
distant object, he almost invariably contracts his brows to prevent the
entrance of too much light; the lower eyelids, cheeks, and upper lip being at
the same time raised, so as to lessen the orifice of the eyes. I have purposely
asked several persons, young and old, to look, under the above circumstances,
at distant objects, making them believe that I only wished to test the power of
their vision; and they all behaved in the manner just described. Some of them,
also, put their open, flat hands over their eyes to keep out the excess of
light. Gratiolet, after making some remarks to nearly the same effect,[5] says,
"Ce sont là des attitudes de vision difficile." He concludes that the
muscles round the eyes contract partly for the sake of excluding too much light
(which appears to me the more important end), and partly to prevent all rays
striking the retina, except those which come direct from the object that is
scrutinized. Mr. Bowman, whom I consulted on this point, thinks that the
contraction of the surrounding muscles may, in addition, "partly sustain
the consensual movements of the two eyes, by giving a firmer support while the
globes are brought to binocular vision by their own proper muscles."
As the effort of
viewing with care under a bright light a distant object is both difficult and
irksome, and as this effort has been habitually accompanied, during numberless
generations, by the contraction of the eyebrows, the habit of frowning will
thus have been much strengthened; although it was originally practised during
infancy from a quite independent cause, namely as the first step in the
protection of the eyes during screaming. There is, indeed, much analogy, as far
as the state of the mind is concerned, between intently scrutinizing a distant object,
and following out an obscure train of thought, or performing some little and
troublesome mechanical work. The belief that the habit of contracting the brows
is continued when there is no need whatever to exclude too much light, receives
support from the cases formerly alluded to, in which the eyebrows or eyelids
are acted on under certain circumstances in a useless manner, from having been
similarly used, under analogous circumstances, for a serviceable purpose. For
instance, we voluntarily close our eyes when we do not wish to see any object,
and we are apt to close them, when we reject a proposition, as if we could not
or would not see it; or when we think about something horrible. We raise our
eyebrows when we wish to see quickly all round us, and we often do the same,
when we earnestly desire to remember something; acting as if we endeavoured to
see it.
Abstraction.
Meditation.--When a person is lost in thought with his mind absent, or, as it
is sometimes said, "when he is in a brown study," he does not frown,
but his eyes appear vacant. The lower eyelids are generally raised and
wrinkled, in the same manner as when a short-sighted person tries to
distinguish a distant object; and the upper orbicular muscles are at the same
time slightly contracted. The wrinkling of the lower eyelids under these
circumstances has been observed with some savages, as by Mr. Dyson Lacy with
the Australians of Queensland, and several times by Mr. Geach with the Malays
of the interior of Malacca. What the meaning or cause of this action may be,
cannot at present be explained; but here we have another instance of movement
round the eyes in relation to the state of the mind.
The vacant expression
of the eyes is very peculiar, and at once shows when a man is completely lost
in thought. Professor Donders has, with his usual kindness, investigated this
subject for me. He has observed others in this condition, and has been himself
observed by Professor Engelmann. The eyes are not then fixed on any object, and
therefore not, as I had imagined, on some distant object. The lines of vision
of the two eyes even often become slightly divergent; the divergence, if the
head be held vertically, with the plane of vision horizontal, amounting to an
angle of 2° as a maximum. This was ascertained by observing the crossed double
image of a distant object. When the head droops forward, as often occurs with a
man absorbed in thought, owing to the general relaxation of his muscles, if the
plane of vision be still horizontal, the eyes are necessarily a little turned
upwards, and then the divergence is as much as 3°, or 3° 5': if the eyes are
turned still more upwards, it amounts to between 6° and 7°. Professor Donders
attributes this divergence to the almost complete relaxation of certain muscles
of the eyes, which would be apt to follow from the mind being wholly
absorbed.[6] The active condition of the muscles of the eyes is that of
convergence; and Professor Donders remarks, as bearing on their divergence
during a period of complete abstraction, that when one eye becomes blind, it
almost always, after a short lapse of time, deviates outwards; for its muscles
are no longer used in moving the eyeball inwards for the sake of binocular
vision.
Perplexed reflection is
often accompanied by certain movements or gestures. At such times we commonly
raise our hands to our foreheads, mouths, or chins; but we do not act thus, as
far as I have seen, when we are quite lost in meditation, and no difficulty is
encountered. Plautus, describing in one of his plays[7] a puzzled man, says,
"Now look, he has pillared his chin upon his hand." Even so trifling
and apparently unmeaning a gesture as the raising of the hand to the face has
been observed with some savages. Al. J. Mansel Weale has seen it with the
Kafirs of South Africa; and the native chief Gaika adds, that men then
"sometimes pull their beards." Mr. Washington Matthews, who attended
to some of the wildest tribes of Indians in the western regions of the United
States, remarks that he has seen them when concentrating their thoughts, bring
their "hands, usually the thumb and index finger, in contact with some
part of the face, commonly the upper lip." We can understand why the
forehead should be pressed or rubbed, as deep thought tries the brain; but why
the hand should be raised to the mouth or face is far from clear.
Ill-temper.--We have
seen that frowning is the natural expression of some difficulty encountered, or
of something disagreeable experienced either in thought or action, and he whose
mind is often and readily affected in this way, will be apt to be ill-tempered,
or slightly angry, or peevish, and will commonly show it by frowning. But a
cross expression, due to a frown, may be counteracted, if the mouth appears
sweet, from being habitually drawn into a smile, and the eyes are bright and
cheerful. So it will be if the eye is clear and steady, and there is the
appearance of earnest reflection. Frowning, with some depression of the corners
of the mouth, which is a sign of grief, gives an air of peevishness. If a child
(see Plate IV., fig. 2)[8] frowns much whilst crying, but does not strongly
contract in the usual manner the orbicular muscles, a well-marked expression of
anger or even of rage, together with misery, is displayed.
If the whole frowning
brow be drawn much downward by the contraction of the pyramidal muscles of the
nose, which produces transverse wrinkles or folds across the base of the nose,
the expression becomes one of moroseness. Duchenne believes that the
contraction of this muscle, without any frowning, gives the appearance of
extreme and aggressive hardness.[9] But I much doubt whether this is a true or
natural expression. I have shown Duchenne's photograph of a young man, with
this muscle strongly contracted by means of galvanism, to eleven persons,
including some artists, and none of them could form an idea what was intended,
except one, a girl, who answered correctly, "surely reserve." When I
first looked at this photograph, knowing what was intended, my imagination added,
as I believe, what was necessary, namely, a frowning brow; and consequently the
expression appeared to me true and extremely morose.
A firmly closed mouth,
in addition to a lowered and frowning brow, gives determination to the
expression, or may make it obstinate and sullen. How it comes that the firm
closure of the mouth gives the appearance of determination will presently be
discussed. An expression of sullen obstinacy has been clearly recognized by my
informants, in the natives of six different regions of Australia. It is well
marked, according to Mr. Scott, with the Hindoos. It has been recognized with
the Malays, Chinese, Kafirs, Abyssinians, and in a conspicuous degree,
according to Dr. Rothrock, with the wild Indians of North America, and
according to Mr. D. Forbes, with the Aymaras of Bolivia. I have also observed
it with the Araucanos of southern Chili. Mr. Dyson Lacy remarks that the
natives of Australia, when in this frame of mind, sometimes fold their arms
across their breasts, an attitude which may be seen with us. A firm
determination, amounting to obstinacy, is, also, sometimes expressed by both
shoulders being kept raised, the meaning of which gesture will be explained in
the following chapter.
With young children
sulkiness is shown by pouting, or, as it is sometimes called, "making a
snout."[10] When the corners of the mouth are much depressed, the lower
lip is a little everted and protruded; and this is likewise called a pout. But
the pouting here referred to, consists of the protrusion of both lips into a
tubular form, sometimes to such an extent as to project as far as the end of
the nose, if this be short. Pouting is generally accompanied by frowning, and
sometimes by the utterance of a booing or whooing noise. This expression is
remarkable, as almost the sole one, as far as I know, which is exhibited much
more plainly during childhood, at least with Europeans, than during maturity.
There is, however, some tendency to the protrusion of the lips with the adults
of all races under the influence of great rage. Some children pout when they
are shy, and they can then hardly be called sulky.
From inquiries which I
have made in several large families, pouting does not seem very common with
European children; but it prevails throughout the world, and must be both
common and strongly marked with most savage races, as it has caught the
attention of many observers. It has been noticed in eight different districts
of Australia; and one of my informants remarks how greatly the lips of the
children are then protruded. Two observers have seen pouting with the children
of Hindoos; three, with those of the Kafirs and Fingoes of South Africa, and
with the Hottentots; and two, with the children of the wild Indians of North
America. Pouting has also been observed with the Chinese, Abyssinians, Malays
of Malacca, Dyaks of Borneo, and often with the New Zealanders. Mr. Mansel
Weale informs me that he has seen the lips much protruded, not only with the
children of the Kafirs, but with the adults of both sexes when sulky; and Mr.
Stack has sometimes observed the same thing with the men, and very frequently
with the women of New Zealand. A trace of the same expression may occasionally
be detected even with adult Europeans.
We thus see that the
protrusion of the lips, especially with young children, is characteristic of
sulkiness throughout the greater part of the world. This movement apparently
results from the retention, chiefly during youth, of a primordial habit, or
from an occasional reversion to it. Young orangs and chimpanzees protrude their
lips to an extraordinary degree, as described in a former chapter, when they
are discontented, somewhat angry, or sulky; also when they are surprised, a
little frightened, and even when slightly pleased. Their mouths are protruded
apparently for the sake of making the various noises proper to these several
states of mind; and its shape, as I observed with the chimpanzee, differed
slightly when the cry of pleasure and that of anger were uttered. As soon as
these animals become enraged, the shape of the month wholly changes, and the
teeth are exposed. The adult orang when wounded is said to emit "a
singular cry, consisting at first of high notes, which at length deepen into a
low roar. While giving out the high notes he thrusts out his lips into a funnel
shape, but in uttering the low notes he holds his mouth wide open."[11]
With the gorilla, the lower lip is said to be capable of great elongation. If
then our semi- human progenitors protruded their lips when sulky or a little
angered, in the same manner as do the existing anthropoid apes, it is not an
anomalous, though a curious fact, that our children should exhibit, when
similarly affected, a trace of the same expression, together with some tendency
to utter a noise. For it is not at all unusual for animals to retain, more or
less perfectly, during early youth, and subsequently to lose, characters which
were aboriginally possessed by their adult progenitors, and which are still
retained by distinct species, their near relations.
Nor is it an anomalous
fact that the children of savages should exhibit a stronger tendency to
protrude their lips, when sulky, than the children of civilized Europeans; for
the essence of savagery seems to consist in the retention of a primordial
condition, and this occasionally holds good even with bodily peculiarities.[12]
It may be objected to this view of the origin of pouting, that the anthropoid
apes likewise protrude their lips when astonished and even when a little
pleased; whilst with us this expression is generally confined to a sulky frame
of mind. But we shall see in a future chapter that with men of various races
surprise does sometimes lead to a slight protrusion of the lips, though great
surprise or astonishment is more commonly shown by the mouth being widely
opened. As when we smile or laugh we draw back the corners of the mouth, we
have lost any tendency to protrude the lips, when pleased, if indeed our early
progenitors thus expressed pleasure.
A little gesture made
by sulky children may here be noticed, namely, their "showing a cold
shoulder." This has a different meaning, as, I believe, from the keeping
both shoulders raised. A cross child, sitting on its parent's knee, will lift
up the near shoulder, then jerk it away, as if from a caress, and afterwards
give a backward push with it, as if to push away the offender. I have seen a
child, standing at some distance from any one, clearly express its feelings by
raising one shoulder, giving it a little backward movement, and then turning away
its whole body.
Decision or
determination.--The firm closure of the mouth tends to give an expression of
determination or decision to the countenance. No determined man probably ever
had an habitually gaping mouth. Hence, also, a small and weak lower jaw, which
seems to indicate that the mouth is not habitually and firmly closed, is
commonly thought to be characteristic of feebleness of character. A prolonged
effort of any kind, whether of body or mind, implies previous determination;
and if it can be shown that the mouth is generally closed with firmness before
and during a great and continued exertion of the muscular system, then, through
the principle of association, the mouth would almost certainly be closed as
soon as any determined resolution was taken. Now several observers have noticed
that a man, in commencing any violent muscular effort, invariably first
distends his lungs with air, and then compresses it by the strong contraction
of the muscles of the chest; and to effect this the mouth must be firmly
closed. Moreover, as soon as the man is compelled to draw breath, be still
keeps his chest as much distended as possible.
Various causes have
been assigned for this manner of acting. Sir C. Bell maintains[13] that the
chest is distended with air, and is kept distended at such times, in order to
give a fixed support to the muscles which are thereto attached. Hence, as he
remarks, when two men are engaged in a deadly contest, a terrible silence
prevails, broken only by hard stifled breathing. There is silence, because to
expel the air in the utterance of any sound would be to relax the support for
the muscles of the arms. If an outcry is heard, supposing the struggle to take
place in the dark, we at once know that one of the two has given up in despair.
Gratiolet admits[14]
that when a man has to struggle with another to his utmost, or has to support a
great weight, or to keep for a long time the same forced attitude, it is
necessary for him first to make a deep inspiration, and then to cease
breathing; but he thinks that Sir C. Bell's explanation is erroneous. He
maintains that arrested respiration retards the circulation of the blood, of
which I believe there is no doubt, and he adduces some curious evidence from
the structure of the lower animals, showing, on the one hand, that a retarded
circulation is necessary for prolonged muscular exertion, and, on the other
hand, that a rapid circulation is necessary for rapid movements. According to
this view, when we commence any great exertion, we close our mouths and stop
breathing, in order to retard the circulation of the blood. Gratiolet sums up
the subject by saying, "C'est là la vraie théorie de l'effort
continu;" but how far this theory is admitted by other physiologists I do
not know.
Dr. Piderit
accounts[15] for the firm closure of the mouth during strong muscular exertion,
on the principle that the influence of the will spreads to other muscles
besides those necessarily brought into action in making any particular
exertion; and it is natural that the muscles of respiration and of the mouth,
from being so habitually used, should be especially liable to be thus acted on.
It appears to me that there probably is some truth in this view, for we are apt
to press the teeth hard together during violent exertion, and this is not
requisite to prevent expiration, whilst the muscles of the chest are strongly
contracted.
Lastly, when a man has
to perform some delicate and difficult operation, not requiring the exertion of
any strength, he nevertheless generally closes his mouth and ceases for a time
to breathe; but he acts thus in order that the movements of his chest may not
disturb, those of his arms. A person, for instance, whilst threading a needle,
may be seen to compress his lips and either to stop breathing, or to breathe as
quietly as possible. So it was, as formerly stated, with a young and sick
chimpanzee, whilst it amused itself by killing flies with its knuckles, as they
buzzed about on the window-panes. To perform an action, however trifling, if
difficult, implies some amount of previous determination.
There appears nothing
improbable in all the above assigned causes having come into play in different
degrees, either conjointly or separately, on various occasions. The result
would be a well-established habit, now perhaps inherited, of firmly closing the
mouth at the commencement of and during any violent and prolonged exertion, or
any delicate operation. Through the principle of association there would also
be a strong tendency towards this same habit, as soon as the mind had resolved
on any particular action or line of conduct, even before there was any bodily
exertion, or if none were requisite. The habitual and firm closure of the mouth
would thus come to show decision of character; and decision readily passes into
obstinacy.
[1] `Anatomy of
Expression,' pp. 137, 139. It is not surprising that the corrugators should
have become much more developed in man than in the anthropoid apes; for they
are brought into incessant action by him under various circumstances, and will
have been strengthened and modified by the inherited effects of use. We have
seen how important a part they play, together with the orbiculares, in
protecting the eyes from being too much gorged with blood during violent
expiratory movements. When the eyes are closed as quickly and as forcibly as
possible, to save them from being injured by a blow, the corrugators contract.
With savages or other men whose heads are uncovered, the eyebrows are
continually lowered and contracted to serve as a shade against a too strong
light; and this is effected partly by the corrugators. This movement would have
been more especially serviceable to man, as soon as his early progenitors held
their heads erect. Lastly, Prof. Donders believes (`Archives of Medicine,' ed.
by L. Beale, 1870, vol. v. p. 34), that the corrugators are brought into action
in causing the eyeball to advance in accommodation for proximity in vision.
[2] `Mécanisme de la
Physionomie Humaine,' Album, Légende iii.
[3] `Mimik und
Physiognomik,' s. 46.
[4] `History of the
Abipones,' Eng. translat. vol. ii. p. 59, as quoted by Lubbock, `Origin of
Civilisation,' 1870, p. 355.
[5] `De la
Physionomie,' pp. 15, 144, 146. Mr. Herbert Spencer accounts for frowning
exclusively by the habit of contracting the brows as a shade to the eyes in a
bright light: see `Principles of Physiology,' 2nd edit. 1872, p. 546.
[6] Gratiolet remarks
(De la Phys. p. 35), "Quand l'attention est fixée sur quelque image intérieure,
l'œil regarde dqns le vide et s'associe automatiquement à la contemplation de
l'esprit." But this view hardly deserves to be called an explanation.
[7] `Miles Gloriosus,'
act ii. sc. 2.
[8] The original
photograph by Herr Kindermann is much more expressive than this copy, as it
shows the frown on the brow more plainly.
[9] `Mécanisme de la
Physionomie Humaine,' Album, Légende iv. figs. 16-18.
[10] Hensleigh Wedgwood
on `The Origin of Language,' 1866, p. 78.
[11] Müller, as quoted
by Huxley, `Man's Place in Nature,' 1863, p. 38.
[12] I have given
several instances in my `Descent of Man,' vol. i. chap. iv.
[13] `Anatomy of
Expression.' p. 190.
[14] `De la Physionomie,'
pp. 118-121.
[15] `Mimik und
Physiognomik,' s. 79.
IF we have suffered or
expect to suffer some wilful injury from a man, or if he is in any way
offensive to us, we dislike him; and dislike easily rises into hatred. Such
feelings, if experienced in a moderate degree, are not clearly expressed by any
movement of the body or features, excepting perhaps by a certain gravity of
behaviour, or by some ill-temper. Few individuals, however, can long reflect
about a hated person, without feeling and exhibiting signs of indignation or
rage. But if the offending person be quite insignificant, we experience merely
disdain or contempt. If, on the other hand, he is all-powerful, then hatred
passes into terror, as when a slave thinks about a cruel master, or a savage
about a bloodthirsty malignant deity.[1] Most of our emotions are so closely
connected with their expression, that they hardly exist if the body remains
passive--the nature of the expression depending in chief part on the nature of
the actions which have been habitually performed under this particular state of
the mind. A man, for instance, may know that his life is in the extremest
peril, and may strongly desire to save if; yet, as Louis XVI. said, when
surrounded by a fierce mob, "Am I afraid? feel my pulse." So a man
may intensely hate another, but until his bodily frame is affected, he cannot
be said to be enraged.
Rage.--I have already
had occasion to treat of this emotion in the third chapter, when discussing the
direct influence of the excited sensorium on the body, in combination with the
effects of habitually associated actions. Rage exhibits itself in the most
diversified manner. The heart and circulation are always affected; the face
reddens or becomes purple, with the veins on the forehead and neck distended.
The reddening of the skin has been observed with the copper-coloured Indians of
South America,[2] and even, as it is said, on the white cicatrices left by old
wounds on negroes.[3] Monkeys also redden from passion. With one of my own
infants, under four months old, I repeatedly observed that the first symptom of
an approaching passion was the rushing of the blood into his bare scalp. On the
other hand, the action of the heart is sometimes so much impeded by great rage,
that the countenance becomes pallid or livid,[4] and not a few men with
heart-disease have dropped down dead under this powerful emotion.
The respiration is
likewise affected; the chest heaves, and the dilated nostrils quiver.[5] As
Tennyson writes, "sharp breaths of anger puffed her fairy nostrils
out." Hence we have such expressions as breathing out vengeance," and
"fuming with anger."[6]
The excited brain gives
strength to the muscles, and at the same time energy to the will. The body is
commonly held erect ready for instant action, but sometimes it is bent forward
towards the offending person, with the limbs more or less rigid. The mouth is
generally closed with firmness, showing fixed determination, and the teeth are
clenched or ground together. Such gestures as the raising of the arms, with the
fists clenched, as if to strike the offender, are common. Few men in a great
passion, and telling some one to begone, can resist acting as if they intended
to strike or push the man violently away. The desire, indeed, to strike often
becomes so intolerably strong, that inanimate objects are struck or dashed to
the ground; but the gestures frequently become altogether purposeless or
frantic. Young children, when in a violent rage roll on the ground on their
backs or bellies, screaming, kicking, scratching, or biting everything within
reach. So it is, as I hear from Mr. Scott, with Hindoo children; and, as we
have seen, with the young of the anthropomorphous apes.
But the muscular system
is often affected in a wholly different way; for trembling is a frequent
consequence of extreme rage. The paralysed lips then refuse to obey the will,
"and the voice sticks in the throat;"[7] or it is rendered loud,
harsh, and discordant. If there be much and rapid speaking, the mouth froths.
The hair sometimes bristles; but I shall return to this subject in another
chapter, when I treat of the mingled emotions of rage and terror. There is in
most cases a strongly-marked frown on the forehead; for this follows from the
sense of anything displeasing or difficult, together with concentration of
mind. But sometimes the brow, instead of being much contracted and lowered,
remains smooth, with the glaring eyes kept widely open. The eyes are always
bright, or may, as Homer expresses it, glisten with fire. They are sometimes
bloodshot, and are said to protrude from their sockets--the result, no doubt,
of the head being gorged with blood, as shown by the veins being distended.
According to Gratiolet,[8] the pupils are always contracted in rage, and I hear
from Dr. Crichton Browne that this is the case in the fierce delirium of
meningitis; but the movements of the iris under the influence of the different
emotions is a very obscure subject.
Shakspeare sums up the
chief characteristics of rage as follows:--
"In peace there's
nothing so becomes a man,
As modest stillness and
humility;
But when the blast of
war blows in our ears,
Then imitate the action
of the tiger:
Stiffen the sinews,
summon up the blood,
Then lend the eye a
terrible aspect;
Now set the teeth, and
stretch the nostril wide,
Hold hard the breath,
and bend up every spirit
To his full height! On,
on, you noblest English."
Henry V., act iii. sc.
1.
The lips are sometimes
protruded during rage in a manner, the meaning of which I do not understand,
unless it depends on our descent from some ape-like animal. Instances have been
observed, not only with Europeans, but with the Australians and Hindoos. The
lips, however, are much more commonly retracted, the grinning or clenched teeth
being thus exposed. This has been noticed by almost every one who has written
on expression.[9] The appearance is as if the teeth were uncovered, ready for
seizing or tearing an enemy, though there may be no intention of acting in this
manner. Mr. Dyson Lacy has seen this grinning expression with the Australians,
when quarrelling, and so has Gaika with the Kafirs of South America.
Dickens,[10] in speaking of an atrocious murderer who had just been caught, and
was surrounded by a furious mob, describes "the people as jumping up one
behind another, snarling with their teeth, and making at him like wild
beasts." Every one who has had much to do with young children must have
seen how naturally they take to biting, when in a passion. It seems as
instinctive in them as in young crocodiles, who snap their little jaws as soon
as they emerge from the egg.
A grinning expression
and the protrusion of the lips appear sometimes to go together. A close
observer says that he has seen many instances of intense hatred (which can
hardly be distinguished from rage, more or less suppressed) in Orientals, and
once in an elderly English woman. In all these cases there "was a grin,
not a scowl --the lips lengthening, the cheeks settling downwards, the eyes
half-closed, whilst the brow remained perfectly calm."[11]
This retraction of the
lips and uncovering of the teeth during paroxysms of rage, as if to bite the
offender, is so remarkable, considering how seldom the teeth are used by men in
fighting, that I inquired from Dr. J. Crichton Browne whether the habit was
common in the insane whose passions are unbridled. He informs me that he has
repeatedly observed it both with the insane and idiotic, and has given me the
following illustrations:--
Shortly before
receiving my letter, be witnessed an uncontrollable outbreak of anger and
delusive jealousy in an insane lady. At first she vituperated her husband, and
whilst doing so foamed at the mouth. Next she approached close to him with
compressed lips, and a virulent set frown. Then she drew back her lips,
especially the corners of the upper lip, and showed her teeth, at the same time
aiming a vicious blow at him. A second case is that of an old soldier, who,
when he is requested to conform to the rules of the establishment, gives way to
discontent, terminating in fury. He commonly begins by asking Dr. Browne
whether he is not ashamed to treat him in such a manner. He then swears and
blasphemes, paces tip and down, tosses his arms wildly about, and menaces any
one near him. At last, as his exasperation culminates, he rushes up towards Dr.
Browne with a peculiar sidelong movement, shaking his doubled fist, and
threatening destruction. Then his upper lip may be seen to be raised,
especially at the corners, so that his huge canine teeth are exhibited. He
hisses forth his curses through his set teeth, and his whole expression assumes
the character of extreme ferocity. A similar description is applicable to
another man, excepting that he generally foams at the mouth and spits, dancing
and jumping about in a strange rapid manner, shrieking out his maledictions in
a shrill falsetto voice.
Dr. Browne also informs
me of the case of an epileptic idiot, incapable of independent movements, and
who spends the whole day in playing with some toys; but his temper is morose
and easily roused into fierceness. When any one touches his toys, he slowly
raises his head from its habitual downward position, and fixes his eyes on the
offender, with a tardy yet angry scowl. If the annoyance be repeated, he draws
back his thick lips and reveals a prominent row of hideous fangs (large canines
being especially noticeable), and then makes a quick and cruel clutch with his
open hand at the offending person. The rapidity of this clutch, as Dr. Browne
remarks, is marvellous in a being ordinarily so torpid that he takes about
fifteen seconds, when attracted by any noise, to turn his head from one side to
the other. If, when thus incensed, a handkerchief, book, or other article, be placed
into his hands, he drags it to his mouth and bites it. Mr. Nicol has likewise
described to me two cases of insane patients, whose lips are retracted during
paroxysms of rage.
Dr. Maudsley, after
detailing various strange animal- like traits in idiots, asks whether these are
not due to the reappearance of primitive instincts--"a faint echo from a
far-distant past, testifying to a kinship which man has almost outgrown."
He adds, that as every human brain passes, in the course of its development,
through the same stages as those occurring in the lower vertebrate animals, and
as the brain of an idiot is in an arrested condition, we may presume that it
"will manifest its most primitive functions, and no higher
functions." Dr. Maudsley thinks that the same view may be extended to the
brain in its degenerated condition in some insane patients; and asks, whence
come "the savage snarl, the destructive disposition, the obscene language,
the wild howl, the offensive habits, displayed by some of the insane? Why should
a human being, deprived of his reason, ever become so brutal in character, as
some do, unless he has the brute nature within him?"[12] This question
must, as it would appear, he answered in the affirmative.
Anger,
Indignation.--These states of the mind differ from rage only in degree, and
there is no marked distinction in their characteristic signs. Under moderate
anger the action of the heart is a little increased, the colour heightened, and
the eyes become bright. The respiration is likewise a little hurried; and as
all the muscles serving for this function act in association, the wings of the
nostrils are somewhat raised to allow of a free indraught of air; and this is a
highly characteristic sign of indignation. The mouth is commonly compressed,
and there is almost always a frown on the brow. Instead of the frantic gestures
of extreme rage, an indignant man unconsciously throws himself into an attitude
ready for attacking or striking his enemy, whom he will perhaps scan from head
to foot in defiance. He carries his head erect, with his chest well expanded,
and the feet planted firmly on the ground. He holds his arms in various
positions, with one or both elbows squared, or with the arms rigidly suspended
by his sides. With Europeans the fists are commonly clenched.[13] The figures 1
and 2 in Plate VI. are fairly good representations of men simulating
indignation. Any one may see in a mirror, if he will vividly imagine that he
has been insulted and demands an explanation in an angry tone of voice, that he
suddenly and unconsciously throws himself into some such attitude.
Rage, anger, and
indignation are exhibited in nearly the same manner throughout the world; and
the following descriptions may be worth giving as evidence of this, and as
illustrations of some of the foregoing remarks. There is, however, an exception
with respect to clenching the fists, which seems confined chiefly to the men
who fight with their fists. With the Australians only one of my informants has
seen the fists clenched. All agree about the body being held erect; and all,
with two exceptions, state that the brows are heavily contracted. Some of them
allude to the firmly-compressed mouth, the distended nostrils, and flashing
eyes. According to the Rev. Mr. Taplin, rage, with the Australians, is
expressed by the lips being protruded, the eyes being widely open; and in the
case of the women by their dancing about and casting dust into the air. Another
observer speaks of the native men, when enraged, throwing their arms wildly about.
I have received similar
accounts, except as to the clenching of the fists, in regard to the Malays of
the Malacca peninsula, the Abyssinians, and the natives of South Africa. So it
is with the Dakota Indians of North America; and, according to Mr. Matthews,
they then hold their heads erect, frown, and often stalk away with long
strides. Mr. Bridges states that the Fuegians, when enraged, frequently stamp
on the ground, walk distractedly about, sometimes cry and grow pale. The Rev.
Mr. Stack watched a New Zealand man and woman quarrelling, and made the
following entry in his note-book: "Eyes dilated, body swayed violently
backwards and forwards, head inclined forwards, fists clenched, now thrown
behind the body, now directed towards each other's faces." Mr. Swinhoe
says that my description agrees with what he has seen of the Chinese, excepting
that an angry man generally inclines his body towards his antagonist, and
pointing at him, pours forth a volley of abuse.
Lastly, with respect to
the natives of India, Mr. J. Scott has sent me a full description of their
gestures and expression when enraged. Two low-caste Bengalees disputed about a
loan. At first they were calm, but soon grew furious and poured forth the
grossest abuse on each other's relations and progenitors for many generations
past. Their gestures were very different from those of Europeans; for though
their chests were expanded and shoulders squared, their arms remained rigidly
suspended, with the elbows turned inwards and the hands alternately clenched
and opened. Their shoulders were often raised high, and then again lowered.
They looked fiercely at each other from under their lowered and strongly
wrinkled brows, and their protruded lips were firmly closed. They approached
each other, with heads and necks stretched forwards, and pushed, scratched, and
grasped at each other. This protrusion of the head and body seems a common
gesture with the enraged; and I have noticed it with degraded English women
whilst quarrelling violently in the streets. In such cases it may be presumed
that neither party expects to receive a blow from the other.
A Bengalee employed in
the Botanic Gardens was accused, in the presence of Mr. Scott, by the native
overseer of having stolen a valuable plant. He listened silently and scornfully
to the accusation; his attitude erect, chest expanded, mouth closed, lips
protruding, eyes firmly set and penetrating. He then defiantly maintained his
innocence, with upraised and clenched hands, his head being now pushed
forwards, with the eyes widely open and eyebrows raised. Mr. Scott also watched
two Mechis, in Sikhim, quarrelling about their share of payment. They soon got
into a furious passion, and then their bodies became less erect, with their
heads pushed forwards; they made grimaces at each other; their shoulders were
raised; their arms rigidly bent inwards at the elbows, and their hands
spasmodically closed, but not properly clenched. They continually approached
and retreated from each other, and often raised their arms as if to strike, but
their hands were open, and no blow was given. Mr. Scott made similar
observations on the Lepchas whom he often saw quarrelling, and he noticed that
they kept their arms rigid and almost parallel to their bodies, with the hands
pushed somewhat backwards and partially closed, but not clenched.
Sneering, Defiance:
Uncovering the canine tooth on one side.--The expression which I wish here to
consider differs but little from that already described, when the lips are
retracted and the grinning teeth exposed. The difference consists solely in the
upper lip being retracted in such a manner that the canine tooth on one side of
the face alone is shown; the face itself being generally a little upturned and
half averted from the person causing offence. The other signs of rage are not
necessarily present. This expression may occasionally be observed in a person
who sneers at or defies another, though there may be no real anger; as when any
one is playfully accused of some fault, and answers, "I scorn the imputation."
The expression is not a common one, but I have seen it exhibited with perfect
distinctness by a lady who was being quizzed by another person. It was
described by Parsons as long ago as 1746, with an engraving, showing the
uncovered canine on one side.[14] Mr. Rejlander, without my having made any
allusion to the subject, asked me whether I had ever noticed this expression,
as he had been much struck by it. He has photographed for me (Plate IV. fig 1)
a lady, who sometimes unintentionally displays the canine on one side, and who
can do so voluntarily with unusual distinctness.
The expression of a
half-playful sneer graduates into one of great ferocity when, together with a
heavily frowning brow and fierce eye, the canine tooth is exposed. A Bengalee
boy was accused before Mr. Scott of some misdeed. The delinquent did not dare
to give vent to his wrath in words, but it was plainly shown on his
countenance, sometimes by a defiant frown, and sometimes "by a thoroughly
canine snarl." When this was exhibited, "the corner of the lip over
the eye-tooth, which happened in this case to be large and projecting, was
raised on the side of his accuser, a strong frown being still retained on the
brow." Sir C. Bell states[15] that the actor Cooke could express the most
determined hate "when with the oblique cast of his eyes he drew up the
outer part of the upper lip, and discovered a sharp angular tooth."
The uncovering of the
canine tooth is the result of a double movement. The angle or corner of the
mouth is drawn a little backwards, and at the same time a muscle which runs
parallel to and near the nose draws up the outer part of the upper lip, and
exposes the canine on this side of the face. The contraction of this muscle
makes a distinct furrow on the cheek, and produces strong wrinkles under the
eye, especially at its inner corner. The action is the same as that of a
snarling dog; and a dog when pretending to fight often draws up the lip on one
side alone, namely that facing his antagonist. Our word sneer is in fact the
same as snarl, which was originally snar, the l "being merely an element
implying continuance of action."[16]
I suspect that we see a
trace of this same expression in what is called a derisive or sardonic smile.
The lips are then kept joined or almost joined, but one corner of the mouth is
retracted on the side towards the derided person; and this drawing back of the
corner is part of a true sneer. Although some persons smile more on one side of
their face than on the other, it is not easy to understand why in cases of
derision the smile, if a real one, should so commonly be confined to one side.
I have also on these occasions noticed a slight twitching of the muscle which
draws up the outer part of the upper lip; and this movement, if fully carried
out, would have uncovered the canine, and would have produced a true sneer.
Mr. Bulmer, an
Australian missionary in a remote part of Gipps' Land, says, in answer to my
query about the uncovering of the canine on one side, "I find that the
natives in snarling at each other speak with the teeth closed, the upper lip
drawn to one side, and a general angry expression of face; but they look direct
at the person addressed." Three other observers in Australia, one in
Abyssinia, and one in China, answer my query on this head in the affirmative;
but as the expression is rare, and as they enter into no details, I am afraid
of implicitly trusting them. It is, however, by no means improbable that this
animal-like expression may be more common with savages than with civilized
races. Mr. Geach is an observer who may be fully trusted, and he has observed
it on one occasion in a Malay in the interior of Malacca. The Rev. S. O. Glenie
answers, "We have observed this expression with the natives of Ceylon, but
not often." Lastly, in North America, Dr. Rothrock has seen it with some
wild Indians, and often in a tribe adjoining the Atnahs.
Although the upper lip
is certainly sometimes raised on one side alone in sneering at or defying any
one, I do not know that this is always the case, for the face is commonly half
averted, and the expression is often momentary. The movement being confined to
one side may not be an essential part of the expression, but may depend on the
proper muscles being incapable of movement excepting on one side. I asked four
persons to endeavour to act voluntarily in this manner; two could expose the
canine only on the left side, one only on the right side, and the fourth on
neither side. Nevertheless it is by no means certain that these same persons,
if defying any one in earnest, would not unconsciously have uncovered their
canine tooth on the side, whichever it might be, towards the offender. For we
have seen that some persons cannot voluntarily make their eyebrows oblique, yet
instantly act in this manner when affected by any real, although most trifling,
cause of distress. The power of voluntarily uncovering the canine on one side
of the face being thus often wholly lost, indicates that it is a rarely used
and almost abortive action. It is indeed a surprising fact that man should
possess the power, or should exhibit any tendency to its use; for Mr. Sutton
has never noticed a snarling action in our nearest allies, namely, the monkeys
in the Zoological Gardens, and he is positive that the baboons, though
furnished with great canines, never act thus, but uncover all their teeth when
feeling savage and ready for an attack. Whether the adult anthropomorphous
apes, in the males of whom the canines are much larger than in the females,
uncover them when prepared to fight, is not known. 251>
The expression here
considered, whether that of a playful sneer or ferocious snarl, is one of the
most curious which occurs in man. It reveals his animal descent; for no one,
even if rolling on the ground in a deadly grapple with an enemy, and attempting
to bite him, would try to use his canine teeth more than his other teeth. We
may readily believe from our affinity to the anthropomorphous apes that our
male semi-human progenitors possessed great canine teeth, and men are now
occasionally born having them of unusually large size, with interspaces in the
opposite jaw for their reception.[17] We may further suspect, notwithstanding
that we have no support from analogy, that our semi-human progenitors uncovered
their canine teeth when prepared for battle, as we still do when feeling
ferocious, or when merely sneering at or defying some one, without any
intention of making a real attack with our teeth.
[1] See some remarks to
this effect by Mr. Bain, `The Emotions and the Will,' 2nd edit. 1865, p. 127.
[2] Rengger,
Naturgesch. der Säugethiere von Paraguay, 1830, s. 3.
[3] Sir C. Bell,
`Anatomy of Expression,' p. 96. On the other hand, Dr. Burgess (`Physiology of
Blushing,' 1839, p. 31) speaks of the reddening of a cicatrix in a negress as
of the nature of a blush.
[4] Moreau and
Gratiolet have discussed the colour of the face under the influence of intense
passion: see the edit. of 1820 of Lavater, vol. iv. pp. 282 and 300; and
Gratiolet, `De la Physionomie,' p. 345.
[5] Sir C. Bell
`Anatomy of Expression,' pp. 91, 107) has fully discussed this subject. Moreau
remarks (in the edit. of 1820 of `La Physionomie, par G. Lavater,' vol. iv. p.
237), and quotes Portal in confirmation, that asthmatic patients acquire
permanently expanded nostrils, owing to the habitual contraction of the
elevatory muscles of the wings of the nose. The explanation by Dr. Piderit
(`Mimik und Physiognomik,' s. 82) of the distension of the nostrils, namely, to
allow free breathing whilst the mouth is closed and the teeth clenched, does
not appear to be nearly so correct as that by Sir C. Bell, who attributes it to
the sympathy (i. e. habitual co-action) of all the respiratory muscles. The
nostrils of an angry man may be seen to become dilated, although his mouth is
open.
[6] Mr. Wedgwood, `On
the Origin of Language,' 1866, p. 76. He also observes that the sound of hard
breathing "is represented by the syllables puff, huff, whiff, whence a
huff is a fit of ill-temper."
[7] Sir C. Bell
`Anatomy of Expression,' p. 95) has some excellent remarks on the expression of
rage.
[8] `De la
Physionomie,' 1865, p. 346.
[9] Sir C. Bell,
`Anatomy of Expression,' p. 177. Gratiolet (De la Phys. p. 369) says, `les
dents se découvrent, et imitent symboliquement l'action de déchirer et de
mordre.'I If, instead of using the vague term symboliquement, Gratiolet had
said that the action was a remnant of a habit acquired during primeval times
when our semi-human progenitors fought together with their teeth, like gorillas
and orangs at the present day, he would have been more intelligible. Dr.
Piderit (`Mimik,' &c., s. 82) also speaks of the retraction of the upper
lip during rage. In an engraving of one of Hogarth's wonderful pictures,
passion is represented in the plainest manner by the open glaring eyes,
frowning forehead, and exposed grinning teeth.
[10] `Oliver Twist,'
vol. iii. p. 245.
[11] `The Spectator,'
July 11, 1868, p. 810.
[12] `Body and Mind,'
1870, pp. 51-53.
[13] Le Brun, in his
well-known `Conférence sur l'Expression' (`La Physionomie, par Lavater,' edit.
of 1820, vol. lx. p. 268), remarks that anger is expressed by the clenching of
the fists. See, to the same effect, Huschke, `Mimices et Physiognomices,
Fragmentum Physiologicum,' 1824, p. 20. Also Sir C. Bell, `Anatomy of
Expression,' p. 219.
[14] Transact.
Philosoph. Soc., Appendix, 1746, p. 65.
[15] `Anatomy of
Expression,' p. 136. Sir C. Bell calls (p. 131) the muscles which uncover the
canines the snarling muscles.
[16] Hensleigh
Wedgwood, `Dictionary of English Etymology,' 1865, vol. iii. pp. 240, 243.
[17] `The Descent of
Man,' 1871, vol. L p. 126.
SCORN and disdain can
hardly be distinguished from contempt, excepting that they imply a rather more
angry frame of mind. Nor can they be clearly distinguished from the feelings
discussed in the last chapter under the terms of sneering and defiance. Disgust
is a sensation rather more distinct in its nature and refers to something
revolting, primarily in relation to the sense of taste, as actually perceived
or vividly imagined; and secondarily to anything which causes a similar
feeling, through the sense of smell, touch, and even of eyesight. Nevertheless,
extreme contempt, or as it is often called loathing contempt, hardly differs
from disgust. These several conditions of the mind are, therefore, nearly
related; and each of them may be exhibited in many different ways. Some writers
have insisted chiefly on one mode of expression, and others on a different
mode. From this circumstance M. Lemoine has argued[1] that their descriptions
are not trustworthy. But we shall immediately see that it is natural that the
feelings which we have here to consider should be expressed in many different
ways, inasmuch as various habitual actions serve equally well, through the
principle of association, for their expression.
Scorn and disdain, as
well as sneering and defiance, may be displayed by a slight uncovering of the
canine tooth on one side of the face; and this movement appears to graduate
into one closely like a smile. Or the smile or laugh may be real, although one
of derision; and this implies that the offender is so insignificant that he
excites only amusement; but the amusement is generally a pretence. Gaika in his
answers to my queries remarks, that contempt is commonly shown by his
countrymen, the Kafirs, by smiling; and the Rajah Brooke makes the same
observation with respect to the Dyaks of Borneo. As laughter is primarily the
expression of simple joy, very young children do not, I believe, ever laugh in
derision.
The partial closure of
the eyelids, as Duchenne[2] insists, or the turning away of the eyes or of the
whole body, are likewise highly expressive of disdain. These actions seem to
declare that the despised person is not worth looking at or is disagreeable to
behold. The accompanying photograph (Plate V. fig. 1) by Mr. Rejlander, shows
this form of disdain. It represents a young lady, who is supposed to be tearing
up the photograph of a despised lover.
The most common method
of expressing contempt is by movements about the nose, or round the mouth; but
the latter movements, when strongly pronounced, indicate disgust. The nose may
be slightly turned up, which apparently follows from the turning up of the
upper lip; or the movement may be abbreviated into the mere wrinkling of the
nose. The nose is often slightly contracted, so as partly to close the
passage;[3] and this is commonly accompanied by a slight snort or expiration.
All these actions are the same with those which we employ when we perceive an
offensive odour, and wish to exclude or expel it. In extreme cases, as Dr.
Piderit remarks,[4] we protrude and raise both lips, or the upper lip alone, so
as to close the nostrils as by a valve, the nose being thus turned up. We seem
thus to say to the despised person that he smells offensively,[5] in nearly the
same manner as we express to him by half-closing our eyelids, or turning away
our faces, that he is not worth looking at. It must not, however, be supposed that
such ideas actually pass through the mind when we exhibit our contempt; but as
whenever we have perceived a disagreeable odour or seen a disagreeable sight,
actions of this kind have been performed, they have become habitual or fixed,
and are now employed under any analogous state of mind.
Various odd little
gestures likewise indicate contempt; for instance, snapping one's fingers.
This, as Mr. Taylor remarks,[6] "is not very intelligible as we generally
see it; but when we notice that the same sign made quite gently, as if rolling
some tiny object away between the finger and thumb, or the sign of flipping it
away with the thumb-nail and forefinger, are usual and well-understood
deaf-and-dumb gestures, denoting anything tiny, insignificant, contemptible, it
seems as though we had exaggerated and conventionalized a perfectly natural
action, so as to lose sight of its original meaning. There is a curious mention
of this gesture by Strabo." Mr. Washington Matthews informs me that, with
the Dakota Indians of North America, contempt is shown not only by movements of
the face, such as those above described, but "conventionally, by the hand
being closed and held near the breast, then, as the forearm is suddenly
extended, the hand is opened and the fingers separated from each other. If the
person at whose expense the sign is made is present, the hand is moved towards
him, and the head sometimes averted from him." This sudden extension and
opening of the hand perhaps indicates the dropping or throwing away a valueless
object.
The term `disgust,' in
its simplest sense, means something offensive to the taste. It is curious how
readily this feeling is excited by anything unusual in the appearance, odour,
or nature of our food. In Tierra del Fuego a native touched with his finger
some cold pre- served meat which I was eating at our bivouac, and plainly
showed utter disgust at its softness; whilst I felt utter disgust at my food
being touched by a naked savage, though his hands did not appear dirty. A smear
of soup on a man's beard looks disgusting, though there is of course nothing
disgusting in the soup itself. I presume that this follows from the strong
association in our minds between the sight of food, however circumstanced, and
the idea of eating it.
As the sensation of
disgust primarily arises in connection with the act of eating or tasting, it is
natural that its expression should consist chiefly in movements round the
mouth. But as disgust also causes annoyance, it is generally accompanied by a
frown, and often by gestures as if to push away or to guard oneself against the
offensive object. In the two photographs (figs. 2 and 3, on Plate V.) Mr.
Rejlander has simulated this expression with some success. With respect to the
face, moderate disgust is exhibited in various ways; by the mouth being widely
opened, as if to let an offensive morsel drop out; by spitting; by blowing out
of the protruded lips; or by a sound as of clearing the throat. Such guttural
sounds are written ach or ugh; and their utterance is sometimes accompanied by
a shudder, the arms being pressed close to the sides and the shoulders raised
in the same manner as when horror is experienced.[7] Extreme disgust is
expressed by movements round the month identical with those preparatory to the
act of vomiting. The mouth is opened widely, with the upper lip strongly
retracted, which wrinkles the sides of the nose, and with the lower lip
protruded and everted as much as possible. This latter movement requires the
contraction of the muscles which draw downwards the corners of the mouth.[8]
It is remarkable how
readily and instantly retching or actual vomiting is induced in some persons by
the mere idea of having partaken of any unusual food, as of an animal which is
not commonly eaten; although there is nothing in such food to cause the stomach
to reject it. When vomiting results, as a reflex action, from some real
cause--as from too rich food, or tainted meat, or from an emetic--it does not
ensue immediately, but generally after a considerable interval of time.
Therefore, to account for retching or vomiting being so quickly and easily
excited by a mere idea, the suspicion arises that our progenitors must formerly
have had the power (like that possessed by ruminants and some other animals) of
voluntarily rejecting food which disagreed with them, or which they thought
would disagree with them; and now, though this power has been lost, as far as
the will is concerned, it is called into involuntary action, through the force
of a formerly well-established habit, whenever the mind revolts at the idea of
having partaken of any kind of food, or at anything disgusting. This suspicion
receives support from the fact, of which I am assured by Mr. Sutton, that the
monkeys in the Zoological Gardens often vomit whilst in perfect health, which
looks as if the act were voluntary. We can see that as man is able to
communicate by language to his children and others, the knowledge of the kinds
of food to be avoided, he would have little occasion to use the faculty of
voluntary rejection; so that this power would tend to be lost through disuse.
As the sense of smell
is so intimately connected with that of taste, it is not surprising that an
excessively bad odour should excite retching or vomiting in some persons, quite
as readily as the thought of revolting food does; and that, as a further
consequence, a moderately offensive odour should cause the various expressive
movements of disgust. The tendency to retch from a fetid odour is immediately
strengthened in a curious manner by some degree of habit, though soon lost by
longer familiarity with the cause of offence and by voluntary restraint. For
instance, I wished to clean the skeleton of a bird, which had not been
sufficiently macerated, and the smell made my servant and myself (we not having
had much experience in such work) retch so violently, that we were compelled to
desist. During the previous days I had examined some other skeletons, which
smelt slightly; yet the odour did not in the least affect me, but, subsequently
for several days, whenever I handled these same skeletons, they made me retch.
From the answers
received from my correspondents it appears that the various movements, which
have now been described as expressing contempt and disgust, prevail throughout
a large part of the world. Dr. Rothrock, for instance, answers with a decided
affirmative with respect to certain wild Indian tribes of North America. Crantz
says that when a Greenlander denies anything with contempt or horror he turns
up his nose, and gives a slight sound through it.[9] Mr. Scott has sent me a
graphic description of the face of a young Hindoo at the sight of castor-oil,
which he was compelled occasionally to take. Mr. Scott has also seen the same
expression on the faces of high-caste natives who have approached close to some
defiling object. Mr. Bridges says that the Fuegians "express contempt by
shooting out the lips and hissing through them, and by turning up the
nose." The tendency either to snort through the nose, or to make a noise expressed
by ugh or ach, is noticed by several of my correspondents.
Spitting seems an
almost universal sign of contempt or disgust; and spitting obviously represents
the rejection of anything offensive from the mouth. Shakspeare makes the Duke
of Norfolk say, "I spit at him--call him a slanderous coward and a villain."
So, again, Falstaff says, "Tell thee what, Hal,--if I tell thee a lie,
spit in my face." Leichhardt remarks that the Australians
"interrupted their speeches by spitting, and uttering a noise like pooh!
pooh! apparently expressive of their disgust." And Captain Burton speaks
of certain negroes "spitting with disgust upon the ground.[10] Captain
Speedy informs me that this is likewise the case with the Abyssinians. Mr.
Geach says that with the Malays of Malacca the expression of disgust
"answers to spitting from the mouth;" and with the Fuegians,
according to Mr. Bridges "to spit at one is the highest mark of
contempt."
I never saw disgust
more plainly expressed than on the face of one of my infants at the age of five
months, when, for the first time, some cold water, and again a month
afterwards, when a piece of ripe cherry was put into his mouth. This was shown
by the lips and whole mouth assuming a shape which allowed the contents to run
or fall quickly out; the tongue being likewise protruded. These movements were
accompanied by a little shudder. It was all the more comical, as I doubt
whether the child felt real disgust--the eyes and forehead expressing much
surprise and consideration. The protrusion of the tongue in letting a nasty
object fall out of the mouth, may explain how it is that lolling out the tongue
universally serves as a sign of contempt and hatred.[11]
We have now seen that
scorn, disdain, contempt, and disgust are expressed in many different ways, by
movements of the features, and by various gestures; and that these are the same
throughout the world. They all consist of actions representing the rejection or
exclusion of some real object which we dislike or abhor, but which does not
excite in us certain other strong emotions, such as rage or terror; and through
the force of habit and association similar actions are performed, whenever any
analogous sensation arises in our minds.
Jealousy, Envy,
Avarice, Revenge, Suspicion, Deceit, Slyness, Guilt, Vanity, Conceit, Ambition,
Pride, Humility, &c.--It is doubtful whether the greater number of the
above complex states of mind are revealed by any fixed expression, sufficiently
distinct to be described or delineated. When Shakspeare speaks of Envy as lean-
faced, or black, or pale, and Jealousy as "the green-eyed monster;"
and when Spenser describes Suspicion as "foul, ill-favoured, and
grim," they must have felt this difficulty. Nevertheless, the above
feelings--at least many of them--can be detected by the eye; for instance,
conceit; but we are often guided in a much greater degree than we suppose by
our previous knowledge of the persons or circumstances.
My correspondents
almost unanimously answer in the affirmative to my query, whether the
expression of guilt and deceit can be recognized amongst the various races of
man; and I have confidence in their answers, as they generally deny that
jealousy can thus be recognized. In the cases in which details are given, the
eyes are almost always referred to. The guilty man is said to avoid looking at
his accuser, or to give him stolen looks. The eyes are said "to be turned
askant," or "to waver from side to side," or "the eyelids
to be lowered and partly closed." This latter remark is made by Mr.
Hagenauer with respect to the Australians, and by Gaika with respect to the
Kafirs. The restless movements of the eyes apparently follow, as will be
explained when we treat of blushing, from the guilty man not enduring to meet
the gaze of his accuser. I may add, that I have observed a guilty expression,
without a shade of fear, in some of my own children at a very early age. In one
instance the expression was unmistakably clear in a child two years and seven
months old, and led to the detection of his little crime. It was shown, as I
record in my notes made at the time, by an unnatural brightness in the eyes,
and by an odd, affected manner, impossible to describe.
Slyness is also, I
believe, exhibited chiefly by movements about the eyes; for these are less
under the control of the will, owing to the force of long-continued habit, than
are the movements of the body. Mr. Herbert Spencer remarks,[12] "When
there is a desire to see something on one side of the visual field without
being supposed to see it, the tendency is to check the conspicuous movement of
the head, and to make the required adjustment entirely with the eyes; which
are, therefore, drawn very much to one side. Hence, when the eyes are turned to
one side, while the face is not turned to the same side, we get the natural
language of what is called slyness."
Of all the above-named
complex emotions, Pride, perhaps, is the most plainly expressed. A proud man
exhibits his sense of superiority over others by holding his head and body
erect. He is haughty (haut), or high, and makes himself appear as large as possible;
so that metaphorically he is said to be swollen or puffed up with pride. A
peacock or a turkey-cock strutting about with puffed-up feathers, is sometimes
said to be an emblem of pride.[13] The arrogant man looks down on others, and
with lowered eyelids hardly condescends to see them; or he may show his
contempt by slight movements, such as those before described, about the
nostrils or lips. Hence the muscle which everts the lower lip has been called
the musculus superbus. In some photographs of patients affected by a monomania
of pride, sent me by Dr. Crichton Browne, the head and body were held erect,
and the mouth firmly closed. This latter action, expressive of decision,
follows, I presume, from the proud man feeling perfect self-confidence in himself.
The whole expression of pride stands in direct antithesis to that of humility;
so that nothing need here be said of the latter state of mind.
Helplessness,
Impotence: Shrugging the shoulders. --When a man wishes to show that he cannot
do something, or prevent something being done, he often raises with a quick
movement both shoulders. At the same time, if the whole gesture is completed,
he bends his elbows closely inwards, raises his open hands, turning them
outwards, with the fingers separated. The head is often thrown a little on one
side; the eyebrows are elevated, and this causes wrinkles across the forehead.
The mouth is generally opened. I may mention, in order to show how
unconsciously the features are thus acted on, that though I had often intentionally
shrugged my shoulders to observe how my arms were placed, I was not at all
aware that my eyebrows were raised and mouth opened, until I looked at myself
in a glass; and since then I have noticed the same movements in the faces of
others. In the accompanying Plate VI., figs. 3 and 4, Mr. Rejlander has
successfully acted the gesture of shrugging the shoulders.
Englishmen are much
less demonstrative than the men of most other European nations, and they shrug
their shoulders far less frequently and energetically than Frenchmen or
Italians do. The gesture varies in all degrees from the complex movement, just
described, to only a momentary and scarcely perceptible raising of both
shoulders; or, as I have noticed in a lady sitting in an arm-chair, to the mere
turning slightly outwards of the open hands with separated fingers. I have
never seen very young English children shrug their shoulders, but the following
case was observed with care by a medical professor and excellent observer, and
has been communicated to me by him. The father of this gentleman was a
Parisian, and his mother a Scotch lady. His wife is of British extraction on
both sides, and my informant does not believe that she ever shrugged her
shoulders in her life. His children have been reared in England, and the
nursemaid is a thorough Englishwoman, who has never been seen to shrug her
shoulders. Now, his eldest daughter was observed to shrug her shoulders at the
age of between sixteen and eighteen months; her mother exclaiming at the time,
"Look at the little French girl shrugging her shoulders!" At first
she often acted thus, sometimes throwing her head a little backwards and on one
side, but she did not, as far as was observed, move her elbows and hands in the
usual manner. The habit gradually wore away, and now, when she is a little over
four years old, she is never seen to act thus. The father is told that he
sometimes shrugs his shoulders, especially when arguing with any one; but it is
extremely improbable that his daughter should have imitated him at so early an
age; for, as he remarks, she could not possibly have often seen this gesture in
him. Moreover, if the habit had been acquired through imitation, it is not
probable that it would so soon have been spontaneously discontinued by this
child, and, as we shall immediately see, by a second child, though the father
still lived with his family. This little girl, it may be added, resembles her
Parisian grandfather in countenance to an almost absurd degree. She also
presents another and very curious resemblance to him, namely, by practising a
singular trick. When she impatiently wants something, she holds out her little
hand, and rapidly rubs the thumb against the index and middle finger: now this
same trick was frequently performed under the same circumstances by her
grandfather.
This gentleman's second
daughter also shrugged her shoulders before the age of eighteen months, and
afterwards discontinued the habit. It is of course possible that she may have
imitated her elder sister; but she continued it after her sister had lost the
habit. She at first resembled her Parisian grandfather in a less degree than
did her sister at the same age, but now in a greater degree. She likewise
practises to the present time the peculiar habit of rubbing together, when
impatient, her thumb and two of her fore-fingers.
In this latter case we
have a good instance, like those given in a former chapter, of the inheritance
of a trick or gesture; for no one, I presume, will attribute to mere
coincidence so peculiar a habit as this, which was common to the grandfather
and his two grandchildren who had never seen him.
Considering all the
circumstances with reference to these children shrugging their shoulders, it
can hardly be doubted that they have inherited the habit from their French
progenitors, although they have only one quarter French blood in their veins,
and although their grandfather did not often shrug his shoulders. There is
nothing very unusual, though the fact is interesting, in these children having gained
by inheritance a habit during early youth, and then discontinuing it; for it is
of frequent occurrence with many kinds of animals that certain characters are
retained for a period by the young, and are then lost.
As it appeared to me at
one time improbable in a high degree that so complex a gesture as shrugging the
shoulders, together with the accompanying movements, should be innate, I was
anxious to ascertain whether the blind and deaf Laura Bridgman, who could not
have learnt the habit by imitation, practised it. And I have heard, through Dr.
Innes, from a lady who has lately had charge of her, that she does shrug her
shoulders, turn in her elbows, and raise her eyebrows in the same manner as
other people, and under the same circumstances. I was also anxious to learn
whether this gesture was practised by the various races of man, especially by
those who never have had much intercourse with Europeans. We shall see that
they act in this manner; but it appears that the gesture is sometimes confined
to merely raising or shrugging the shoulders, without the other movements.
Mr. Scott has
frequently seen this gesture in the Bengalees and Dhangars (the latter
constituting a distinct race) who are employed in the Botanic Garden at
Calcutta; when, for instance, they have declared that they could not do some
work, such as lifting a heavy weight. He ordered a Bengalee to climb a lofty
tree; but the man, with a shrug of his shoulders and a lateral shake of his
head, said he could not. Mr. Scott knowing that the man was lazy, thought he
could, and insisted on his trying. His face now became pale, his arms dropped
to his sides, his mouth and eyes were widely opened, and again surveying the
tree, he looked askant at Mr. Scott, shrugged his shoulders, inverted his
elbows, extended his open hands, and with a few quick lateral shakes of the
head declared his inability. Mr. H. Erskine has likewise seen the natives of
India shrugging their shoulders; but he has never seen the elbows turned so
much inwards as with us; and whilst shrugging their shoulders they sometimes
lay their uncrossed hands on their breasts.
With the wild Malays of
the interior of Malacca, and with the Bugis (true Malays, though speaking a
different, language), Mr. Geach has often seen this gesture. I presume that it
is complete, as, in answer to my query descriptive of the movements of the
shoulders, arms, hands, and face, Mr. Geach remarks, "it is performed in a
beautiful style." I have lost an extract from a scientific voyage, in which
shrugging the shoulders by some natives (Micronesians) of the Caroline
Archipelago in the Pacific Ocean, was well described. Capt. Speedy informs me
that the Abyssinians shrug their shoulders but enters into no details. Mrs. Asa
Gray saw an Arab dragoman in Alexandria acting exactly as described in my
query, when an old gentleman, on whom he attended, would not go in the proper
direction which had been pointed out to him.
Mr. Washington Matthews
says, in reference to the wild Indian tribes of the western parts of the United
States, "I have on a few occasions detected men using a slight apologetic
shrug, but the rest of the demonstration which you describe I have not
witnessed." Fritz Müller informs me that he has seen the negroes in Brazil
shrugging their shoulders; but it is of course possible that they may have
learnt to do so by imitating the Portuguese. Mrs. Barber has never seen this
gesture with the Kafirs of South Africa; and Gaika, judging from his answer,
did not even understand what was meant by my description. Mr. Swinhoe is also
doubtful about the Chinese; but he has seen them, under the circumstances which
would make us shrug our shoulders, press their right elbow against their side,
raise their eyebrows, lift up their hand with the palm directed towards the
person addressed, and shake it from right to left. Lastly, with respect to the
Australians, four of my informants answer by a simple negative, and one by a
simple affirmative. Mr. Bunnett, who has had excellent opportunities for
observation on the borders of the Colony of Victory, also answers by a
"yes," adding that the gesture is performed "in a more subdued
and less demonstrative manner than is the case with civilized nations."
This circumstance may account for its not having been noticed by four of my
informants.
These statements,
relating to Europeans, Hindoos, the hill-tribes of India, Malays, Micronesians,
Abyssinians, Arabs, Negroes, Indians of North America, and apparently to the
Australians--many of these natives having had scarcely any intercourse with
Europeans--are sufficient to show that shrugging the shoulders, accompanied in
some cases by the other proper movements, is a gesture natural to mankind.
This gesture implies an
unintentional or unavoidable action on our own part, or one that we cannot
perform; or an action performed by another person which we cannot prevent. It
accompanies such speeches as, "It was not my fault;" "It is
impossible for me to grant this favour;" "He must follow his own
course, I cannot stop him." Shrugging the shoulders likewise expresses
patience, or the absence of any intention to resist. Hence the muscles which
raise the shoulders are sometimes called, as I have been informed by an artist,
the patience muscles." Shylock the Jew, says,
"Signor Antonio,
many a time and oft
In the Rialto have you
rated me
About my monies and
usances;
Still have I borne it
with a patient shrug."
Merchant of Venice, act
1. sc. 3.
Sir C. Bell has
given[14] a life-like figure of a man, who is shrinking back from some terrible
danger, and is on the point of screaming out in abject terror. He is
represented with his shoulders lifted up almost to his ears; and this at once
declares that there is no thought of resistance.
As shrugging the
shoulders generally implies "I cannot do this or that," so by a
slight change, it sometimes implies "I won't do it." The movement
then expresses a dogged determination not to act. Olmsted describes[15] an
Indian in Texas as giving a great shrug to his shoulders, when he was informed
that a party of men were Germans and not Americans, thus expressing that he
would have nothing to do with them. Sulky and obstinate children may be seen
with both their shoulders raised high up; but this movement is not associated
with the others which generally accompany a true shrug. An excellent
observer[16] in describing a young man who was determined not to yield to his
father's desire, says, "He thrust his hands deep down into his pockets,
and set up his shoulders to his ears, which was a good warning that, come right
or wrong, this rock should fly from its firm base as soon as Jack would; and
that any remonstrance on the subject was purely futile." As soon as the
son got his own way, he "put his shoulders into their natural
position."
Resignation is
sometimes shown by the open hands being placed, one over the other, on the
lower part of the body. I should not have thought this little gesture worth
even a passing notice, had not Dr. W. Ogle remarked to me that he had two or
three times observed it in patients who were preparing for operations under
chloroform. They exhibited no great fear, but seemed to declare by this posture
of their hands, that they had made up their minds, and were resigned to the
inevitable.
We may now inquire why
men in all parts of the world when they feel,--whether or not they wish to show
this feeling,--that they cannot or will not do something, or will not resist
something if done by another, shrug their shoulders, at the same time often
bending in their elbows, showing the palms of their hands with extended
fingers, often throwing their heads a little on one side, raising their
eyebrows, and opening their mouths. These states of the mind are either simply
passive, or show a determination not to act. None of the above movements are of
the least service. The explanation lies, I cannot doubt, in the principle of
unconscious antithesis. This principle here seems to come into play as clearly
as in the case of a dog, who, when feeling savage, puts himself in the proper
attitude for attacking and for making himself appear terrible to his enemy; but
as soon as he feels affectionate, throws his whole body into a directly
opposite attitude, though this is of no direct use to him.
Let it be observed how
an indignant man, who resents, and will not submit to some injury, holds his
head erect, squares his shoulders, and expands his chest. He often clenches his
fists, and puts one or both arms in the proper position for attack or defence,
with the muscles of his limbs rigid. He frowns,--that is, he contracts and
lowers his brows,--and, being determined, closes his mouth. The actions and
attitude of a helpless man are, in every one of these respects, exactly the
reverse. In Plate VI. we may imagine one of the figures on the left side to
have just said, "What do you mean by insulting me?" and one of the
figures on the right side to answer, "I really could not help it."
The helpless man unconsciously contracts the muscles of his forehead which are
antagonistic to those that cause a frown, and thus raises his eyebrows; at the
same time he relaxes the muscles about the mouth, so that the lower jaw drops.
The antithesis is complete in every detail, not only in the movements of the
features, but in the position of the limbs and in the attitude of the whole body,
as may be seen in the accompanying plate. As the helpless or apologetic man
often wishes to show his state of mind, he then acts in a conspicuous or
demonstrative manner.
In accordance with the
fact that squaring the elbows and clenching the fists are gestures by no means
universal with the men of all races, when they feel indignant and are prepared
to attack their enemy, so it appears that a helpless or apologetic frame of
mind is ex- pressed in many parts of the world by merely shrugging the shoulders,
without turning inwards the elbows and opening the hands. The man or child who
is obstinate, or one who is resigned to some great misfortune, has in neither
case any idea of resistance by active means; and he expresses this state of
mind, by simply keeping his shoulders raised; or he may possibly fold his arms
across his breast.
Signs of affirmation or
approval, and of negation or disapproval: nodding and shaking the head.--I was
curious to ascertain how far the common signs used by us in affirmation and
negation were general throughout the world. These signs are indeed to a certain
extent expressive of our feelings, as we give a vertical nod of approval with a
smile to our children, when we approve of their conduct; and shake our heads
laterally with a frown, when we disapprove. With infants, the first act of
denial consists in refusing food; and I repeatedly noticed with my own infants,
that they did so by withdrawing their heads laterally from the breast, or from
anything offered them in a spoon. In accepting food and taking it into their
mouths, they incline their heads forwards. Since making these observations I
have been informed that the same idea had occurred to Charma.[17] It deserves
notice that in accepting or taking food, there is only a single movement
forward, and a single nod implies an affirmation. On the other hand, in
refusing food, especially if it be pressed on them, children frequently move
their heads several times from side to side, as we do in shaking our heads in
negation. Moreover, in the case of refusal, the head is not rarely thrown
backwards, or the mouth is closed, so that these movements might likewise come
to serve as signs of negation. Mr. Wedgwood remarks on this subject,[18] that
"when the voice is exerted with closed teeth or lips, it produces the
sound of the letter n or m. Hence we may account for the use of the particle ne
to signify negation, and possibly also of the Greek ** in the same sense."
That these signs are
innate or instinctive, at least with Anglo-Saxons, is rendered highly probable
by the blind and deaf Laura Bridgman "constantly accompanying her yes with
the common affirmative nod, and her no with our negative shake of the
head." Had not Mr. Lieber stated to the contrary,[19] I should have
imagined that these gestures might have been acquired or learnt by her,
considering her wonderful sense of touch and appreciation of the movements of
others. With microcephalous idiots, who are so degraded that they never learn
to speak, one of them is described by Vogt,[20] as answering, when asked
whether he wished for more food or drink, by inclining or shaking his head.
Schmalz, in his remarkable dissertation on the education of the deaf and dumb,
as well as of children raised only one degree above idiotcy, assumes that they
can always both make and understand the common signs of affirmation and negation.[21]
Nevertheless if we look
to the various races of man, these signs are not so universally employed as I
should have expected; yet they seem too general to be ranked as altogether
conventional or artificial. My informants assert that both signs are used by
the Malays, by the natives of Ceylon, the Chinese, the negroes of the Guinea
coast, and, according to Gaika, by the Kafirs of South Africa, though with
these latter people Mrs. Barber has never seen a lateral shake used as a
negative. With respect to the Australians, seven observers agree that a nod is
given in affirmation; five agree about a lateral shake in negation, accompanied
or not by some word; but Mr. Dyson Lacy has never seen this latter sign in
Queensland, and Mr. Bulmer says that in Gipps' Land a negative is expressed by
throwing the head a little backwards and putting out the tongue. At the
northern extremity of the continent, near Torres Straits, the natives when
uttering a negative "don't shake the head with it, but holding up the right
hand, shake it by turning it half round and back again two or three
times."[22] The throwing yback of the head with a cluck of the tongue is
said to be used as a negative by the modern Greeks and Turks, the latter people
expressing yes by a movement like that made by us when we shake our heads.[23]
The Abyssinians, as I am informed by Captain Speedy, express a negative by
jerking the head to the right shoulder, together with a slight cluck, the mouth
being closed; an affirmation is expressed by the head being thrown backwards
and the eyebrows raised for an instant. The Tagals of Luzon, in the Philippine
Archipelago, as I hear from Dr. Adolf Meyer, when they say "yes,"
also throw the head backwards. According to the Rajah Brooke, the Dyaks of
Borneo express an affirmation by raising the eyebrows, and a negation by
slightly contracting them, together with a peculiar look from the eyes. With
the Arabs on the Nile, Professor and Mrs. Asa Gray concluded that nodding in
affirmation was rare, whilst shaking the head in negation was never used, and
was not even understood by them. With the Esquimaux[24] a nod means yes and a
wink no. The New Zealanders "elevate the head and chin in place of nodding
acquiescence."[25]
With the Hindoos Mr. H.
Erskine concludes from inquiries made from experienced Europeans, and from
native gentlemen, that the signs of affirmation and negation vary--a nod and a
lateral shake being sometimes used as we do; but a negative is more commonly
expressed by the head being thrown suddenly backwards and a little to one side,
with a cluck of the tongue. What the meaning may be of this cluck of the
tongue, which has been observed with various people, I cannot imagine. A native
gentleman stated that affirmation is frequently shown by the head being thrown
to the left. I asked Mr. Scott to attend particularly to this point, and, after
repeated observations, he believes that a vertical nod is not commonly used by
the natives in affirmation, but that the head is first thrown backwards either
to the left or right, and then jerked obliquely forwards only once. This
movement would perhaps have been described by a less careful observer as a
lateral shake. He also states that in negation the head is usually held nearly
upright, and shaken several times.
Mr. Bridges informs me
that the Fuegians nod their heads vertically in affirmation, and shake them
laterally in denial. With the wild Indians of North America, according to Mr.
Washington Matthews, nodding and shaking the head have been learnt from Europeans,
and are not naturally employed. They express affirmation by describing with the
hand (all the fingers except the index being flexed) a curve downwards and
outwards from the body, whilst negation is expressed by moving the open hand
outwards, with the palm facing inwards." Other observers state that the
sign of affirmation with these Indians is the forefinger being raised, and then
lowered and pointed to the ground, or the hand is waved straight forward from
the face; and that the sign of negation is the finger or whole hand shaken from
side to side.[26] This latter movement probably represents in all cases the
lateral shaking of the head. The Italians are said in like manner to move the
lifted finger from right to left in negation, as indeed we English sometimes
do.
On the whole we find
considerable diversity in the signs of affirmation and negation in the
different races of man. With respect to negation, if we admit that the shaking
of the finger or hand from side to side is symbolic of the lateral movement of
the head; and if we admit that the sudden backward movement of the head
represents one of the actions often practised by young children in refusing
food, then there is much uniformity throughout the world in the signs of
negation, and we can see how they originated. The most marked exceptions are
presented by the Arabs, Esquimaux, some Australian tribes, and Dyaks. With the
latter a frown is the sign of negation, and with us frowning often accompanies
a lateral shake of the head.
With respect to nodding
in affirmation, the exceptions are rather more numerous, namely with some of
the Hindoos, with the Turks, Abyssinians, Dyaks, Tagals, and New Zealanders.
The eyebrows are sometimes raised in affirmation, and as a person in bending
his head forwards and downwards naturally looks up to the person whom he
addresses, he will be apt to raise his eyebrows, and this sign may thus have
arisen as an abbreviation. So again with the New Zealanders, the lifting up the
chin and head in affirmation may perhaps represent in an abbreviated form the
upward movement of the head after it has been nodded forwards and downwards.
[1] `De In Physionomie
et la Parole,' 1865, p. 89.
[2] `Physionomie
Humaine,' Album, Légende viii. p. 35. Gratiolet also speaks (De la Phys. 1865,
p. 52) of the turning away of the eyes and body.
[3] Dr. W. Ogle, in an
interesting paper on the Sense of Smell (`Medico-Chirurgical Transactions,'
vol. liii. p. 268), shows that when we wish to smell carefully, instead of
taking one deep nasal inspiration, we draw in the air by a succession of rapid
short sniffs. If "the nostrils be watched during this process, it will be
seen that, so far from dilating, they actually contract at each sniff. The
contraction does not include the whole anterior opening, but only the posterior
portion." He then explains the cause of this movement. When, on the other
hand, we wish to exclude any odour, the contraction, I presume, affects only
the anterior part of the nostrils.
[4] `Mimik und
Physiognomik,' ss. 84, 93. Gratiolet (ibid. p. 155) takes nearly the same view
with Dr. Piderit respecting the expression of contempt and disgust.
[5] Scorn implies a
strong form of contempt; and one of the roots of the word `scorn' means,
according to Mr. Wedgwood (Dict. of English Etymology, vol. iii. p. 125),
ordure or dirt. A person who is scorned is treated like dirt.
[6] `Early History of
Mankind,' 2nd edit. 1870, p. 45.
[7] See, to this
effect, Mr. Hensleigh Wedgwood's Introduction to the `Dictionary of English
Etymology,' 2nd edit. 1872, p. xxxvii.
[8] Duchenne believes
that in the eversion of the lower lip, the corners are drawn downwards by the
depressores angulioris. Henle (Handbuch d. Anat. des Menschen, 1858, B. i. s.
151) concludes that this is effected by the musculus quadratus menti.
[9] As quoted by Tylor,
`Primitive Culture,' 1871, vol. i. p. 169.
[10] Both these
quotations are given by Mr. H. Wedgwood, `On the Origin of Language,' 1866, p.
75.
[11] This is stated to
be the case by Mr. Tylor (Early Hist. of Mankind, 2nd edit. 1870, p. 52); and
he adds, "it is not clear why this should be so."
[12] `Principles of
Psychology,' 2nd edit. 1872, p. 552.
[13] Gratiolet (De la
Phys. p. 351) makes this remark, and has some good observations on the
expression of pride. See Sir C. Bell (`Anatomy of Expression,' p. 111) on the
action of the musculus superbus.
[14] `Anatomy of
Expression,' p. 166.
[15] `Journey through
Texas,' p. 352.
[16] Mrs. Oliphant,
`The Brownlows,' vol. ii. p. 206.
[17] `Essai sur le
Langage,' 2nd edit. 1846. I am much indebted to Miss Wedgwood for having given
me this information, with an extract from the work.
[18] `On the Origin of
Language,' 1866, p. 91.
[19] `On the Vocal
Sounds of L. Bridgman;' Smithsonian Contributions, 1851, vol. ii. p. 11.
[20] `Mémoire sur les
Microcéphales,' 1867, p. 27.
[21] Quoted by Tylor,
`Early History of Mankind,' 2nd edit. 1870, p. 38.
[22] Mr. J. B. Jukes,
`Letters and Extracts,' &c. 1871, p. 248.
[23] F. Lieber, `On the
Vocal Sounds,' &c. p. 11. Tylor, ibid. p. 53.
[24] Dr. King,
Edinburgh Phil. Journal, 1845, p. 313.
[25] Tylor, `Early
History of Mankind,' 2nd edit. 1870, p. 53.
[26] Lubbock, `The
Origin of Civilization,' 1870, p. 277. Tylor, ibid. p. 38. Lieber (ibid. p. 11)
remarks on the negative of the Italians.
ATTENTION, if sudden
and close, graduates into surprise; and this into astonishment; and this into
stupefied amazement. The latter frame of mind is closely akin to terror.
Attention is shown by the eyebrows being slightly raised; and as this state
increases into surprise, they are raised to a much greater extent, with the
eyes and mouth widely open. The raising of the eyebrows is necessary in order
that the eyes should be opened quickly and widely; and this movement produces
transverse wrinkles across the forehead. The degree to which the eyes and mouth
are opened corresponds with the degree of surprise felt; but these movements must
be coordinated; for a widely opened mouth with eyebrows only slightly raised
results in a meaningless grimace, as Dr. Duchenne has shown in one of his
photographs.[1] On the other hand, a person may often be seen to pretend
surprise by merely raising his eyebrows.
Dr. Duchenne has given
a photograph of an old man with his eyebrows well elevated and arched by the
galvanization of the frontal muscle; and with his mouth voluntarily opened.
This figure expresses surprise with much truth. I showed it to twenty-four
persons without a word of explanation, and one alone did not at all understand
what was intended. A second person answered terror, which is not far wrong;
some of the others, however, added to the words surprise or astonishment, the
epithets horrified, woful, painful, or disgusted.
The eyes and mouth
being widely open is an expression universally recognized as one of surprise or
astonishment. Thus Shakespeare says, "I saw a smith stand with open mouth
swallowing a tailor's news." (`King John,' act iv. scene ii.) And again,
"They seemed almost, with staring on one another, to tear the cases of
their eyes; there was speech in the dumbness, language in their very gesture;
they looked as they had heard of a world destroyed." (`Winter's Tale,' act
v. scene ii.)
My informants answer
with remarkable uniformity to the same effect, with respect to the various
races of man; the above movements of the features being often accompanied by
certain gestures and sounds, presently to be described. Twelve observers in
different parts of Australia agree on this head. Mr. Winwood Reade has observed
this expression with the negroes on the Guinea coast. The chief Gaika and
others answer yes to my query with respect to the Kafirs of South Africa; and
so do others emphatically with reference to the Abyssinians, Ceylonese,
Chinese, Fuegians, various tribes of North America, and New Zealanders. With
the latter, Mr. Stack states that the expression is more plainly shown by
certain individuals than by others, though all endeavour as much as possible to
conceal their feelings. The Dyaks of Borneo are said by the Rajah Brooke to
open their eyes widely, when astonished, often swinging their heads to and fro,
and beating their breasts. Mr. Scott informs me that the workmen in the Botanic
Gardens at Calcutta are strictly ordered not to smoke; but they often disobey
this order, and when suddenly surprised in the act, they first open their eyes
and mouths widely. They then often slightly shrug their shoulders, as they
perceive that discovery is inevitable, or frown and stamp on the ground from
vexation. Soon they recover from their surprise, and abject fear is exhibited
by the relaxation of all their muscles; their heads seem to sink between their
shoulders; their fallen eyes wander to and fro; and they supplicate
forgiveness.
The well-known
Australian explorer, Mr. Stuart, has given[2] a striking account of stupefied
amazement together with terror in a native who had never before seen a man on
horseback. Mr. Stuart approached unseen and called to him from a little
distance. "He turned round and saw me. What he imagined I was I do not
know; but a finer picture of fear and astonishment I never saw. He stood
incapable of moving a limb, riveted to the spot, mouth open and eyes staring. .
. . He remained motionless until our black got within a few yards of him, when
suddenly throwing down his waddies, he jumped into a mulga bush as high as he
could get." He could not speak, and answered not a word to the inquiries
made by the black, but, trembling from head to foot, "waved with his hand
for us to be off."
That the eyebrows are
raised by an innate or instinctive impulse may be inferred from the fact that
Laura Bridgman invariably acts thus when astonished, as I have been assured by
the lady who has lately had charge of her. As surprise is excited by something
unexpected or unknown, we naturally desire, when startled, to perceive the
cause as quickly as possible; and we consequently open our eyes fully, so that
the field of vision may be increased, and the eyeballs moved easily in any
direction. But this hardly accounts for the eyebrows being so greatly raised as
is the case, and for the wild staring of the open eyes. The explanation lies, I
believe, in the impossibility of opening the eyes with great rapidity by merely
raising the upper lids. To effect this the eyebrows must be lifted
energetically. Any one who will try to open his eyes as quickly as possible
before a mirror will find that he acts thus; and the energetic lifting up of
the eyebrows opens the eyes so widely that they stare, the white being exposed
all round the iris. Moreover, the elevation of the eyebrows is an advantage in
looking upwards; for as long as they are lowered they impede our vision in this
direction. Sir C. Bell gives[3] a curious little proof of the part which the
eyebrows play in opening the eyelids. In a stupidly drunken man all the muscles
are relaxed, and the eyelids consequently droop, in the same manner as when we
are falling asleep. To counteract this tendency the drunkard raises his
eyebrows; and this gives to him a puzzled, foolish look, as is well represented
in one of Hogarth's drawings. The habit of raising the eyebrows having once
been gained in order to see as quickly as possible all around us, the movement
would follow from the force of association whenever astonishment was felt from
any cause, even from a sudden sound or an idea.
With adult persons,
when the eyebrows are raised, the whole forehead becomes much wrinkled in
transverse lines; but with children this occurs only to a slight degree. The
wrinkles run in lines concentric with each eyebrow, and are partially confluent
in the middle. They are highly characteristic of the expression of surprise or
astonishment. Each eyebrow, when raised, becomes also, as Duchenne remarks,[4]
more arched than it was before.
The cause of the mouth
being opened when astonishment is felt, is a much more complex affair; and
several causes apparently concur in leading to this movement. It has often been
supposed[5] that the sense of hearing is thus rendered more acute; but I have
watched persons listening intently to a slight noise, the nature and source of
which they knew perfectly, and they did not open their mouths. Therefore I at
one time imagined that the open mouth might aid in distinguishing the direction
whence a sound proceeded, by giving another channel for its entrance into the
ear through the eustachian tube, But Dr. W. Ogle[6] has been so kind as to
search the best recent authorities on the functions of the eustachian tube, and
he informs me that it is almost conclusively proved that it remains closed
except during the act of deglutition; and that in persons in whom the tube
remains abnormally open, the sense of hearing, as far as external sounds are
concerned, is by no means improved; on the contrary, it is impaired by the
respiratory sounds being rendered more distinct. If a watch be placed within
the mouth, but not allowed to touch the sides, the ticking is heard much less
plainly than when held outside. In persons in whom from disease or a cold the
eustachian tube is permanently or temporarily closed, the sense of hearing is
injured; but this may be accounted for by mucus accumulating within the tube,
and the consequent exclusion of air. We may therefore infer that the mouth is
not kept open under the sense of astonishment for the sake of hearing sounds
more distinctly; notwithstanding that most deaf people keep their mouths open.
Every sudden emotion,
including astonishment, quickens the action of the heart, and with it the
respiration. Now we can breathe, as Gratiolet remarks[7] and as appears to me
to be the case, much more quietly through the open mouth than through the
nostrils. Therefore, when we wish to listen intently to any sound, we either
stop breathing, or breathe as quietly as possible, by opening our mouths, at
the same time keeping our bodies motionless. One of my sons was awakened in the
night by a noise under circumstances which naturally led to great care, and
after a few minutes he perceived that his mouth was widely open. He then became
conscious that he had opened it for the sake of breathing as quietly as
possible. This view receives support from the reversed case which occurs with
dogs. A dog when panting after exercise, or on a hot day, breathes loudly; but
if his attention be suddenly aroused, he instantly pricks his ears to listen,
shuts his mouth, and breathes quietly, as he is enabled to do, through his
nostrils.
When the attention is
concentrated for a length of time with fixed earnestness on any object or
subject, all the organs of the body are forgotten and neglected;[8] and as the
nervous energy of each individual is limited in amount, little is transmitted
to any part of the system, excepting that which is at the time brought into
energetic action. Therefore many of the muscles tend to become relaxed, and the
jaw drops from its own weight. This will account for the dropping of the jaw
and open mouth of a man stupefied with amazement, and perhaps when less
strongly affected. I have noticed this appearance, as I find recorded in my
notes, in very young children when they were only moderately surprised.
There is still another
and highly effective cause, leading to the mouth being opened, when we are
astonished, and more especially when we are suddenly startled. We can draw a
full and deep inspiration much more easily through the widely open mouth than
through the nostrils. Now when we start at any sudden sound or sight, almost
all the muscles of the body are involuntarily and momentarily thrown into
strong action, for the sake of guarding ourselves against or jumping away from
the danger, which we habitually associate with anything unexpected. But we
always unconsciously prepare ourselves for any great exertion, as formerly explained,
by first taking a deep and full inspiration, and we consequently open our
mouths. If no exertion follows, and we still remain astonished, we cease for a
time to breathe, or breathe as quietly as possible, in order that every sound
may be distinctly heard. Or again, if our attention continues long and
earnestly absorbed, all our muscles become relaxed, and the jaw, which was at
first suddenly opened, remains dropped. Thus several causes concur towards this
same movement, whenever surprise, astonishment, or amazement is felt.
Although when thus
affected, our mouths are generally opened, yet the lips are often a little
protruded. This fact reminds us of the same movement, though in a much more
strongly marked degree, in the chimpanzee and orang when astonished. As a
strong expiration naturally follows the deep inspiration which accompanies the
first sense of startled surprise, and as the lips are often protruded, the
various sounds which are then commonly uttered can apparently be accounted for.
But sometimes a strong expiration alone is heard; thus Laura Bridgman, when
amazed, rounds and protrudes her lips, opens them, and breathes strongly.[9]
One of the commonest sounds is a deep Oh; and this would naturally follow, as
explained by Helmholtz, from the mouth being moderately opened and the lips
protruded. On a quiet night some rockets were fired from the `Beagle,' in a
little creek at Tahiti, to amuse the natives; and as each rocket, was let off
there was absolute silence, but this was invariably followed by a deep groaning
Oh, resounding all round the bay. Mr. Washington Matthews says that the North
American Indians express astonishment by a groan; and the negroes on the West
Coast of Africa, according to Mr. Winwood Reade, protrude their lips, and make
a sound like heigh, heigh. If the mouth is not much opened, whilst the lips are
considerably protruded, a blowing, hissing, or whistling noise is produced. Mr.
R. Brough Smith informs me that an Australian from the interior was taken to
the theatre to see an acrobat rapidly turning head over heels: "he was
greatly astonished, and protruded his lips, making a noise with his mouth as if
blowing out a match." According to Mr. Bulmer the Australians, when
surprised, utter the exclamation korki, "and to do this the mouth is drawn
out as if going to whistle." We Europeans often whistle as a sign of
surprise; thus, in a recent novel[10] it is said, "here the man expressed
his astonishment and disapprobation by a prolonged whistle." A Kafir girl,
as Mr. J. Mansel Weale informs me, "on hearing of the high price of an
article, raised her eyebrows and whistled just as a European would." Mr.
Wedgwood remarks that such sounds are written down as whew, and they serve as
interjections for surprise.
According to three
other observers, the Australians often evince astonishment by a clucking noise.
Europeans also sometimes express gentle surprise by a little clicking noise of
nearly the same kind. We have seen that when we are startled, the mouth is
suddenly opened; and if the tongue happens to be then pressed closely against
the palate, its sudden withdrawal will produce a sound of this kind, which
might thus come to express surprise.
Turning to gestures of
the body. A surprised person often raises his opened hands high above his head,
or by bending his arms only to the level of his face. The flat palms are
directed towards the person who causes this feeling, and the straightened
fingers are separated. This gesture is represented by Mr. Rejlander in Plate
VII. fig. 1. In the `Last Supper,' by Leonardo da Vinci, two of the Apostles
have their hands half uplifted, clearly expressive of their astonishment. A
trustworthy observer told me that he had lately met his wife under most
unexpected circumstances: "She started, opened her mouth and eyes very
widely, and threw up both her arms above her head." Several years ago I
was surprised by seeing several of my young children earnestly doing something
together on the ground; but the distance was too great for me to ask what they
were about. Therefore I threw up my open hands with extended fingers above my
head; and as soon as I had done this, I became conscious of the action. I then
waited, without saying a word, to see if my children had understood this
gesture; and as they came running to me they cried out, "We saw that you
were astonished at us." I do not know whether this gesture is common to
the various races of man, as I neglected to make inquiries on this head. That
it is innate or natural may be inferred from the fact that Laura Bridgman, when
amazed, "spreads her arms and turns her hands with extended fingers
upwards;"[11] nor is it likely, considering that the feeling of surprise
is generally a brief one, that she should have learnt this gesture through her
keen sense of touch.
Huschke describes[12] a
somewhat different yet allied gesture, which he says is exhibited by persons
when astonished. They hold themselves erect, with the features as before
described, but with the straightened arms extended backwards--the stretched
fingers being separated from each other. I have never myself seen this gesture;
but Huschke is probably correct; for a friend asked another man how he would
express great astonishment, and he at once threw himself into this attitude.
These gestures are, I
believe, explicable on the principle of antithesis. We have seen that an
indignant man holds his head erect, squares his shoulders, turns out his
elbows, often clenches his fist, frowns, and closes his mouth; whilst the
attitude of a helpless man is in every one of these details the reverse. Now, a
man in an ordinary frame of mind, doing nothing and thinking of nothing in
particular, usually keeps his two arms suspended laxly by his sides, with his
hands somewhat flexed, and the fingers near together. Therefore, to raise the
arms suddenly, either the whole arms or the fore-arms, to open the palms flat,
and to separate the fingers,--or, again, to straighten the arms, extending them
backwards with separated fingers,--are movements in complete antithesis to those
preserved under an indifferent frame of mind, and they are, in consequence,
unconsciously assumed by an astonished man. There is, also, often a desire to
display surprise in a conspicuous manner, and the above attitudes are well
fitted for this purpose. It may be asked why should surprise, and only a few
other states of the mind, be exhibited by movements in antithesis to others.
But this principle will not be brought into play in the case of those emotions,
such as terror, great joy, suffering, or rage, which naturally lead to certain
lines of action and produce certain effects on the body, for the whole system
is thus preoccupied; and these emotions are already thus expressed with the
greatest plainness.
There is another little
gesture, expressive of astonishment of which I can offer no explanation;
namely, the hand being placed over the mouth or on some part of the head. This
has been observed with so many races of man, that it must have some natural
origin. A wild Australian was taken into a large room full of official papers,
which surprised him greatly, and he cried out, cluck, cluck, cluck, putting the
back of his hand towards his lips. Mrs. Barber says that the Kafirs and Fingoes
express astonishment by a serious look and by placing the right hand upon the
mouth, Littering the word mawo, which means `wonderful.' The Bushmen are
said[13] to put their right hands to their necks, bending their heads
backwards. Mr. Winwood Reade has observed that the negroes on the West Coast of
Africa, when surprised, clap their hands to their mouths, saying at the same
time, "My mouth cleaves to me," i. e. to my hands; and he has heard
that this is their usual gesture on such occasions. Captain Speedy informs me
that the Abyssinians place their right hand to the forehead, with the palm
outside. Lastly, Mr. Washington Matthews states that the conventional sign of
astonishment with the wild tribes of the western parts of the United States
"is made by placing the half-closed hand over the mouth; in doing this,
the head is often bent forwards, and words or low groans are sometimes
uttered." Catlin[14] makes the same remark about the hand being pressed
over the mouth by the Mandans and other Indian tribes.
Admiration.--Little
need be said on this head. Admiration apparently consists of surprise
associated with some pleasure and a sense of approval. When vividly felt, the
eyes are opened and the eyebrows raised; the eyes become bright, instead of
remaining blank, as under simple astonishment; and the mouth, instead of gaping
open, expands into a smile.
Fear, Terror.--The word
`fear' seems to be derived from what is sudden and dangerous;[15] and that of
terror from the trembling of the vocal organs and body. I use the word `terror'
for extreme fear; but some writers think it ought to be confined to cases in
which the imagination is more particularly concerned. Fear is often preceded by
astonishment, and is so far akin to it, that both lead to the senses of sight
and hearing being instantly aroused. In both cases the eyes and mouth are
widely opened, and the eyebrows raised. The frightened man at first stands like
a statue motionless and breathless, or crouches down as if instinctively to
escape observation.
The heart beats quickly
and violently, so that it palpitates or knocks against the ribs; but it is very
doubtful whether it then works more efficiently than usual, so as to send a
greater supply of blood to all parts of the body; for the skin instantly
becomes pale, as during incipient faintness. This paleness of the surface,
however, is probably in large part, or exclusively, due to the vasomotor centre
being affected in such a manner as to cause the contraction of the small
arteries of the skin. That the skin is much affected under the sense of great
fear, we see in the marvellous and inexplicable manner in which perspiration
immediately exudes from it. This exudation is all the more remarkable, as the
surface is then cold, and hence the term a cold sweat; whereas, the sudorific
glands are properly excited into action when the surface is heated. The hairs
also on the skin stand erect; and the superficial muscles shiver. In connection
with the disturbed action of the heart, the breathing is hurried. The salivary
glands act imperfectly; the mouth becomes dry,[16] and is often opened and
shut. I have also noticed that under slight fear there is a strong tendency to
yawn. One of the best-marked symptoms is the trembling of all the muscles of
the body; and this is often first seen in the lips. From this cause, and from
the dryness of the mouth, the voice becomes husky or indistinct, or may
altogether fail. "Obstupui, steteruntque comæ, et vox faucibus hæsit."
Of vague fear there is
a well-known and grand description in Job:--"In thoughts from the visions
of the night, when deep sleep falleth on men, fear came upon me, and trembling,
which made all my bones to shake. Then a spirit passed before my face; the hair
of my flesh stood up. It stood still, but I could not discern the form thereof:
an image was before my eyes, there was silence, and I heard a voice, saying,
Shall mortal man be more just than God? Shall a man be more pure than his
Maker?" (Job iv. 13)
As fear increases into
an agony of terror, we behold, as under all violent emotions, diversified
results. The heart beats wildly, or may fail to act and faintness ensue; there
is a death-like pallor; the breathing is laboured; the wings of the nostrils
are wildly dilated; "there is a gasping and convulsive motion of the lips,
a tremor on the hollow cheek, a gulping and catching of the throat;"[17]
the uncovered and protruding eyeballs are fixed on the object of terror; or
they may roll restlessly from side to side, huc illuc volvens oculos totumque
pererrat.[18] The pupils are said to be enormously dilated. All the muscles of
the body may become rigid, or may be thrown into convulsive movements. The
hands are alternately clenched and opened, often with a twitching movement. The
arms may be protruded, as if to avert some dreadful danger, or may be thrown
wildly over the head. The Rev. Mr. Hagenauer has seen this latter action in a
terrified Australian. In other cases there is a sudden and uncontrollable
tendency to headlong flight; and so strong is this, that the boldest soldiers
may be seized with a sudden panic.
As fear rises to an
extreme pitch, the dreadful scream of terror is heard. Great beads of sweat
stand on the skin. All the muscles of the body are relaxed. Utter prostration
soon follows, and the mental powers fail. The intestines are affected. The
sphincter muscles cease to act, and no longer retain the contents of the body.
Dr. J. Crichton Browne
has given me so striking an account of intense fear in an insane woman, aged
thirty- five, that the description though painful ought not to be omitted. When
a paroxysm seizes her, she screams out, "This is hell!" "There
is a black woman!" "I can't get out!"--and other such
exclamations. When thus screaming, her movements are those of alternate tension
and tremor. For one instant she clenches her hands, holds her arms out before
her in a stiff semi- flexed position; then suddenly bends her body forwards,
sways rapidly to and fro, draws her fingers through her hair, clutches at her
neck, and tries to tear off her clothes. The sterno-cleido-mastoid muscles
(which serve to bend the head on the chest) stand out prominently, as if
swollen, and the skin in front of them is much wrinkled. Her hair, which is cut
short at the back of her head, and is smooth when she is calm, now stands on
end; that in front being dishevelled by the movements of her hands. The
countenance expresses great mental agony. The skin is flushed over the face and
neck, down to the clavicles, and the veins of the forehead and neck stand out
like thick cords. The lower lip drops, and is somewhat everted. The mouth is
kept half open, with the lower jaw projecting. The cheeks are hollow and deeply
furrowed in curved lines running from the wings of the nostrils to the corners
of the mouth. The nostrils themselves are raised and extended. The eyes are widely
opened, and beneath them the skin appears swollen; the pupils are large. The
forehead is wrinkled transversely in many folds, and at the inner extremities
of the eyebrows it is strongly furrowed in diverging lines, produced by the
powerful and persistent contraction of the corrugators.
Mr. Bell has also
described[19] an agony of terror and of despair, which he witnessed in a
murderer, whilst carried to the place of execution in Turin. "On each side
of the car the officiating priests were seated; and in the centre sat the
criminal himself. It was impossible to witness the condition of this unhappy
wretch without terror; and yet, as if impelled by some strange infatuation, it
was equally impossible not to gaze upon an object so wild, so full of horror. He
seemed about thirty- five years of age; of large and muscular form; his
countenance marked by strong and savage features; half naked, pale as death,
agonized with terror, every limb strained in anguish, his hands clenched
convulsively, the sweat breaking out on his bent and contracted brow, he kissed
incessantly the figure of our Saviour, painted on the flag which was suspended
before him; but with an agony of wildness and despair, of which nothing ever
exhibited on the stage can give the slightest conception."
I will add only one
other case, illustrative of a man utterly prostrated by terror. An atrocious
murderer of two persons was brought into a hospital, under the mistaken
impression that he had poisoned himself; and Dr. W. Ogle carefully watched him
the next morning, while he was being handcuffed and taken away by the police.
His pallor was extreme, and his prostration so great that he was hardly able to
dress himself. His skin perspired; and his eyelids and head drooped so much
that it was impossible to catch even a glimpse of his eyes. His lower jaw hung
down. There was no contraction of any facial muscle, and Dr. Ogle is almost
certain that the hair did not stand on end, for he observed it narrowly, as it
had been dyed for the sake of concealment.
With respect to fear,
as exhibited by the various races of man, my informants agree that the signs
are the same as with Europeans. They are displayed in an exaggerated degree
with the Hindoos and natives of Ceylon. Mr. Geach has seen Malays when terrified
turn pale and shake; and Mr. Brough Smyth states that a native Australian
"being on one occasion much frightened, showed a complexion as nearly
approaching to what we call paleness, as can well be conceived in the case of a
very black man." Mr. Dyson Lacy has seen extreme fear shown in an
Australian, by a nervous twitching of the hands, feet, and lips; and by the
perspiration standing on the skin. Many savages do not repress the signs of
fear so much as Europeans; and they often tremble greatly. With the Kafir,
Gaika says, in his rather quaint English, the shaking "of the body is much
experienced, and the eyes are widely open." With savages, the sphincter
muscles are often relaxed, just as may be observed in much frightened dogs, and
as I have seen with monkeys when terrified by being caught.
The erection of the
hair.--Some of the signs of fear deserve a little further consideration. Poets
continually speak of the hair standing on end; Brutus says to the ghost of Cæsar,
"that mak'st my blood cold, and my hair to stare." And Cardinal
Beaufort, after the murder of Gloucester exclaims, "Comb down his hair;
look, look, it stands upright." As I did not feel sure whether writers of
fiction might not have applied to man what they had often observed in animals,
I begged for information from Dr. Crichton Browne with respect to the insane.
He states in answer that he has repeatedly seen their hair erected under the
influence of sudden and extreme terror. For instance, it is occasionally
necessary to inject morphia, under the skin of an insane woman, who dreads the
operation extremely, though it causes very little pain; for she believes that
poison is being introduced into her system, and that her bones will be
softened, and her flesh turned into dust. She becomes deadly pale; her limbs
are stiffened by a sort of tetanic spasm, and her hair is partially erected on
the front of the head.
Dr. Browne further
remarks that the bristling of the hair which is so common in the insane, is not
always associated with terror. It is perhaps most frequently seen in chronic
maniacs, who rave incoherently and have destructive impulses; but it is during
their paroxysms of violence that the bristling is most observable. The fact of
the hair becoming erect under the influence both of rage and fear agrees
perfectly with what we have seen in the lower animals. Dr. Browne adduces
several cases in evidence. Thus with a man now in the Asylum, before the
recurrence of each maniacal paroxysm, "the hair rises up from his forehead
like the mane of a Shetland pony." He has sent me photographs of two
women, taken in the intervals between their paroxysms, and he adds with respect
to one of these women, "that the state of her hair is a sure and
convenient criterion of her mental condition." I have had one of these
photographs copied, and the engraving gives, if viewed from a little distance,
a faithful representation of the original, with the exception that the hair
appears rather too coarse and too much curled. The extraordinary condition of
the hair in the insane is due, not only to its erection, but to its dryness and
harshness, consequent on the subcutaneous glands failing to act. Dr. Bucknill
has said[20] that a lunatic "is a lunatic to his finger's ends;" he
might have added, and often to the extremity of each particular hair.
Dr. Browne mentions as
an empirical confirmation of the relation which exists in the insane between
the state of their hair and minds, that the wife of a medical man, who has
charge of a lady suffering from acute melancholia, with a strong fear of death,
for herself, her husband and children, reported verbally to him the day before
receiving my letter as follows, "I think Mrs. ---- will soon improve, for
her hair is getting smooth; and I always notice that our patients get better
whenever their hair ceases to be rough and unmanageable."
Dr. Browne attributes
the persistently rough condition of the hair in many insane patients, in part
to their minds being always somewhat disturbed, and in part to the effects of
habit,--that is, to the hair being frequently and strongly erected during their
many recurrent paroxysms. In patients in whom the bristling of the hair is
extreme, the disease is generally permanent and mortal; but in others, in whom
the bristling is moderate, as soon as they recover their health of mind the
hair recovers its smoothness.
In a previous chapter
we have seen that with animals the hairs are erected by the contraction of
minute, unstriped, and involuntary muscles, which run to each separate
follicle. In addition to this action, Mr. J. Wood has clearly ascertained by
experiment, as he informs me, that with man the hairs on the front of the head
which slope forwards, and those on the back which slope backwards, are raised
in opposite directions by the contraction of the occipito-frontalis or scalp
muscle. So that this muscle seems to aid in the erection of the hairs on the
head of man. in the same manner as the homologous panniculus carnosus aids, or
takes the greater part, in the erection of the spines on the backs of some of
the lower animals.
Contraction of the
platysma myoides muscle.--This muscle is spread over the sides of the neck,
extending downwards to a little beneath the collar-bones, and upwards to the
lower part of the cheeks. A portion, called the risorius, is represented in the
woodcut (M) fig. 2. The contraction of this muscle draws the corners of the
mouth and the lower parts of the checks downwards and backwards. It produces at
the same time divergent, longitudinal, prominent ridges on the sides of the
neck in the young; and, in old thin persons, fine transverse wrinkles. This
muscle is sometimes said not to be under the control of the will; but almost
every one, if told to draw the corners of his mouth backwards and downwards
with great force, brings it into action. I have, however, heard of a man who
can voluntarily act on it only on one side of his neck.
Sir C. Bell[21] and
others have stated that this muscle is strongly contracted under the influence
of fear; and Duchenne insists so strongly on its importance in the expression
of this emotion, that he calls it the muscle of fright.[22] He admits, however,
that its contraction is quite inexpressive unless associated with widely open
eyes and mouth. He has given a photograph (copied and reduced in the
accompanying woodcut) of the same old man as on former occasions, with his
eyebrows strongly raised, his mouth opened, and the platysma contracted, all by
means of galvanism. The original photograph was shown to twenty-four persons,
and they were separately asked, without any explanation being given, what
expression was intended: twenty instantly answered, "intense fright"
or "horror;" three said pain, and one extreme discomfort. Dr.
Duchenne has given another photograph of the same old man, with the platysma
contracted, the eyes and mouth opened, and the eyebrows rendered oblique, by
means of galvanism. The expression thus induced is very striking (see Plate
VII. fig. 2); the obliquity of the eyebrows adding the appearance of great
mental distress. The original was shown to fifteen persons; twelve answered
terror or horror, and three agony or great suffering. From these cases, and
from an examination of the other photographs given by Dr. Duchenne, together
with his remarks thereon, I think there can be little doubt that the
contraction of the platysma does add greatly to the expression of fear.
Nevertheless this muscle ought hardly to be called that of fright, for its
contraction is certainly not a necessary concomitant of this state of mind.
A man may exhibit
extreme terror in the plainest manner by death-like pallor, by drops of
perspiration on his skin, and by utter prostration, with all the muscles of his
body, including the platysma, completely relaxed. Although Dr. Browne has often
seen this muscle quivering and contracting in the insane, he has not been able
to connect its action with any emotional condition in them, though he carefully
attended to patients suffering from great fear. Mr. Nicol, on the other hand,
has observed three cases in which this muscle appeared to be more or less
permanently contracted under the influence of melancholia, associated with much
dread; but in one of these cases, various other muscles about the neck and head
were subject to spasmodic contractions.
Dr. W. Ogle observed
for me in one of the London hospitals about twenty patients, just before they
were put under the influence of chloroform for operations. They exhibited some
trepidation, but no great terror. In only four of the cases was the platysma
visibly contracted; and it did not begin to contract until the patients began
to cry. The muscle seemed to contract at the moment of each deep-drawn
inspiration; so that it is very doubtful whether the contraction depended at
all on the emotion of fear. In a fifth case, the patient, who was not
chloroformed, was much terrified; and his platysma was more forcibly and
persistently contracted than in the other cases. But even here there is room
for doubt, for the muscle which appeared to be unusually developed, was seen by
Dr. Ogle to contract as the man moved his head from the pillow, after the
operation was over.
As I felt much
perplexed why, in any case, a superficial muscle on the neck should be
especially affected by fear, I applied to my many obliging correspondents for
information about the contraction of this muscle under other circumstances. It
would be superfluous to give all the answers which I have received. They show
that this muscle acts, often in a variable manner and degree, under many
different conditions. It is violently contracted in hydrophobia, and in a
somewhat less degree in lockjaw; sometimes in a marked manner during the
insensibility from chloroform. Dr. W. Ogle observed two male patients,
suffering from such difficulty in breathing, that the trachea had to be opened,
and in both the platysma was strongly contracted. One of these men overheard
the conversation of the surgeons surrounding him, and when he was able to
speak, declared that he had not been frightened. In some other cases of extreme
difficulty of respiration, though not requiring tracheotomy, observed by Drs.
Ogle and Langstaff, the platysma was not contracted.
Mr. J. Wood, who has
studied with such care the muscles of the human body, as shown by his various
publications, has often seen the platysma contracted in vomiting, nausea, and
disgust; also in children and adults under the influence of rage,--for
instance, in Irishwomen, quarrelling and brawling together with angry
gesticulations. This may possibly have been due to their high and angry tones;
for I know a lady, an excellent musician, who, in singing certain high notes,
always contracts her platysma. So does a young man, as I have observed, in
sounding certain notes on the flute. Mr. J. Wood informs me that he has found
the platysma best developed in persons with thick necks and broad shoulders;
and that in families inheriting these peculiarities, its development is usually
associated with much voluntary power over the homologous occipito- frontalis
muscle, by which the scalp can be moved.
None of the foregoing
cases appear to throw any light on the contraction of the platysma from fear;
but it is different, I think, with the following cases. The gentleman before
referred to, who can voluntarily act on this muscle only on one side of his
neck, is positive that it contracts on both sides whenever he is startled.
Evidence has already been given showing that this muscle sometimes contracts,
perhaps for the sake of opening the mouth widely, when the breathing is
rendered difficult by disease, and during the deep inspirations of crying- fits
before an operation. Now, whenever a person starts at any sudden sight or
sound, he instantaneously draws a deep breath; and thus the contraction of the
platysma may possibly have become associated with the sense of fear. But there
is, I believe, a more efficient relation. The first sensation of fear, or the
imagination of something dreadful, commonly excites a shudder. I have caught
myself giving a little involuntary shudder at a painful thought, and I
distinctly perceived that my platysma contracted; so it does if I simulate a
shudder. I have asked others to act in this manner; and in some the muscle
contracted, but not in others. One of my sons, whilst getting out of bed,
shuddered from the cold, and, as he happened to have his hand on his neck, he
plainly felt that this muscle strongly contracted. He then voluntarily
shuddered, as he had done on former occasions, but the platysma was not then
affected. Mr. J. Wood has also several times observed this muscle contracting
in patients, when stripped for examination, and who were not frightened, but
shivered slightly from the cold. Unfortunately I have not been able to
ascertain whether, when the whole body shakes, as in the cold stage of an ague
fit, the platysma contracts. But as it certainly often contracts during a
shudder; and as a shudder or shiver often accompanies the first sensation of
fear, we have, I think, a clue to its action in this latter case.[23] Its
contraction, however, is not an invariable concomitant of fear; for it probably
never acts under the influence of extreme, prostrating terror.
Dilatation of the
Pupils.--Gratiolet repeatedly insists[24] that the pupils are enormously
dilated whenever terror is felt. I have no reason to doubt the accuracy of this
statement, but have failed to obtain confirmatory evidence, excepting in the
one instance before given of an insane woman suffering from great fear. When
writers of fiction speak of the eyes being widely dilated, I presume that they
refer to the eyelids. Munro's statement,[25] that with parrots the iris is
affected by the passions, independently of the amount of light, seems to bear
on this question; but Professor Donders informs me, that he has often seen
movements in the pupils of these birds which he thinks may be related to their
power of accommodation to distance, in nearly the same manner as our own pupils
contract when our eyes converge for near vision. Gratiolet remarks that the
dilated pupils appear as if they were gazing into profound darkness. No doubt
the fears of man have often been excited in the dark; but hardly so often or so
exclusively, as to account for a fixed and associated habit having thus arisen.
It seems more probable, assuming that Gratiolet's statement is correct, that
the brain is directly affected by the powerful emotion of fear and reacts on
the pupils; but Professor Donders informs me that this is an extremely
complicated subject. I may add, as possibly throwing light on the subject, that
Dr. Fyffe, of Netley Hospital, has observed in two patients that the pupils
were distinctly dilated during the cold stage of an ague fit. Professor Donders
has also often seen dilatation of the pupils in incipient faintness.
Horror.--The state of
mind expressed by this term implies terror, and is in some, cases almost
synonymous with it. Many a man must have felt, before the blessed discovery of
chloroform, great horror at the thought of an impending surgical operation. He
who dreads, as well as hates a man, will feel, as Milton uses the word, a
horror of him. We feel horror if we see any one, for instance a child, exposed
to some instant and crushing danger. Almost every one would experience the same
feeling in the highest degree in witnessing a man being tortured or going to be
tortured. In these cases there is no danger to ourselves; but from the power of
the imagination and of sympathy we put ourselves in the position of the
sufferer, and feel something akin to fear.
Sir C. Bell
remarks,[26] that "horror is full of energy; the body is in the utmost
tension, not unnerved by fear." It is, therefore, probable that horror
would generally be accompanied by the strong contraction of the brows; but as
fear is one of the elements, the eyes and mouth would be opened, and the eyebrows
would be raised, as far as the antagonistic action of the corrugators permitted
this movement. Duchenne has given a photograph[27] (fig. 21) of the same old
man as before, with his eyes somewhat staring, the eyebrows partially raised,
and at the same time strongly contracted, the mouth opened, and the platysma in
action, all effected by the means of galvanism. He considers that the
expression thus produced shows extreme terror with horrible pain or torture. A
tortured man, as long as his sufferings allowed him to feel any dread for the
future, would probably exhibit horror in an extreme degree. I have shown the
original of this photograph to twenty-three persons of both sexes and various
ages; and thirteen immediately answered horror, great pain, torture, or agony;
three answered extreme fright; so that sixteen answered nearly in accordance
with Duchenne's belief. Six, however, said anger, guided no doubt, by the
strongly contracted brows, and overlooking the peculiarly opened mouth. One
said disgust. On the whole, the evidence indicates that we have here a fairly
good representation of horror and agony. The photograph before referred to (Pl.
VII. fig. 2) likewise exhibits horror; but in this the oblique eyebrows
indicate great mental distress in place of energy.
Horror is generally
accompanied by various gestures, which differ in different individuals. Judging
from pictures, the whole body is often turned away or shrinks; or the arms are
violently protruded as if to push away some dreadful object. The most frequent
gesture, as far as can be inferred from the action of persons who endeavour to
express a vividly-imagined scene of horror, is the raising of both shoulders,
with the bent arms pressed closely against the sides or chest. These movements
are nearly the same with those commonly made when we feel very cold; and they
are generally accompanied by a shudder, as well as by a deep expiration or
inspiration, according as the chest happens at the time to be expanded or
contracted. The sounds thus made are expressed by words like uh or ugh.[28] It
is not, however, obvious why, when we feel cold or express a sense of horror,
we press our bent arms against our bodies, raise our shoulders, and shudder.
Conclusion.--I have now
endeavoured to describe the diversified expressions of fear, in its gradations
from mere attention to a start of surprise, into extreme terror and horror.
Some of the signs may be accounted for through the principles of habit,
association, and inheritance,-- such as the wide opening of the mouth and eyes,
with upraised eyebrows, so as to see as quickly as possible all around us, and
to hear distinctly whatever sound may reach our ears. For we have thus
habitually prepared ourselves to discover and encounter any danger. Some of the
other signs of fear may likewise be accounted for, at least in part, through
these same principles. Men, during numberless generations, have endeavoured to
escape from their enemies or danger by headlong flight, or by violently
struggling with them; and such great exertions will have caused the heart to
beat rapidly, the breathing to be hurried, the chest to heave, and the nostrils
to be dilated. As these exertions have often been prolonged to the last
extremity, the final result will have been utter prostration, pallor,
perspiration, trembling of all the muscles, or their complete relaxation. And
now, whenever the emotion of fear is strongly felt, though it may not lead to
any exertion, the same results tend to reappear, through the force of
inheritance and association.
Nevertheless, it is
probable that many or most of the above symptoms of terror, such as the beating
of the heart, the trembling of the muscles, cold perspiration, &c., are in
large part directly due to the disturbed or interrupted transmission of nerve-force
from the cerebro- spinal system to various parts of the body, owing to the mind
being so powerfully affected. We may confidently look to this cause,
independently of habit and association, in such cases as the modified
secretions of the intestinal canal, and the failure of certain glands to act.
With respect to the involuntary bristling of the hair, we have good reason to
believe that in the case of animals this action, however it may have
originated, serves, together with certain voluntary movements, to make them
appear terrible to their enemies; and as the same involuntary and voluntary
actions are performed by animals nearly related to man, we are led to believe
that man has retained through inheritance a relic of them, now become useless.
It is certainly a remarkable fact, that the minute unstriped muscles, by which
the hairs thinly scattered over man's almost naked body are erected, should
have been preserved to the present day; and that they should still contract
under the same emotions, namely, terror and rage, which cause the hairs to
stand on end in the lower members of the Order to which man belongs.
[1] `Mécanisme de la
Physionomie,' Album, 1862, p. 42.
[2] `The Polyglot News
Letter,' Melbourne, Dec. 1858, p. 2.
[3] `The Anatomy of Expression,'
p. 106.
[4] Mécanisme de la
Physionomie,' Album, p. 6.
[5] See, for instance,
Dr. Piderit (`Mimik und Physiognomik,' s. 88), who has a good discussion on the
expression of surprise.
[6] Dr. Murie has also
given me information leading to the same conclusion, derived in part from
comparative anatomy.
[7] `De la
Physionomie,' 1865, p. 234.
[8] See, on this
subject, Gratiolet, ibid. p. 254.
[9] Lieber, `On the
Vocal Sounds of Laura Bridgman,' Smithsonian Contributions, 1851, vol. ii. p.
7.
[10] `Wenderholme,'
vol. ii. p. 91.
[11] Lieber, `On the
Vocal Sounds,' &c., ibid. p. 7.
[12] Huschke, `Mimices
et Physiognomices,' 1821, p. 18. Gratiolet (De la Phys. p. 255) gives a figure
of a man in this attitude, which, however, seems to me expressive of fear
combined with astonishment. Le Brun also refers (Lavater, vol. ix. p. 299) to
the hands of an astonished man being opened.
[13] Huschke, ibid. p.
18.
[14] `North American
Indians,' 3rd edit. 1842, vol. i. p. 105.
[15] H. Wedgwood, Dict.
of English Etymology, vol. ii. 1862, p. 35. See, also, Gratiolet (`De la
Physionomie,' p. 135) on the sources of such words as `terror, horror, rigidus,
frigidus,' &c.
[16] Mr. Bain (`The
Emotions and the Will,' 1865, p. 54) explains in the following manner the
origin of the custom "of subjecting criminals in India to the ordeal of
the morsel of rice. The accused is made to take a mouthful of rice, and after a
little time to throw it out. If the morsel is quite dry, the party is believed
to be guilty,-- his own evil conscience operating to paralyse the salivating
organs."
[17] Sir C. Bell,
Transactions of Royal Phil. Soc. 1822, p. 308. `Anatomy of Expression,' p. 88
and pp. 164-469.
[18] See Moreau on the
rolling of the eyes, in the edit. of 1820 of Lavater, tome iv. p. 263. Also,
Gratiolet, De la Phys. p. 17.
[19] `Observations on
Italy,' 1825, p. 48, as quoted in 'The Anatomy of Expression,' p. 168.
[20] Quoted by Dr.
Maudsley, `Body and Mind,' 1870, p. 41.
[21] `Anatomy of
Expression,' p. 168.
[22] Mécanisme de la
Phys. Humaine, Album, Légende xi.
[23] Ducheinne takes,
in fact, this view (ibid. p. 45), as he attributes the contraction of the
platysma to the shivering of fear (frisson de la peur); but he elsewhere
compares the action with that which causes the hair of frightened quadrupeds to
stand erect; and this can hardly be considered as quite correct.
[24] `De la
Physionomie,' pp. 51, 256, 346.
[25] As quoted in
White's `Gradation in Man,' p. 57.
[26] `Anatomy of
Expression,' p. 169.
[27] `Mécanisme de la
Physionomie,' Album, pl. 65, pp. 44, 45.
[28] See remarks to
this effect by Mr. Wedgwood, in the Introduction to his `Dictionary of English
Etymology,' 2nd edit. 1872, p. xxxvii. He shows by intermediate forms that the
sounds here referred to have probably given rise to many words, such as ugly,
huge, &c.
BLUSHING is the most
peculiar and the most human of all expressions. Monkeys redden from passion,
but it would require an overwhelming amount of evidence to make us believe that
any animal could blush. The reddening of the face from a blush is due to the
relaxation of the muscular coats of the small arteries, by which the
capillaries become filled with blood; and this depends on the proper vaso-motor
centre being affected. No doubt if there be at the same time much mental
agitation, the general circulation will be affected; but it is not due to the
action of the heart that the network of minute vessels covering the face
becomes under a sense of shame gorged with blood. We can cause laughing by
tickling the skin, weeping or frowning by a blow, trembling from the fear of
pain, and so forth; but we cannot cause a blush, as Dr. Burgess remarks,[1] by
any physical means,--that is by any action on the body. It is the mind which
must be affected. Blushing is not only involuntary; but the wish to restrain
it, by leading to self-attention actually increases the tendency.
The young blush much
more freely than the old, but not during infancy,[2] which is remarkable, as we
know that infants at a very early age redden from passion. I have received
authentic accounts of two little girls blushing at the ages of between two and
three years; and of another sensitive child, a year older, blushing, when
reproved for a fault. Many children, at a somewhat more advanced age blush in a
strongly marked manner. It appears that the mental powers of infants are not as
yet sufficiently developed to allow of their blushing. Hence, also, it is that
idiots rarely blush. Dr. Crichton Browne observed for me those under his care,
but never saw a genuine blush, though he has seen their faces flash, apparently
from joy, when food was placed before them, and from anger. Nevertheless some,
if not utterly degraded, are capable of blushing. A microcephalous idiot, for
instance, thirteen years old, whose eyes brightened a little when he was
pleased or amused, has been described by Dr. Behn,[3] as blushing and turning
to one side, when undressed for medical examination.
Women blush much more
than men. It is rare to see an old man, but not nearly so rare to see an old
woman blushing. The blind do not escape. Laura Bridgman, born in this
condition, as well as completely deaf, blushes.[4] The Rev. R. H. Blair,
Principal of the Worcester College, informs me that three children born blind,
out of seven or eight then in the Asylum, are great blushers. The blind are not
at first conscious that they are observed, and it is a most important part of
their education, as Mr. Blair informs me, to impress this knowledge on their
minds; and the impression thus gained would greatly strengthen the tendency to
blush, by increasing the habit of self-attention.
The tendency to blush
is inherited. Dr. Burgess gives the case[5] of a family consisting of a father,
mother, and ten children, all of whom, without exception, were prone to blush
to a most painful degree. The children were grown up; "and some of them
were sent to travel in order to wear away this diseased sensibility, but
nothing was of the slightest avail." Even peculiarities in blushing seem
to be inherited. Sir James Paget, whilst examining the spine of a girl, was
struck at her singular manner of blushing; a big splash of red appeared first
on one cheek, and then other splashes, variously scattered over the face and
neck. He subsequently asked the mother whether her daughter always blushed in
this peculiar manner; and was answered, "Yes, she takes after me." Sir
J. Paget then perceived that by asking this question he had caused the mother
to blush; and she exhibited the same peculiarity as her daughter.
In most cases the face,
ears and neck are the sole parts which redden; but many persons, whilst
blushing intensely, feel that their whole bodies grow hot and tingle; and this
shows that the entire surface must be in some manner affected. Blushes are said
sometimes to commence on the forehead, but more commonly on the cheeks,
afterwards spreading to the ears and neck.[6] In two Albinos examined by Dr.
Burgess, the blushes commenced by a small circumscribed spot on the cheeks,
over the parotidean plexus of nerves, and then increased into a circle; between
this blushing circle and the blush on the neck there was an evident line of
demarcation; although both arose simultaneously. The retina, which is naturally
red in the Albino, invariably increased at the same time in redness.[7] Every
one must have noticed how easily after one blush fresh blushes chase each other
over the face. Blushing is preceded by a peculiar sensation in the skin.
According to Dr. Burgess the reddening of the skin is generally succeeded by a
slight pallor, which shows that the capillary vessels contract after dilating.
In some rare cases paleness instead of redness is caused under conditions which
would naturally induce a blush. For instance, a young lady told me that in a
large and crowded party she caught her hair so firmly on the button of a
passing servant, that it took some time before she could be extricated; from
her sensations she imagined that she had blushed crimson; but was assured by a
friend that she had turned extremely pale.
I was desirous to learn
how far down the body blushes extend; and Sir J. Paget, who necessarily has
frequent opportunities for observation, has kindly attended to this point for
me during two or three years. He finds that with women who blush intensely on the
face, ears, and nape of neck, the blush does not commonly extend any lower down
the body. It is rare to see it as low down as the collar-bones and
shoulder-blades; and he has never himself seen a single instance in which it
extended below the upper part of the chest. He has also noticed that blushes
sometimes die away downwards, not gradually and insensibly, but by irregular
ruddy blotches. Dr. Langstaff has likewise observed for me several women whose
bodies did not in the least redden while their faces were crimsoned with
blushes. With. the insane, some of whom appear to be particularly liable to
blushing, Dr. J. Crichton Browne has several times seen the blush extend as far
down as the collar-bones, and in two instances to the breasts. He gives me the
case of a married woman, aged twenty-seven, who suffered from epilepsy. On the
morning after her arrival in the Asylum, Dr. Browne, together with his
assistants, visited her whilst she was in bed. The moment that he approached,
she blushed deeply over her cheeks and temples; and the blush spread quickly to
her ears. She was much agitated and tremulous. He unfastened the collar of her
chemise in order to examine the state of her lungs; and then a brilliant blush
rushed over her chest, in an arched line over the upper third of each breast,
and extended downwards between the breasts nearly to the ensiform cartilage of
the sternum. This case is interesting, as the blush did not thus extend
downwards until it became intense by her attention being drawn to this part of
her person. As the examination proceeded she became composed, and the blush
disappeared; but on several subsequent occasions the same phenomena were
observed.
The foregoing facts
show that, as a general rule, with English women, blushing does not extend
beneath the neck and upper part of the chest. Nevertheless Sir J. Paget informs
me that he has lately heard of a case, on which he can fully rely, in which a
little girl, shocked by what she imagined to be an act of indelicacy, blushed
all over her abdomen and the upper parts of her legs. Moreau also[8] relates,
on the authority of a celebrated painter, that the chest, shoulders, arms, and
whole body of a girl, who unwillingly consented to serve as a model, reddened
when she was first divested of her clothes.
It is a rather curious
question why, in most cases the face, ears, and neck alone redden, inasmuch as
the whole surface of the body often tingles and grows hot. This seems to
depend, chiefly, on the face and adjoining parts of the skin having been
habitually exposed to the air, light, and alternations of temperature, by which
the small arteries not only have acquired the habit of readily dilating and
contracting, but appear to have become unusually developed in comparison with
other parts of the surface.[9] It is probably owing to this same cause, as M.
Moreau and Dr. Burgess have remarked, that the face is so liable to redden
under various circumstances, such as a fever-fit. ordinary heat, violent
exertion, anger, a slight blow, &c.; and on the other hand that it is
liable to grow pale from cold and fear, and to be discoloured during pregnancy.
The face is also particularly liable to be affected by cutaneous complaints, by
small-pox, erysipelas, &c. This view is likewise supported by the fact that
the men of certain races, who habitually go nearly naked, often blush over
their arms and chests and even down to their waists. A lady, who is a great
blusher, informs Dr. Crichton Browne, that when she feels ashamed or is
agitated, she blushes over her face, neck, wrists, and hands,--that is, over
all the exposed portions of her skin. Nevertheless it may be doubted whether
the habitual exposure of the skin of the face and neck, and its consequent
power of reaction under stimulants of all kinds, is by itself sufficient to
account for the much greater tendency in English women of these parts than of
others to blush; for the hands are well supplied with nerves and small vessels,
and have been as much exposed to the air as the face or neck, and yet the hands
rarely blush. We shall presently see that the attention of the mind having been
directed much more frequently and earnestly to the face than to any other part
of the body, probably affords a sufficient explanation.
Blushing in the various
races of man.--The small vessels of the face become filled with blood, from the
emotion of shame, in almost all the races of man, though in the very dark races
no distinct change of colour can be perceived. Blushing is evident in all the
Aryan nations of Europe, and to a certain extent with those of India. But Mr.
Erskine has never noticed that the necks of the Hindoos are decidedly affected.
With the Lepchas of Sikhim, Mr. Scott has often observed a faint blush on the
cheeks, base of the ears, and sides of the neck, accompanied by sunken eyes and
lowered head. This has occurred when he has detected them in a falsehood, or
has accused them of ingratitude. The pale, sallow complexions of these men
render a blush much more conspicuous than in most of the other natives of India.
With the latter, shame, or it may be in part fear, is expressed, according to
Mr. Scott, much more plainly by the head being averted or bent down, with the
eyes wavering or turned askant, than by any change of colour in the skin.
The Semitic races blush
freely, as might have been expected, from their general similitude to the
Aryans. Thus with the Jews, it is said in the Book of Jeremiah (chap. vi. 15),
"Nay, they were not at all ashamed, neither could they blush." Mrs.
Asa Gray saw an Arab managing his boat clumsily on the Nile, and when laughed
at by his companions, "he blushed quite to the back of his neck."
Lady Duff Gordon remarks that a young Arab blushed on coming into her
presence.[10]
Mr. Swinhoe has seen
the Chinese blushing, but he thinks it is rare; yet they have the expression
"to redden with shame." Mr. Geach informs me that the Chinese settled
in Malacca and the native Malays of the interior both blush. Some of these
people go nearly naked, and he particularly attended to the downward extension
of the blush. Omitting the cases in which the face alone was seen to blush, Mr.
Geach observed that the face, arms, and breast of a Chinaman, aged 24 years,
reddened from shame; and with another Chinese, when asked why he had not done
his work in better style, the whole body was similarly affected. In two
Malays[11] he saw the face, neck, breast, and arms blushing; and in a third
Malay (a Bugis) the blush extended down to the waist.
The Polynesians blush
freely. The Rev. Mr. Stack has seen hundreds of instances with the New
Zealanders. The following case is worth giving, as it relates to an old man who
was unusually dark-coloured and partly tattooed. After having let his land to
an Englishman for a small yearly rental, a strong passion seized him to buy a
gig, which had lately become the fashion with the Maoris. He consequently
wished to draw all the rent for four years from his tenant, and consulted Mr.
Stack whether he could do so. The man was old, clumsy, poor, and ragged, and
the idea of his driving himself about in his carriage for display amused Mr.
Stack so much that he could not help bursting out into a laugh; and then
"the old man blushed up to the roots of his hair." Forster says that
"you may easily distinguish a spreading blush" on the cheeks of the
fairest women in Tahiti.[12] The natives also of several of the other
archipelagoes in the Pacific have been seen to blush.
Mr. Washington Matthews
has often seen a blush on the faces of the young squaws belonging to various
wild Indian tribes of North America. At the opposite extremity of the continent
in Tierra del Fuego, the natives, according to Mr. Bridges, "blush much,
but chiefly in regard to women; but they certainly blush also at their own
personal appearance." This latter statement agrees with what I remember of
the Fuegian, Jemmy Button, who blushed when he was quizzed about the care which
he took in polishing his shoes, and in otherwise adorning himself. With respect
to the Aymara Indians on the lofty plateaus of Bolivia, Mr. Forbes says,[13]
that from the colour of their skins it is impossible that their blushes should
be as clearly visible as in the white races; still under such circumstances as
would raise a blush in us, "there can always be seen the same expression
of modesty or confusion; and even in the dark, a rise of temperature of the
skin of the face can be felt, exactly as occurs in the European." With the
Indians who inhabit the hot, equable, and damp parts of South America, the skin
apparently does not answer to mental excitement so readily as with the natives
of the northern and southern parts of the continent, who have long been exposed
to great vicissitudes of climate; for Humboldt quotes without a protest the
sneer of the Spaniard, "How can those be trusted, who know not how to
blush?"[14] Von Spix and Martius, in speaking of the aborigines of Brazil,
assert that they cannot properly be said to blush; "it was only after long
intercourse with the whites, and after receiving some education, that we
perceived in the Indians a change of colour expressive of the emotions of their
minds."[15] It is, however, incredible that the power of blushing could
have thus originated; but the habit of self-attention, consequent on their
education and new course of life, would have much increased any innate tendency
to blush.
Several trustworthy
observers have assured me that they have seen on the faces of negroes an
appearance resembling a blush, under circumstances which would have excited one
in us, though their skins were of an ebony-black tint. Some describe it as
blushing brown, but most say that the blackness becomes more intense. An
increased supply of blood in the skin seems in some manner to increase its
blackness; thus certain exanthematous diseases cause the affected places in the
negro to appear blacker, instead of, as with us, redder.[16] The skin, perhaps,
from being rendered more tense by the filling of the capillaries, would reflect
a somewhat different tint to what it did before. That the capillaries of the
face in the negro become filled with blood, under the emotion of shame, we may
feel confident; because a perfectly characterized albino negress, described by
Buffon,[17] showed a faint tinge of crimson on her cheeks when she exhibited
herself naked. Cicatrices of the skin remain for a long time white in the
negro, and Dr. Burgess, who had frequent opportunities of observing a scar of
this kind on the face of a negress, distinctly saw that it "invariably
became red whenever she was abruptly spoken to, or charged with any trivial
offence."[18] The blush could be seen proceeding from the circumference of
the scar towards the middle, but it did not reach the centre. Mulattoes are
often great blushers, blush succeeding blush over their faces. From these facts
there can be no doubt that negroes blush, although no redness is visible on the
skin.
I am assured by Gaika
and by Mrs. Barber that the Kafirs of South Africa never blush; but this may
only mean that no change of colour is distinguishable. Gaika adds that under
the circumstances which would make a, European blush, his countrymen "look
ashamed to keep their heads up."
It is asserted by four
of my informants that the Australians, who are almost as black as negroes,
never blush. A fifth answers doubtfully, remarking that only a very strong
blush could be seen, on account of the dirty state of their skins. Three
observers state that they do blush;[19] Mr. S. Wilson adding that this is
noticeable only under a strong emotion, and when the skin is not too dark from
long exposure and want of cleanliness. Mr. Lang answers, "I have noticed
that shame almost always excites a blush, which frequently extends as low as
the neck." Shame is also shown, as he adds, "by the eyes being turned
from side to side." As Mr. Lang was a teacher in a native school, it is
probable that he chiefly observed children; and we know that they blush more
than adults. Mr. G. Taplin has seen half-castes blushing, and he says that the
aborigines have a word expressive of shame. Mr. Hagenauer, who is one of those
who has never observed the Australians to blush, says that he has "seen
them looking down to the ground on account of shame;" and the missionary,
Mr. Bulmer, remarks that though "I have not been able to detect anything
like shame in the adult aborigines, I have noticed that the eyes of the
children, when ashamed, present a restless, watery appearance, as if they did
not know where to look."
The facts now given are
sufficient to show that blushing, whether or not there is any change of colour,
is common to most, probably to all, of the races of man.
Movements and gestures
which accompany Blushing. --Under a keen sense of shame there is a, strong
desire for concealment.[20] We turn away the whole body, more especially the
face, which we endeavour in some manner to hide. An ashamed person can hardly
endure to meet the gaze of those present, so that he almost invariably casts
down his eyes or looks askant. As there generally exists at the same time a
strong wish to avoid the appearance of shame, a vain attempt is made to look
direct at the person who causes this feeling; and the antagonism between these
opposite tendencies leads to various restless movements in the eyes. I have
noticed two ladies who, whilst blushing, to which they are very liable, have thus
acquired, as it appears, the oddest trick of incessantly blinking their eyelids
with extraordinary rapidity. An intense blush is sometimes accompanied by a
slight effusion of tears;[21] and this, I presume, is due to the lacrymal
glands partaking of the increased supply of blood, which we know rushes into
the capillaries of the adjoining parts, including the retina.
Many writers, ancient
and modern, have noticed the foregoing movements; and it has already been shown
that the aborigines in various parts of the world often exhibit their shame by
looking downwards or askant, or by restless movements of their eyes. Ezra cries
out (ch. ix. 6), "O, my God! I am ashamed, and blush to lift up my head to
thee, my God." In Isaiah (ch. I. 6) we meet with the words, "I hid
not my face from shame." Seneca remarks (Epist. xi. 5) "that the
Roman players hang down their heads, fix their eyes on the ground and keep them
lowered, but are unable to blush in acting shame." According to Macrobius,
who lived in the filth century (`Saturnalia,' B. vii. C. 11), "Natural
philosophers assert that nature being moved by shame spreads the blood before
herself as a veil, as we see any one blushing often puts his hands before his
face." Shakspeare makes Marcus (`Titus Andronicus,' act ii, sc. 5) say to
his niece, "Ah! now thou turn'st away thy face for shame." A lady
informs me that she found in the Lock Hospital a girl whom she had formerly
known, and who had become a wretched castaway, and the poor creature, when
approached, hid her face under the bed-clothes, and could not be persuaded to
uncover it. We often see little children, when shy or ashamed, turn away, and
still standing up, bury their faces in their mother's gown; or they throw
themselves face downwards on her lap.
Confusion of
mind.--Most persons, whilst blushing intensely, have their mental powers
confused. This is recognized in such common expressions as "she was
covered with confusion." Persons in this condition lose their presence of
mind, and utter singularly inappropriate remarks. They are often much
distressed, stammer, and make awkward movements or strange grimaces. In certain
cases involuntary twitchings of some of the facial muscles may be observed. I
have been informed by a young lady, who blushes excessively, that at such times
she does not even know what she is saying. When it was suggested to her that
this might be due to her distress from the consciousness that her blushing was
noticed, she answered that this could not be the case, "as she had
sometimes felt quite as stupid when blushing at a thought in her own
room."
I will give an instance
of the extreme disturbance of mind to which some sensitive men are liable. A
gentleman, on whom I can rely, assured me that he had been an eye-witness of
the following scene:--A small dinner-party was given in honour of an extremely
shy man, who, when he rose to return thanks, rehearsed the speech, which he had
evidently learnt by heart, in absolute silence, and did not utter a single
word; but he acted as if he were speaking with much emphasis. His friends,
perceiving how the case stood, loudly applauded the imaginary bursts of
eloquence, whenever his gestures indicated a pause, and the man never
discovered that he had remained the whole time completely silent. On the contrary,
he afterwards remarked to my friend, with much satisfaction, that he thought he
had succeeded uncommonly well.
When a person is much
ashamed or very shy, and blushes intensely, his heart beats rapidly and his
breathing is disturbed. This can hardly fail to affect the circulation of the
blood within the brain, and perhaps the mental powers. It seems however
doubtful, judging from the still more powerful influence of anger and fear on
the circulation, whether we can thus satisfactorily account for the confused
state of mind in persons whilst blushing intensely.
The true explanation
apparently lies in the intimate sympathy which exists between the capillary
circulation of the surface of the head and face, and that of the brain. On
applying to Dr. J. Crichton Browne for information, he has given me various
facts bearing on this subject. When the sympathetic nerve is divided on one
side of the head, the capillaries on this side are relaxed and become filled
with blood, causing the skin to redden and to grow hot, and at the same time
the temperature within the cranium on the same side rises. Inflammation of the
membranes of the brain leads to the engorgement of the face, ears, and eyes
with blood. The first stage of an epileptic fit appears to be the contraction
of the vessels of the brain, and the first outward manifestation is, an extreme
pallor of countenance. Erysipelas of the head commonly induces delirium. Even
the relief given to a severe headache by burning the skin with strong lotion,
depends, I presume, on the same principle.
Dr. Browne has often
administered to his patients the vapour of the nitrite of amyl,[22] which has
the singular property of causing vivid redness of the face in from thirty to
sixty seconds. This flushing resembles blushing in almost every detail: it
begins at several distinct points on the face, and spreads till it involves the
whole surface of the head, neck, and front of the chest; but has been observed
to extend only in one case to the abdomen. The arteries in the retina become
enlarged; the eyes glisten, and in one instance there was a slight effusion of
tears. The patients are at first pleasantly stimulated, but, as the flushing
increases, they become confused and bewildered. One woman to whom the vapour
had often been administered asserted that, as soon as she grew hot, she grew
muddled. With persons just commencing to blush it appears, judging from their
bright eyes and lively behaviour, that their mental powers are somewhat
stimulated. It is only when the blushing is excessive that the mind grows
confused. Therefore it would seem that the capillaries of the face are
affected, both during the inhalation of the nitrite of amyl and during
blushing, before that part of the brain is affected on which the mental powers
depend.
Conversely when the
brain is primarily affected; the circulation of the skin is so in a secondary
manner. Dr. Browne has frequently observed, as he informs me, scattered red
blotches and mottlings on the chests of epileptic patients. In these cases,
when the skin on the thorax or abdomen is gently rubbed with a pencil or other
object, or, in strongly-marked cases, is merely touched by the finger, the
surface becomes suffused in less than half a minute with bright red marks,
which spread to some distance on each side of the touched point, and persist
for several minutes. These are the cerebral maculæ of Trousseau; and they
indicate, as Dr. Browne remarks, a highly modified condition of the cutaneous
vascular system. If, then, there exists, as cannot be doubted, an intimate
sympathy between the capillary circulation in that part of the brain on which
our mental powers depend, and in the skin of the face, it is not surprising
that the moral causes which induce intense blushing should likewise induce,
independently of their own disturbing influence, much confusion of mind.
The Nature of the
Mental States which induce Blushing. --These consist of shyness, shame, and
modesty; the essential element in all being self-attention. Many reasons can be
assigned for believing that originally self-attention directed to personal
appearance, in relation to the opinion of others, was the exciting cause; the
same effect being subsequently produced, through the force of association, by
self-attention in relation to moral conduct. It is not the simple act of
reflecting on our own appearance, but the thinking what others think of us,
which excites a blush. In absolute solitude the most sensitive person would be
quite indifferent about his appearance. We feel blame or disapprobation more
acutely than approbation; and consequently depreciatory remarks or ridicule,
whether of our appearance or conduct, causes us to blush much more readily than
does praise. But undoubtedly praise and admiration are highly efficient: a
pretty girl blushes when a man gazes intently at her, though she may know
perfectly well that he is not depreciating her. Many children, as well as old
and sensitive persons blush, when they are much praised. Hereafter the question
will be discussed, how it has arisen that the consciousness that others are
attending to our personal appearance should have led to the capillaries,
especially those of the face, instantly becoming filled with blood.
My reasons for
believing that attention directed to personal appearance, and not to moral
conduct, has been the fundamental element in the acquirement of the habit of
blushing, will now be given. They are separately light, but combined possess,
as it appears to me, considerable weight. It is notorious that nothing makes a
shy person blush so much as any remark, however slight, on his personal
appearance. One cannot notice even the dress of a woman much given to blushing,
wihout causing her face to crimson. It is sufficient to stare hard at some
persons to make them, as Coleridge remarks, blush,--"account for that he
who can."[23]
With the two albinos
observed by Dr. Burgess,[24] "the slightest attempt to examine their
peculiarities invariably" caused them to blush deeply. Women are much more
sensitive about their personal appearance than men are, especially elderly
women in comparison with elderly men, and they blush much more freely. The
young of both sexes are much more sensitive on this same head than the old, and
they also blush much more freely than the old. Children at a very early age do
not blush; nor do they show those other signs of self- consciousness which
generally accompany blushing; and it is one of their chief charms that they
think nothing about what others think of them. At this early age they will
stare at a stranger with a fixed gaze and unblinking eyes, as on an inanimate
object, in a manner which we elders cannot imitate.
It is plain to every
one that young men and women are highly sensitive to the opinion of each other
with reference to their personal appearance; and they blush incomparably more
in the presence of the opposite sex than in that of their own.[25] A young man,
not very liable to blush, will blush intensely at any slight ridicule of his
appearance from a girl whose judgment on any important subject lie would
disregard. No happy pair of young lovers, valuing each other's admiration and
love more than anything else in the world, probably ever courted each other
without many a blush. Even the barbarians of Tierra del Fuego, according to Mr.
Bridges, blush "chiefly in regard to women, but certainly also at their
own personal appearance."
Of all parts of the
body, the face is most considered and regarded, as is natural from its being
the chief seat of expression and the source of the voice. It is also the chief
seat of beauty and of ugliness, and throughout the world is the most
ornamented.[26] The face, therefore, will have been subjected during many
generations to much closer and more earnest self-attention than any other part
of the body; and in accordance with the principle here advanced we can
understand why it should be the most liable to blush. Although exposure to
alternations of temperature, &c., has probably much increased the power of
dilatation and contraction in the capillaries of the face and adjoining parts,
yet this by itself will hardly account for these parts blushing much more than
the rest of the body; for it does not explain the fact of the hands rarely
blushing. With Europeans the whole body tingles slightly when the face blushes
intensely; and with the races of men who habitually go nearly naked, the
blushes extend over a much larger surface than with us. These facts are, to a
certain extent, intelligible, as the self-attention of primeval man, as well as
of the existing races which still go naked, will not have been so exclusively
confined to their faces, as is the case with the people who now go clothed.
We have seen that in
all parts of the world persons who feel shame for some moral delinquency, are
apt to avert, bend down, or hide their faces, independently of any thought
about their personal appearance. The object can hardly be to conceal their
blushes, for the face is thus averted or hidden under circumstances which
exclude any desire to conceal shame, as when guilt is fully confessed and
repented of. It is, however, probable that primeval man before he had acquired
much moral sensitiveness would have been highly sensitive about his personal
appearance, at least in reference to the other sex, and he would consequently
have felt distress at any depreciatory remarks about his appearance; and this
is one form of shame. And as the face is the part of the body which is most
regarded, it is intelligible that any one ashamed of his personal appearance
would desire to conceal this part of his body. The habit having been thus
acquired, would naturally be carried on when shame from strictly moral causes
was felt; and it is not easy otherwise to see why under these circumstances
there should be a desire to hide the face more than any other part of the body.
The habit, so general
with every one who feels ashamed, of turning away, or lowering his eyes, or
restlessly moving them from side to side, probably follows from each glance
directed towards those present, bringing home the conviction that he is
intently regarded; and he endeavours, by not looking at those present, and
especially not at their eyes, momentarily to escape from this painful
conviction.
Shyness.--This odd
state of mind, often called shamefacedness, or false shame, or mauvaise honte,
appears to be one of the most efficient of all the causes of blushing. Shyness
is, indeed, chiefly recognized by the face reddening, by the eyes being averted
or cast down, and by awkward, nervous movements of the body. Many a woman
blushes from this cause, a hundred, perhaps a thousand times, to once that she
blushes from having done anything deserving blame, and of which she is truly
ashamed. Shyness seems to depend on sensitiveness to the opinion, whether good
or bad, of others, more especially with respect to external appearance.
Strangers neither know nor care anything about our conduct or character, but
they may, and often do, criticize our appearance: hence shy persons are
particularly apt to be shy and to blush in the presence of strangers. The
consciousness of anything peculiar, or even new, in the dress, or any slight
blemish on the person, and more especially, on the face-points which are likely
to attract the attention of strangers--makes the shy intolerably shy. On the
other hand, in those cases in which conduct and not personal appearance is
concerned, we are much more apt to be shy in the presence of acquaintances,
whose judgment we in some degree value, than in that of strangers. A physician
told me that a young man, a wealthy duke, with whom he had travelled as medical
attendant, blushed like a girl, when he paid him his fee; yet this young man
probably would not have blushed and been shy, had he been paying a bill to a
tradesman. Some persons, however, are so sensitive, that the mere act of
speaking to almost any one is sufficient to rouse their self-consciousness, and
a slight blush is the result.
Disapprobation or
ridicule, from our sensitiveness on this head, causes shyness and blushing much
more readily than does approbation; though the latter with some persons is
highly efficient. The conceited are rarely shy; for they value themselves much
too highly to expect depreciation. Why a proud man is often shy, as appears to
be the case, is not so obvious, unless it be that, with all his self-reliance,
he really thinks much about the opinion of others although in a disdainful
spirit. Persons who are exceedingly shy are rarely shy in the presence of those
with whom they are quite familiar, and of whose good opinion and sympathy they
are perfectly assured;--for instance, a girl in the presence of her mother. I
neglected to inquire in my printed paper whether shyness can be detected in the
different races of man; but a Hindoo gentleman assured Mr. Erskine that it is
recognizable in his countrymen.
Shyness, as the
derivation of the word indicates in several languages,[27] is closely related
to fear; yet it is distinct from fear in the ordinary sense. A shy man no doubt
dreads the notice of strangers, but can hardly be said to be afraid of them, he
may be as bold as a hero in battle, and yet have no self-confidence about
trifles in the presence of strangers. Almost every one is extremely nervous
when first addressing a public assembly, and most men remain so throughout
their lives; but this appears to depend on the consciousness of a great coming
exertion, with its associated effects on the system, rather than on
shyness;[28] although a timid or shy man no doubt suffers on such occasions
infinitely more than another. With very young children it is difficult to
distinguish between fear and shyness; but this latter feeling with them has
often seemed to me to partake of the character of the wildness of an untamed
animal. Shyness comes on at a very early age. In one of my own children, when
two years and three months old, I saw a trace of what certainly appeared to be
shyness, directed towards myself after an absence from home of only a week.
This was shown not by a blush, but by the eyes being for a few minutes slightly
averted from me. I have noticed on other occasions that shyness or
shamefacedness and real shame are exhibited in the eyes of young children before
they have acquired the power of blushing.
As shyness apparently
depends on self-attention, we can perceive how right are those who maintain
that reprehending children for shyness, instead of doing them any good, does
much harm, as it calls their attention still more closely to themselves. It has
been well urged that "nothing hurts young people more than to be watched
continually about their feelings, to have their countenances scrutinized, and
the degrees of their sensibility measured by the surveying eye of the
unmerciful spectator. Under the constraint of such examinations they can think
of nothing but that they are looked at, and feel nothing but shame or
apprehension."[29]
Moral causes:
guilt.--With respect to blushing from strictly moral causes, we meet with the
same fundamental principle as before, namely, regard for the opinion of others.
It is not the conscience which raises a blush, for a man may sincerely regret
some slight fault committed in solitude, or he may suffer the deepest remorse
for an undetected crime, but he will not blush. "I blush," says Dr.
Burgess,[30] "in the presence of my accusers." It is not the sense of
guilt, but the thought that others think or know us to be guilty which crimsons
the face. A man may feel thoroughly ashamed at having told a small falsehood,
without blushing; but if he even suspects that he is detected he will instantly
blush, especially if detected by one whom he reveres.
On the other hand, a
man may be convinced that God witnesses all his actions, and he may feel deeply
conscious of some fault and pray for forgiveness; but this will not, as a lady
who is a great blusher believes, ever excite a blush. The explanation of this
difference between the knowledge by God and man of our actions lies, I presume,
in man's disapprobation of immoral conduct being somewhat akin in nature to his
depreciation of our personal appearance, so that through association both lead
to similar results; whereas the disapprobation of God brings up no such
association.
Many a person has
blushed intensely when accused of some crime, though completely innocent of it.
Even the thought, as the lady before referred to has observed to me, that
others think that we have made an unkind or stupid remark, is amply sufficient
to cause a blush, although we know all the time that we have been completely
misunderstood. An action may be meritorious or of an indifferent nature, but a
sensitive person, if he suspects that others take a different view of it, will
blush. For instance, a lady by herself may give money to a beggar without a
trace of a blush, but if others are present, and she doubts whether they
approve, or suspects that they think her influenced by display, she will blush.
So it will be, if she offers to relieve the distress of a decayed gentlewoman,
more particularly of one whom she had previously known under better
circumstances, as she cannot then feel sure how her conduct will be viewed. But
such cases as these blend into shyness.
Breaches of
etiquette.--The rules of etiquette always refer to conduct in the presence of,
or towards others. They have no necessary connection with the moral sense, and
are often meaningless. Nevertheless as they depend on the fixed custom of our
equals and superiors, whose opinion we highly regard, they are considered
almost as binding as are the laws of honour to a gentleman. Consequently the
breach of the laws of etiquette, that is, any impoliteness or gaucherie, any
impropriety, or an inappropriate remark, though quite accidental, will cause
the most intense blushing of which a man is capable. Even the recollection of
such an act, after an interval of many years, will make the whole body to
tingle. So strong, also, is the power of sympathy that a sensitive person, as a
lady has assured me, will sometimes blush at a flagrant breach of etiquette by
a perfect stranger, though the act may in no way concern her.
Modesty.-- This is
another powerful agent in exciting blushes; but the word modesty includes very
different states of the mind. It implies humility, and we often judge of this
by persons being greatly pleased and blushing at slight praise, or by being
annoyed at praise which seems to them too high according to their own humble
standard of themselves. Blushing here has the usual signification of regard for
the opinion of others. But modesty frequently relates to acts of indelicacy;
and indelicacy is an affair of etiquette, as we clearly see with the nations
that go altogether or nearly naked. He who is modest, and blushes easily at
acts of this nature, does so because they are breaches of a firmly and wisely
established etiquette. This is indeed shown by the derivation of the word
modest from modus, a measure or standard of behaviour. A blush due to this form
of modesty is, moreover, apt to be intense, because it generally relates to the
opposite sex; and we have seen how in all cases our liability to blush is thus
increased. We apply the term `modest,' as it would appear, to those who have an
humble opinion of themselves, and to those who are extremely sensitive about an
indelicate word or deed, simply because in both cases blushes are readily
excited, for these two frames of mind have nothing else in common. Shyness
also, from this same cause, is often mistaken for modesty in the sense of
humility.
Some persons flush up,
as I have observed and have been assured, at any sudden and disagreeable
recollection. The commonest cause seems to be the sudden remembrance of not
having done something for another person which had been promised. In this case
it may be that the thought passes half unconsciously through the mind,
"What will he think of me?" and then the flush would partake of the
nature of a true blush. But whether such flushes are in most cases due to the
capillary circulation being affected, is very doubtful; for we must remember
that almost every strong emotion, such as anger or great joy, acts on the
heart, and causes the face to redden.
The fact that blushes
may be excited in absolute solitude seems opposed to the view here taken,
namely that the habit originally arose from thinking about what others think of
us. Several ladies, who are great blushers, are unanimous in regard to
solitude; and some of them believe that they have blushed in the dark. From
what Mr. Forbes has stated with respect to the Aymaras, and from my own
sensations, I have no doubt that this latter statement is correct. Shakspeare,
therefore, erred when he made Juliet, who was not even by herself, say to Romeo
(act ii. sc. 2):-- Thou know'st the mask of night is on my face; Else would a
maiden blush bepaint my cheek, For that which thou hast heard me speak
to-night." But when a blush is excited in solitude, the cause almost
always relates to the thoughts of others about us--to acts done in their
presence, or suspected by them; or again when we reflect what others would have
thought of us had they known of the act. Nevertheless one or two of my
informants believe that they have blushed from shame at acts in no way relating
to others. If this be so, we must attribute the result to the force of
inveterate habit and association, under a state of mind closely analogous to
that which ordinarily excites a blush; nor need we feel surprise at this, as
even sympathy with another person who commits a flagrant breach of etiquette is
believed, as we have just seen, sometimes to cause a blush.
Finally, then, I
conclude that blushing,--whether due to shyness--to shame for a real crime--to
shame from a breach of the laws of etiquette--to modesty from humility--to
modesty from an indelicacy--depends in all cases on the same principle; this
principle being a sensitive regard for the opinion, more particularly for the
depreciation of others, primarily in relation to our personal appearance,
especially of our faces; and secondarily, through the force of association and
habit, in relation to the opinion of others on our conduct.
Theory of Blushing.--We
have now to consider, why should the thought that others are thinking about us
affect our capillary circulation? Sir C. Bell insists[31] that blushing
"is a provision for expression, as may be inferred from the colour
extending only to the surface of the face, neck, and breast, the parts most
exposed. It is not acquired; it is from the beginning." Dr. Burgess
believes that it was designed by the Creator in "order that the soul might
have sovereign power of displaying in the cheeks the various internal emotions
of the moral feelings;" so as to serve as a check on ourselves, and as a
sign to others, that we were violating rules which ought to be held sacred. Gratiolet
merely remarks,--"Or, comme il est dans l'ordre de la nature que l'être
social le plus intelligent soit aussi le plus intelligible, cette faculté de
rougeur et de pâleur qui distingue l'homme, est un signe naturel de sa haute
perfection."
The belief that
blushing was speciallydesigned by the Creator is opposed to the general theory
of evolution, which is now so largely accepted; but it forms no part of my duty
here to argue on the general question. Those who believe in design, will find
it difficult to account for shyness being the most frequent and efficient of
all the causes of blushing, as it makes the blusher to suffer and the beholder
uncomfortable, without being of the least service to either of them. They will
also find it difficult to account for negroes and other coloured races
blushing, in whom a change of colour in the skin is scarcely or not at all
visible.
No doubt a slight blush
adds to the beauty of a maiden's face; and the Circassian women who are capable
of blushing, invariably fetch a higher price in the seraolio of the Sultan than
less susceptible women.[32] But the firmest believer in the efficacy of sexual
selection will hardly suppose that blushing was acquired as a sexual ornament.
This view would also be opposed to what has. just been said about the
dark-coloured races blushing in an invisible manner.
The hypothesis which
appears to me the most probable, though it may at first seem rash, is that
attention closely directed to any part of the body tends to interfere with the ordinary
and tonic contraction of the small arteries of that part. These vessels, in
consequence, become at such times more or less relaxed, and are instantly
filled with arterial blood. This tendency will have been much strengthened, if
frequent attention has been paid during many generations to the same part,
owing to nerve-force readily flowing along accustomed channels, and by the
power of inheritance. Whenever we believe that others are depreciating or even
considering our personal appearance, our attention is vividly directed to the
outer and visible parts of our bodies; and of all such parts we are most
sensitive about our faces, as no doubt has been the case during many past
generations. Therefore, assuming for the moment that the capillary vessels can
be acted on by close attention, those of the face will have become eminently
susceptible. Through the force of association, the same effects will tend to
follow whenever we think that others are considering or censuring our actions
or character.
As the basis of this
theory rests on mental attention having some power to influence the capillary
circulation, it will be necessary to give a considerable body of details,
bearing more or less directly on this subject. Several observers,[33] who from
their wide experience and knowledge are eminently capable of forming a sound
judgment, are convinced that attention or consciousness (which latter term Sir
H. Holland thinks the more explicit) concentrated on almost any part of the
body produces some direct physical effect on it. This applies to the movements
of the involuntary muscles, and of the voluntary muscles when acting
involuntarily,--to the secretion of the glands,--to the activity of the senses
and sensations,--and even to the nutrition of parts.
It is known that the
involuntary movements of the heart are affected if close attention be paid to
them. Gratiolet[34] gives the case of a man, who by continually watching and
counting his own pulse, at last caused one beat out of every six to intermit.
On the other hand, my father told me of a careful observer, who certainly had
heart-disease and died from it, and who positively stated that his pulse was
habitually irregular to an extreme degree; yet to his great disappointment it
invariably became regular as soon as my father entered the room. Sir H. Holland
remarks,[35] that "the effect upon the circulation of a part from the
consciousness suddenly directed and fixed upon it, is often obvious and
immediate." Professor Laycock, who has particularly attended to phenomena
of this nature,[36] insists that "when the attention is directed to any
portion of the body, innervation and circulation are excited locally, and the
functional activity of that portion developed."
It is generally
believed that the peristaltic movements of the intestines are influenced by
attention being paid to them at fixed recurrent periods; and these movements
depend on the contraction of unstriped and involuntary muscles. The abnormal
action of the voluntary muscles in epilepsy, chorea, and hysteria is known to
be influenced by the expectation of an attack, and by the sight of other
patients similarly affected.[37] So it is with the involuntary acts of yawning
and laughing.
Certain glands are much
influenced by thinking of them, or of the conditions under which they have been
habitually excited. This is familiar to every one in the increased flow of
saliva, when the thought, for instance, of intensely acid fruit is kept before
the mind.[38] It was shown in our sixth chapter, that an earnest and
long-continued desire either to repress, or to increase, the action of the
lacrymal glands is effectual. Some curious cases have been recorded in the case
of women, of the power of the mind on the mammary glands; and still more
remarkable ones in relation to the uterine functions.[39]
When we direct our
whole attention to any one sense, its acuteness is increased;[40] and the
continued habit of close attention, as with blind people to that of hearing,
and with the blind and deaf to that of touch, appears to improve the sense in
question permanently. There is, also, some reason to believe, judging from the
capacities of different races of man, that the effects are inherited. Turning
to ordinary sensations, it is well known that pain is increased by attending to
it; and Sir B. Brodie goes so far as to believe that pain may be felt in any
part of the body to which attention is closely drawn.[41] Sir H. Holland also
remarks that we become not only conscious of the existence of a part subjected
to concentrated attention, but we experience in it various odd sensations. as
of weight, heat, cold, tingling, or itching.[42]
Lastly, some
physiologists maintain that the mind can influence the nutrition of parts. Sir
J. Paget has given a curious instance of the power, not indeed of the mind, but
of the nervous system, on the hair. A lady "who is subject to attacks of
what is called nervous headache, always finds in the morning after such an one,
that some patches of her hair are white, as if powdered with starch. The change
is effected in a night, and in a few days after, the hairs gradually regain
their dark brownish colour.[43]
We thus see that close
attention certainly affects various parts and organs, which are not properly
under the control of the will. By what means attention--perhaps the most
wonderful of all the wondrous powers of the mind--is effected, is an extremely
obscure subject. According to Müller,[44] the process by which the sensory
cells of the brain are rendered, through the will, susceptible of receiving
more intense and distinct impressions, is closely analogous to that by which
the motor cells are excited to send nerve-force to the voluntary muscles. There
are many points of analogy in the action of the sensory and motor nerve-cells;
for instance, the familiar fact that close attention to any one sense causes
fatigue, like the prolonged exertion of any one muscle.[45] When therefore we
voluntarily concentrate our attention on any part of the body, the cells of the
brain which receive impressions or sensations from that part are, it is
probable, in some unknown manner stimulated into activity. This may account,
without any local change in the part to which our attention is earnestly
directed, for pain or odd sensations being there felt or increased.
If, however, the part
is furnished with muscles, we cannot feel sure, as Mr. Michael Foster has
remarked to me, that some slight impulse may not be unconsciously sent to such
muscles; and this would probably cause an obscure sensation in the part.
In a large number of
cases, as with the salivary and lacrymal glands, intestinal canal, &c., the
power of attention seems to rest, either chiefly, or as some physiologists
think, exclusively, on the vaso-motor system being affected in such a manner
that more blood is allowed to flow into the capillaries of the part in
question. This increased action of the capillaries may in some cases be
combined with the simultaneously increased activity of the sensorium.
The manner in which the
mind affects the vaso- motor system may be conceived in the following manner.
When we actually taste sour fruit, an impression is sent through the gustatory
nerves to a certain part of the sensorium; this transmits nerve-force to the
vaso- motor centre, which consequently allows the muscular coats of the small
arteries that permeate the salivary glands to relax. Hence more blood flows
into these glands, and they secrete a copious supply of saliva. Now it does not
seem an improbable assumption, that, when we reflect intently on a sensation,
the same part of the sensorium, or a closely connected part of it, is brought
into a state of activity, in the same manner as when we actually perceive the
sensation. If so, the same cells in the brain will be excited, though, perhaps,
in a less degree, by vividly thinking about a sour taste, as by perceiving it;
and they will transmit in the one case, as in the other, nerve-force to the
vaso-motor centre with the same results.
To give another, and,
in some respects, more appropriate illustration. If a man stands before a hot
fire, his face reddens. This appears to be due, as Mr. Michael Foster informs
me, in part to the local action of the heat, and in part to a reflex action
from the vaso-motor centres.[46] In this latter case, the heat affects the nerves
of the face; these transmit an impression to the sensory cells of the brain,
which act on the vaso-motor centre, and this reacts on the small arteries of
the face, relaxing them and allowing them to become filled with blood. Here,
again, it seems not improbable that if we were repeatedly to concentrate with
great earnestness our attention on the recollection of our heated faces, the
same part of the sensorium which gives us the consciousness of actual heat
would be in some slight degree stimulated, and would in consequence tend to
transmit some nerve- force to the vaso-motor centres, so as to relax the
capillaries of the face. Now as men during endless generations have had their
attention often and earnestly directed to their personal appearance, and especially
to their faces, any incipient tendency in the facial capillaries to be thus
affected will have become in the course of time greatly strengthened through
the principles just referred to, namely, nerve-force passing readily along
accustomed channels, and inherited habit. Thus, as it appears to me, a
plausible explanation is afforded of the leading phenomena connected with the
act of blushing.
Recapitulation.--Men
and women, and especially the young, have always valued, in a high degree,
their personal appearance; and have likewise regarded the appearance of others.
The face has been the chief object of attention, though, when man aboriginally
went naked, the whole surface of his body would have been attended to. Our
self-attention is excited almost exclusively by the opinion of others, for no
person living in absolute solitude would care about his appearance. Every one
feels blame more acutely than praise. Now, whenever we know, or suppose, that
others are depreciating our personal appearance, our attention is strongly
drawn towards ourselves, more especially to our faces. The probable effect of
this will be, as has just been explained, to excite into activity that part of
the sensorium, which receives the sensory nerves of the face; and this will react
through the vaso-motor system on the facial capillaries. By frequent
reiteration during numberless generations, the process will have become so
habitual, in association with the belief that others are thinking of us, that
even a suspicion of their depreciation suffices to relax the capillaries,
without any conscious thought about our faces. With some sensitive persons it
is enough even to notice their dress to produce the same effect. Through the
force, also, of association and inheritance our capillaries are relaxed,
whenever we know, or imagine, that any one is blaming, though in silence, our
actions, thoughts, or character; and, again, when we are highly praised.
On this hypothesis we
can understand how it is that the face blushes much more than any other part of
the body, though the whole surface is somewhat affected, more especially with
the races which still go nearly naked. It is not at all surprising that the
dark-coloured races should blush, though no change of colour is visible in
their skins. From the principle of inheritance it is not surprising that
persons born blind should blush. We can understand why the young are much more
affected than the old, and women more than men; and why the opposite sexes
especially excite each other's blushes. It becomes obvious why personal remarks
should be particularly liable to cause blushing, and why the most powerful of
all the causes is shyness; for shyness relates to the presence and opinion of
others, and the shy are always more or less self-conscious. With respect to
real shame from moral delinquencies, we can perceive why it is not guilt, but
the thought that others think us guilty, which raises a blush. A man reflecting
on a crime committed in solitude, and stung by his conscience, does not blush;
yet he will blush under the vivid recollection of a detected fault, or of one
committed in the presence of others, the degree of blushing being closely
related to the feeling of regard for those who have detected, witnessed, or
suspected his fault. Breaches of conventional rules of conduct, if they are
rigidly insisted on by our equals or superiors, often cause more intense
blushes even than a detected crime, and an act which is really criminal, if not
blamed by our equals, hardly raises a tinge of colour on our cheeks. Modesty
from humility, or from an indelicacy, excites a vivid blush, as both relate to
the judgment or fixed customs of others.
From the intimate
sympathy which exists between the capillary circulation of the surface of the
head and of the brain, whenever there is intense blushing, there will be some,
and often great, confusion of mind. This is frequently accompanied by awkward
movements, and sometimes by the involuntary twitching of certain muscles.
As blushing, according
to this hypothesis, is an indirect result of attention, originally directed to
our personal appearance, that is to the surface of the body, and more
especially to the face, we can understand the meaning of the gestures which
accompany blushing throughout the world. These consist in hiding the face, or
turning it towards the ground, or to one side. The eyes are generally averted
or are restless, for to look at the man who causes us to feel shame or shyness,
immediately brings home in an intolerable manner the consciousness that his
gaze is directed on us. Through the principle of associated habit, the same
movements of the face and eyes are practised, and can, indeed, hardly be
avoided, whenever we know or believe that, others are blaming, or too strongly
praising, our moral conduct.
[1] `The Physiology or
Mechanism of Blushing,' 1839, p. 156. I shall have occasion often to quote this
work in the present chapter.
[2] Dr. Burgess, ibid.
p. 56. At p. 33 he also remarks on women blushing more freely than men, as
stated below.
[3] Quoted by Vogt, `Mémoire
sur les Microcéphales,' 1867, p. 20. Dr. Burgess (ibid. p. 56) doubts whether
idiots ever blush.
[4] Lieber `On the
Vocal Sounds,' &c.; Smithsonian Contributions, 1851, vol. ii. p. 6.
[5] Ibid. p. 182.
[6] Moreau, in edit. of
1820 of Lavater, vol. iv. p. 303.
[7] Burgess. ibid. p.
38, on paleness after blushing, p. 177.
[8] See Lavater, edit.
of 1820, vol. iv. p. 303.
[9] Burgess, ibid. pp.
114, 122. Moreau in Lavater, ibid. vol. iv. p. 293.
[10] `Letters from
Egypt,' 1865, p. 66. Lady Gordon is mistaken when she says Malays and Mulattoes
never blush.
[11] Capt. Osborn
(`Quedah,' p. 199), in speaking of a Malay, whom be reproached for cruelty,
says he was glad to see that the man blushed.
[12] J. R. Forster,
`Observations during a Voyage round the World,' 4to, 1778, p. 229. Waitz gives
(`Introduction to Anthropology,' Eng. translat. 1863, vol. i. p. 135)
references for other islands in the Pacific. See, also, Dampier `On the Blushing
of the Tunquinese' (vol. ii. p. 40); but I have not consulted this work. Waitz
quotes Bergmann, that the Kalmucks do not blush, but this may be doubted after
what we have seen with respect to the Chinese. He also quotes Roth, who denies
that the Abyssinians are capable of blushing. Unfortunately, Capt. Speedy, who
lived so long with the Abyssinians, has not answered my inquiry on this head.
Lastly, I must add that the Rajah Brooke has never observed the least sign of a
blush with the Dyaks of Borneo; on the contrary under circumstances which would
excite a blush in us, they assert "that they feel the blood drawn from
their faces."
[13] Transact. of the
Ethnological Soc. 1870, vol. ii. p. 16.
[14] Humboldt,
`Personal Narrative,' Eng. translat. vol. iii. p. 229.
[15] Quoted by
Prichard, Phys. Hist. of Mankind, 4th edit 1851, vol. i. p. 271.
[16] See, on this head,
Burgess, ibid. p. 32. Also Waitz, `Introdnction to Anthropology,' Eng. edit.
vol. i. p. 139. Moreau gives a detailed account (`Lavater,' 1820, tom. iv. p.
302) of the blushing of a Madagascar negress-slave when forced by her brutal
master to exhibit her naked bosom.
[17] Quoted by
Prichard, Phys. Hist. of Mankind, 4th edit. 1851, vol. i. p. 225.
[18] Burgess, ibid. p.
31. On mulattoes blushing, see p. 33. I have received similar accounts with
respect to, mulattoes.
[19] Barrington also
says that the Australians of New South Wales blush, as quoted by Waitz, ibid.
p. 135.
[20] Mr. Wedgwood says
(Dict. of English Etymology, vol. iii. 1865, p. 155) that the word shame
"may well originate in the idea of shade or concealment, and may be
illustrated by the Low German scheme, shade or shadow." Gratiolet (De la
Phys. pp. 357-362) has a good discussion on the gestures accompanying shame;
but some of his remarks seem to me rather fanciful. See, also, Burgess (ibid.
pp. 69, 134) on the same subject.
[21] Burgess, ibid. pp.
181, 182. Boerhaave also noticed (as quoted by Gratiolet, ibid. p. 361) the
tendency to the secretion of tears during intense blushing. Mr. Bulmer, as we
have seen, speaks of the "watery eyes" of the children of the
Australian aborigines when ashamed.
[22] See also Dr. J.
Crichton Browne's Memoir on this subject in the `West Riding Lunatic Asylum
Medical Report,' 1871, pp. 95-98.
[23] In a discussion on
so-called animal magnetism in `Table Talk,' vol. i.
[24] Ibid. p. 40.
[25] Mr. Bain (`The
Emotions and the Will,' 1865, p. 65) remarks on "the shyness of manners
which is induced between the sexes .... from the influence of mutual regard, by
the apprehension on either side of not standing well with the other."
[26] See, for evidence
on this subject, `The Descent of Man,' &c., vol. ii. pp. 71, 341.
[27] H. Wedgwood, Dict.
English Etymology, vol. iii. 1865, p. 184. So with the Latin word verecundus.
[28] Mr. Bain (`The
Emotions and the Will,' p. 64) has discussed the "abashed" feelings
experienced on these occasions, as well as the stage-fright of actors unused to
the stage. Mr. Bain apparently attributes these feelings to simple apprehension
or dread.
[29] `Essays on
Practical Education,' by Maria and R. L. Edgeworth, new edit. vol. ii. 1822, p.
38. Dr. Burgess (ibid. p. 187) insists strongly to the same effect.
[30] `Essays on
Practical Education,' by Maria and R. L. Edgeworth, new edit. vol. ii. 1822, p.
50.
[31] Bell, `Anatomy of
Expression,' p. 95. Burgess, as quoted below, ibid. p. 49. Gratiolet, De la
Phys. p. 94.
[32] On the authority
of Lady Mary Wortley Montague; see Burgess, ibid. p. 43.
[33] In England, Sir H.
Holland was, I believe, the first to consider the influence of mental attention
on various parts of the body, in his `Medical Notes and Reflections,' 1839 p.
64. This essay, much enlarged, was reprinted by Sir H. Holland in his `Chapters
on Mental Physiology,' 1858, p. 79, from which work I always quote. At nearly
the same time, as well as subsequently, Prof. Laycock discussed the same
subject: see `Edinburgh Medical and Surgical Journal,' 1839, July, pp. 17-22.
Also his `Treatise on the Nervous Diseases of Women,' 1840, p. 110; and `Mind
and Brain,' vol. ii. 1860, p. 327. Dr. Carpenter's views on mesmerism have a
nearly similar bearing. The great physiologist Müller treated (`Elements of
Physiology,' Eng. translat. vol. ii. pp. 937, 1085) of the influence of the
attention on the senses. Sir J. Paget discusses the influence of the mind on
the nutrition of parts, in his `Lectures on Surgical Pathology,' 1853, vol. i.
p. 39: 1 quote from the 3rd edit. revised by Prof. Turner, 1870, p. 28. See, also,
Gratiolet, De la Phys. pp. 283-287.
[34] De la Phys. p.
283.
[35] `Chapters on
Mental Physiology,' 1858, p. 111.
[36] `Mind find Brain,'
vol. ii. 1860, p. 327.
[37] `Chapters on
Mental Physiology,' pp. 104-106.
[38] See Gratiolet on
this subject, De la Phys. p. 287.
[39] Dr. J. Crichton
Browne, from his observations on the insane, is convinced that attention
directed for a prolonged period on any part or organ may ultimately influence
its capillary circulation and nutrition. He has given me some extraordinary
cases; one of these, which cannot here be related in full, refers to a married
woman fifty years of age, who laboured under the firm and long-continued
delusion that she was pregnant. When the expected period arrived, she acted
precisely as if she had been really delivered of a child, and seemed to suffer
extreme pain, so that the perspiration broke out on her forehead. The result
was that a state of things returned, continuing for three days, which had
ceased during the six previous years. Mr. Braid gives, in his `Magic,
Hypnotism,' &c., 1852, p. 95, and in his other works analogous cases, as
well as other facts showing the great influence of the will on the mammary
glands, even on one breast alone.
[40] Dr. Maudsley has
given (`The Physiology and Pathology of Mind,' 2nd edit. 1868, p. 105), on good
authority, some curious statements with respect to the improvement of the sense
of touch by practice and attention. It is remarkable that when this sense has
thus been rendered more acute at any point of the body, for instance, in a
finger, it is likewise improved at the corresponding point on the opposite side
of the body.
[41] The Lancet,' 1838,
pp. 39-40, as quoted by Prof. Laycock, `Nervous Diseases of Women,' 1840, p.
110.
[42] `Chapters on Mental
Physiology,' 1858, pp. 91-93.
[43] `Lectures on
Surgical Pathology,' 3rd edit. revised by Prof. Turner, 1870, pp. 28, 31.
[44] `Elements of
Physiology,' Eng. translat. vol. ii. p. 938.
[45] Prof. Laycock has
discussed this point in a very interesting manner. See his `Nervous Diseases of
Women,' 1840, p. 110.
[46] See, also, Mr.
Michael Foster, on the action of the vaso-motor system, in his interesting
Lecture before the royal Institution, as translated in the `Revue des Cours
Scientifiques,' Sept. 25, 1869, p. 683.
I HAVE now described,
to the best of my ability, the chief expressive actions in man, and in some few
of the lower animals. I have also attempted to explain the origin or
development of these actions through the three principles given in the first
chapter. The first of these principles is, that movements which are serviceable
in gratifying some desire, or in relieving some sensation, if often repeated,
become so habitual that they are performed, whether or not of any service,
whenever the same desire or sensation is felt, even in a very weak degree.
Our second principle is
that of antithesis. The habit of voluntarily performing opposite movements
under opposite impulses has become firmly established in us by the practice of
our whole lives. Hence, if certain actions have been regularly performed, in
accordance with our first principle, under a certain frame of mind, there will
be a strong and involuntary tendency to the performance of directly opposite
actions, whether or not these are of any use, under the excitement of an
opposite frame of mind.
Our third principle is
the direct action of the excited nervous system on the body, independently of
the will, and independently, in large part, of habit. Experience shows that
nerve-force is generated and set free whenever the cerebro-spinal system is
excited. The direction which this nerve-force follows is necessarily determined
by the lines of connection between the nerve-cells, with each other and with
various parts of the body. But the direction is likewise much influenced by
habit; inasmuch as nerve-force passes readily along accustomed channels.
The frantic and
senseless actions of an enraged man may be attributed in part to the undirected
flow of nerve-force, and in part to the effects of habit, for these actions often
vaguely represent the act of striking. They thus pass into gestures included
under our first principle; as when an indignant man unconsciously throws
himself into a fitting attitude for attacking his opponent, though without any
intention of making an actual attack. We see also the influence of habit in all
the emotions and sensations which are called exciting; for they have assumed
this character from having habitually led to energetic action; and action
affects, in an indirect manner, the respiratory and circulatory system; and the
latter reacts on the brain. Whenever these emotions or sensations are even
slightly felt by us, though they may not at the time lead to any exertion, our
whole system is nevertheless disturbed through the force of habit and
association. Other emotions and sensations are called depressing, because they
have not habitually led to energetic action, excepting just at first, as in the
case of extreme pain, fear, and grief, and they have ultimately caused complete
exhaustion; they are consequently expressed chiefly by negative signs and by
prostration. Again, there are other emotions, such as that of affection, which
do not commonly lead to action of any kind, and consequently are not exhibited
by any strongly marked outward signs. Affection indeed, in as far as it is a
pleasurable sensation, excites the ordinary signs of pleasure.
On the other hand, many
of the effects due to the excitement of the nervous system seem to be quite
independent of the flow of nerve-force along the channels which have been
rendered habitual by former exertions of the will. Such effects, which often
reveal the state of mind of the person thus affected, cannot at present be
explained; for instance, the change of colour in the hair from extreme terror or
grief,--the cold sweat and the trembling of the muscles from fear,--the
modified secretions of the intestinal canal,--and the failure of certain glands
to act.
Notwithstanding that
much remains unintelligible in our present subject, so many expressive movements
and actions can be explained to a certain extent through the above three
principles, that we may hope hereafter to see all explained by these or by
closely analogous principles.
Actions of all kinds,
if regularly accompanying any state of the mind, are at once recognized as
expressive. These may consist of movements of any part of the body, as the
wagging of a dog's tail, the shrugging of a man's shoulders, the erection of
the hair, the exudation of perspiration, the state of the capillary circulation,
laboured breathing, and the use of the vocal or other sound-- producing
instruments. Even insects express anger, terror, jealousy, and love by their
stridulation. With man the respiratory organs are of especial importance in
expression, not only in a direct, but in a still higher degree in an indirect
manner.
Few points are more
interesting in our present subject than the extraordinarily complex chain of
events which lead to certain expressive movements. Take, for instance, the
oblique eyebrows of a man suffering from grief or anxiety. When infants scream
loudly from hunger or pain, the circulation is affected, and the eyes tend to
become gorged with blood: consequently the muscles surrounding the eyes are
strongly contracted as a protection: this action, in the course of many
generations, has become firmly fixed and inherited: but when, with advancing
years and culture, the habit of screaming is partially repressed, the muscles
round the eyes still tend to contract, whenever even slight distress is felt:
of these muscles, the pyramidals of the nose are less under the control of the
will than are the others and their contraction can be checked only by that of
the central fasciæ of the frontal muscle: these latter fasciæ draw up the inner
ends of the eyebrows, and wrinkle the forehead in a peculiar manner, which we
instantly recognize as the expression of grief or anxiety. Slight movements,
such as these just described, or the scarcely perceptible drawing down of the
corners of the mouth, are the last remnants or rudiments of strongly marked and
intelligible movements. They are as full of significance to us in regard to
expression, as are ordinary rudiments to the naturalist in the classification
and genealogy of organic beings.
That the chief
expressive actions, exhibited by man and by the lower animals, are now innate
or inherited, --that is, have not been learnt by the individual,--is admitted
by every one. So little has learning or imitation to do with several of them
that they are from the earliest days and throughout life quite beyond our
control; for instance, the relaxation of the arteries of the skin in blushing,
and the increased action of the heart in anger. We may see children, only two
or three years old, and even those born blind, blushing from shame; and the
naked scalp of a very young infant reddens from passion. Infants scream from
pain directly after birth, and all their features then assume the same form as
during subsequent years. These facts alone suffice to show that many of our
most important expressions have not been learnt; but it is remarkable that
some, which are certainly innate, require practice in the individual, before
they are performed in a full and perfect manner; for instance, weeping and
laughing. The inheritance of most of our expressive actions explains the fact
that those born blind display them, as I hear from the Rev. R. H. Blair,
equally well with those gifted with eyesight. We can thus also understand the
fact that the young and the old of widely different races, both with man and
animals, express the same state of mind by the same movements.
We are so familiar with
the fact of young and old animals displaying their feelings in the same manner,
that we hardly perceive how remarkable it is that a young puppy should wag its
tail when pleased, depress its ears and uncover its canine teeth when
pretending to be savage, just like an old dog; or that a kitten should arch its
little back and erect its hair when frightened and angry, like an old cat.
When, however, we turn to less common gestures in ourselves, which we are
accustomed to look at as artificial or conventional,--such as shrugging the
shoulders, as a sign of impotence, or the raising the arms with open hands and
extended fingers, as a sign of wonder,--we feel perhaps too much surprise at
finding that they are innate. That these and some other gestures are inherited,
we may infer from their being performed by very young children, by those born
blind, and by the most widely distinct races of man. We should also bear in
mind that new and highly peculiar tricks, in association with certain states of
the mind, are known to have arisen in certain individuals, and to have been
afterwards transmitted to their offspring, in some cases, for more than one
generation.
Certain other gestures,
which seem to us so natural that we might easily imagine that they were innate,
apparently have been learnt like the words of a language. This seems to be the
case with the joining of the uplifted hands, and the turning up of the eyes, in
prayer. So it is with kissing as a mark of affection; but this is innate, in so
far as it depends on the pleasure derived from contact with a beloved person.
The evidence with respect to the inheritance of nodding and shaking the head,
as signs of affirmation and negation, is doubtful; for they are not universal,
yet seem too general to have been independently acquired by all the individuals
of so many races.
We will now consider
how far the will and consciousness have come into play in the development of
the various movements of expression. As far as we can judge, only a few
expressive movements, such as those just referred to, are learnt by each
individual; that is, were consciously and voluntarily performed during the
early years of life for some definite object, or in imitation of others, and
then became habitual. The far greater number of the movements of expression,
and all the more important ones, are, as we have seen, innate or inherited; and
such cannot be said to depend on the will of the individual. Nevertheless, all
those included under our first principle were at first voluntarily performed
for a definite object,--namely, to escape some danger, to relieve some
distress, or to gratify some desire. For instance, there can hardly be a doubt
that the animals which fight with their teeth, have acquired the habit of
drawing back their ears closely to their heads, when feeling savage, from their
progenitors having voluntarily acted in this manner in order to protect their
ears from being torn by their antagonists; for those animals which do not fight
with their teeth do not thus express a savage state of mind. We may infer as
highly probable that we ourselves have acquired the habit of contracting the
muscles round the eyes, whilst crying gently, that is, without the utterance of
any loud sound, from our progenitors, especially during infancy, having
experienced, during the act of screaming, an uncomfortable sensation in their
eyeballs. Again, some highly expressive movements result from the endeavour to
cheek or prevent other expressive movements; thus the obliquity of the eyebrows
and the drawing down of the corners of the mouth follow from the endeavour to
prevent a screaming- fit from coming on, or to cheek it after it has come on.
Here it is obvious that the consciousness and will must at first have come into
play; not that we are conscious in these or in other such cases what muscles
are brought into action, any more than when we perform the most ordinary
voluntary movements.
With respect to the
expressive movements due to the principle of antithesis, it is clear that the
will has intervened, though in a remote and indirect manner. So again with the
movements coming under our third principle; these, in as far as they are influenced
by nerve-force readily passing along habitual channels, have been determined by
former and repeated exertions of the will. The effects indirectly due to this
latter agency are often combined in a complex manner, through the force of
habit and association, with those directly resulting from the excitement of the
cerebro-spinal system. This seems to be the case with the increased action of
the heart under the influence of any strong emotion. When an animal erects its
hair, assumes a threatening attitude, and utters fierce sounds, in order to
terrify an enemy, we see a curious combination of movements which were
originally voluntary with those that are involuntary. It is, however, possible
that even strictly involuntary actions, such as the erection of the hair, may
have been affected by the mysterious power of the will.
Some expressive
movements may have arisen spontaneously, in association with certain states of
the mind, like the tricks lately referred to, and afterwards been inherited.
But I know of no evidence rendering this view probable.
The power of
communication between the members of the same tribe by means of language has
been of paramount importance in the development of man; and the force of
language is much aided by the expressive movements of the face and body. We
perceive this at once when we converse on an important subject with any person
whose face is concealed. Nevertheless there are no grounds, as far as I can
discover, for believing that any muscle has been developed or even modified
exclusively for the sake of expression. The vocal and other sound- producing
organs, by which various expressive noises are produced, seem to form a partial
exception; but I have elsewhere attempted to show that these organs were first
developed for sexual purposes, in order that one sex might call or charm the
other. Nor can I discover grounds for believing that any inherited movement,
which now serves as a means of expression, was at first voluntarily and
consciously performed for this special purpose,--like some of the gestures and
the finger-language used by the deaf and dumb. On the contrary, every true or
inherited movement of expression seems to have had some natural and independent
origin. But when once acquired, such movements may be voluntarily and
consciously employed as a means of communication. Even infants, if carefully
attended to, find out at a very early age that their screaming brings relief,
and they soon voluntarily practise it. We may frequently see a person
voluntarily raising his eyebrows to express surprise, or smiling to express
pretended satisfaction and acquiescence. A man often wishes to make certain
gestures conspicuous or demonstrative, and will raise his extended arms with
widely opened fingers above his head, to show astonishment, or lift his
shoulders to his ears, to show that he cannot or will not do something. The
tendency to such movements will be strengthened or increased by their being
thus voluntarily and repeatedly performed; and the effects may be inherited.
It is perhaps worth
consideration whether movements at first used only by one or a few individuals
to express a certain state of mind may not sometimes have spread to others, and
ultimately have become universal, through the power of conscious and
unconscious imitation. That there exists in man a strong tendency to imitation,
independently of the conscious will, is certain. This is exhibited in the most
extraordinary manner in certain brain diseases, especially at the commencement
of inflammatory softening of the brain, and has been called the "echo
sign." Patients thus affected imitate, without understanding every absurd
gesture which is made, and every word which is uttered near them, even in a
foreign language.[1] In the case of animals, the jackal and wolf have learnt
under confinement to imitate the barking of the dog. How the barking of the
dog, which serves to express various emotions and desires, and which is so
remarkable from having been acquired since the animal was domesticated, and
from being inherited in different degrees by different breeds, was first learnt
we do not know; but may we not suspect that imitation has had something to do
with its acquisition, owing to dogs having long lived in strict association
with so loquacious an animal as man?
In the course of the
foregoing remarks and throughout this volume, I have often felt much difficulty
about the proper application of the terms, will, consciousness, and intention.
Actions, which were at first voluntary, soon became habitual, and at last hereditary,
and may then be performed even in opposition to the will. Although they often
reveal the state of the mind, this result was not at first either intended or
expected. Even such words as that "certain movements serve as a means of
expression" are apt to mislead, as they imply that this was their primary
purpose or object. This, however, seems rarely or never to have been the case;
the movements having been at first either of some direct use, or the indirect
effect of the excited state of the sensorium. An infant may scream either
intentionally or instinctively to show that it wants food; but it has no wish
or intention to draw its features into the peculiar form which so plainly
indicates misery; yet some of the most characteristic expressions exhibited by
man are derived from the act of screaming, as has been explained.
Although most of our
expressive actions are innate or instinctive, as is admitted by everyone, it is
a different question whether we have any instinctive power of recognizing them.
This has generally been assumed to be the case; but the assumption has been
strongly controverted by M. Lemoine.[2] Monkeys soon learn to distinguish, not
only the tones of voice of their masters, but the expression of their faces, as
is asserted by a careful observer.[3] Dogs well know the difference between
caressing and threatening gestures or tones; and they seem to recognize a
compassionate tone. But as far as I can make out, after repeated trials, they
do not understand any movement confined to the features, excepting a smile or
laugh; and this they appear, at least in some cases, to recognize. This limited
amount of knowledge has probably been gained, both by monkeys and dogs, through
their associating harsh or kind treatment with our actions; and the knowledge
certainly is not instinctive. Children, no doubt, would soon learn the
movements of expression in their elders in the same manner as animals learn
those of man. Moreover, when a child cries or laughs, he knows in a general
manner what he is doing and what he feels; so that a very small exertion of
reason would tell him what crying or laughing meant in others. But the question
is, do our children acquire their knowledge of expression solely by experience
through the power of association and reason?
As most of the
movements of expression must have been gradually acquired, afterwards becoming
instinctive, there seems to be some degree of à priori probability that their
recognition would likewise have become instinctive. There is, at least, no
greater difficulty in believing this than in admitting that, when a female
quadruped first bears young, she knows the cry of distress of her offspring, or
than in admitting that many animals instinctively recognize and fear their
enemies; and of both these statements there can be no reasonable doubt. It is
however extremely difficult to prove that our children instinctively recognize
any expression. I attended to this point in my first-born infant, who could not
have learnt anything by associating with other children, and I was convinced
that he understood a smile and received pleasure from seeing one, answering it
by another, at much too early an age to have learnt anything by experience.
When this child was about four months old, I made in his presence many odd noises
and strange grimaces, and tried to look savage; but the noises, if not too
loud, as well as the grimaces, were all taken as good jokes; and I attributed
this at the time to their being preceded or accompanied by smiles. When five
months old, he seemed to understand a compassionate, expression and tone of
voice. When a few days over six months old, his nurse pretended to cry, and I
saw that his face instantly assumed a melancholy expression, with the corners
of the mouth strongly depressed; now this child could rarely have seen any
other child crying, and never a grown-up person crying, and I should doubt
whether at so early an age he could have reasoned on the subject. Therefore it
seems to me that an innate feeling must have told him that the pretended crying
of his nurse expressed grief; and this through the instinct of sympathy excited
grief in him.
M. Lemoine argues that,
if man possessed an innate knowledge of expression, authors and artists would
not have found it so difficult, as is notoriously the case, to describe and
depict the characteristic signs of each particular state of mind. But this does
not seem to me a valid argument. We may actually behold the expression changing
in an unmistakable manner in a man or animal, and yet be quite unable, as I
know from experience, to analyse the nature of the change. In the two
photographs given by Duchenne of the same old man (Plate III. figs. 5 and 6),
almost every one recognized that the one represented a true, and the other a
false smile; but I have found it very difficult to decide in what the whole
amount of difference consists. It has often struck me as a curious fact that so
many shades of expression are instantly recognized without any conscious
process of analysis on our part. No one, I believe, can clearly describe a
sullen or sly expression; yet many observers are unanimous that these
expressions can be recognized in the various races of man. Almost everyone to
whom I showed Duchenne's photograph of the young man with oblique eyebrows
(Plate II. fig. 2) at once declared that it expressed grief or some such
feeling; yet probably not one of these persons, or one out of a thousand
persons, could beforehand have told anything precise about the obliquity of the
eyebrows with their inner ends puckered, or about the rectangular furrows on
the forehead. So it is with many other expressions, of which I have had
practical experience in the trouble requisite in instructing others what points
to observe. If, then, great ignorance of details does not prevent our
recognizing with certainty and promptitude various expressions, I do not see
how this ignorance can be advanced as an argument that our knowledge, though
vague and general, is not innate.
I have endeavoured to
show in considerable detail that all the chief expressions exhibited by man are
the same throughout the world. This fact is interesting, as it affords a new
argument in favour of the several races being descended from a single
parent-stock, which must have been almost completely human in structure, and to
a large extent in mind, before the period at which the races diverged from each
other. No doubt similar structures, adapted for the same purpose, have often
been independently acquired through variation and natural selection by distinct
species; but this view will not explain close similarity between distinct
species in a multitude of unimportant details. Now if we bear in mind the
numerous points of structure having no relation to expression, in which all the
races of man closely agree, and then add to them the numerous points, some of
the highest importance and many of the most trifling value, on which the
movements of expression directly or indirectly depend, it seems to me
improbable in the highest degree that so much similarity, or rather identity of
structure, could have been acquired by independent means. Yet this must have
been the case if the races of man are descended from several aboriginally
distinct species. It is far more probable that the many points of close
similarity in the various races are due to inheritance from a single
parent-form, which had already assumed a human character.
It is a curious, though
perhaps an idle speculation, how early in the long line of our progenitors the
various expressive movements, now exhibited by man, were successively acquired.
The following remarks will at least serve to recall some of the chief points
discussed in this volume. We may confidently believe that laughter, as a sign
of pleasure or enjoyment, was practised by our progenitors long before they
deserved to be called human; for very many kinds of monkeys, when pleased,
utter a reiterated sound, clearly analogous to our laughter, often accompanied
by vibratory movements of their jaws or lips, with the corners of the mouth
drawn backwards and upwards, by the wrinkling of the cheeks, and even by the
brightening of the eyes.
We may likewise infer
that fear was expressed from an extremely remote period, in almost the same
manner as it now is by man; namely, by trembling, the erection of the hair,
cold perspiration, pallor, widely opened eyes, the relaxation of most of the
muscles, and by the whole body cowering downwards or held motionless.
Suffering, if great,
will from the first have caused screams or groans to be uttered, the body to be
contorted, and the teeth to be ground together. But our progenitors will not
have exhibited those highly expressive movements of the features which
accompany screaming and crying until their circulatory and respiratory organs,
and the muscles surrounding the eyes, had acquired their present structure. The
shedding of tears appears to have originated through reflex action from the
spasmodic contraction of the eyelids, together perhaps with the eyeballs
becoming gorged with blood during the act of screaming. Therefore weeping
probably came on rather late in the line of our descent; and this conclusion
agrees with the fact that our nearest allies, the anthropomorphous apes, do not
weep. But we must here exercise some caution, for as certain monkeys, which are
not closely related to man, weep, this habit might have been developed long ago
in a sub-branch of the group from which man is derived. Our early progenitors,
when suffering from grief or anxiety, would not have made their eyebrows
oblique, or have drawn down the corners of their mouth, until they had acquired
the habit of endeavouring to restrain their screams. The expression, therefore,
of grief and anxiety is eminently human.
Rage will have been
expressed at a very early period by threatening or frantic gestures, by the
reddening of the skin, and by glaring eyes, but not by frowning. For the habit
of frowning seems to have been acquired chiefly from the corrugators being the
first muscles to contract round the eyes, whenever during infancy pain, anger,
or distress is felt, and there consequently is a near approach to screaming;
and partly from a frown serving as a shade in difficult and intent vision. It
seems probable that this shading action would not have become habitual until
man had assumed a completely upright position, for monkeys do not frown when
exposed to a glaring light. Our early progenitors, when enraged, would probably
have exposed their teeth more freely than does man, even when giving full vent
to his rage, as with the insane. We may, also, feel almost certain that they
would have protruded their lips, when sulky or disappointed, in a greater
degree than is the case with our own children, or even with the children of
existing savage races.
Our early progenitors,
when indignant or moderately angry, would not have held their heads erect,
opened their chests, squared their shoulders, and clenched their fists, until
they had acquired the ordinary carriage and upright attitude of man, and had
learnt to fight with their fists or clubs. Until this period had arrived the
antithetical gesture of shrugging the shoulders, as a sign of impotence or of
patience, would not have been developed. From the same reason astonishment
would not then have been expressed by raising the arms with open hands and
extended fingers. Nor, judging from the actions of monkeys, would astonishment
have been exhibited by a widely opened mouth; but the eyes would have been
opened and the eyebrows arched. Disgust would have been shown at a very early
period by movements round the mouth, like those of vomiting,--that is, if the
view which I have suggested respecting the source of the expression is correct,
namely, that our progenitors had the power, and used it, of voluntarily and
quickly rejecting any food from their stomachs which they disliked. But the
more refined manner of showing contempt or disdain, by lowering the eyelids, or
turning away the eyes and face, as if the despised person were not worth
looking at, would not probably have been acquired until a much later period.
Of all expressions,
blushing seems to be the most strictly human; yet it is common to all or nearly
all the races of man, whether or not any change of colour is visible in their
skin. The relaxation of the small arteries of the surface, on which blushing depends,
seems to have primarily resulted from earnest attention directed to the
appearance of our own persons, especially of our faces, aided by habit,
inheritance, and the ready flow of nerve-force along accustomed channels; and
afterwards to have been extended by the power of association to self-attention
directed to moral conduct. It can hardly be doubted that many animals are
capable of appreciating beautiful colours and even forms, as is shown by the
pains which the individuals of one sex take in displaying their beauty before
those of the opposite sex. But it does not seem possible that any animal, until
its mental powers had been developed to an equal or nearly equal degree with
those of man, would have closely considered and been sensitive about its own
personal appearance. Therefore we may conclude that blushing originated at a
very late period in the long line of our descent.
From the various facts
just alluded to, and given in the course of this volume, it follows that, if
the structure of our organs of respiration and circulation had differed in only
a slight degree from the state in which they now exist, most of our expressions
would have been wonderfully different. A very slight change in the course of
the arteries and veins which run to the head, would probably have prevented the
blood from accumulating in our eyeballs during violent expiration; for this
occurs in extremely few quadrupeds. In this case we should not have displayed
some of our most characteristic expressions. If man had breathed water by the
aid of external branchiæ (though the idea is hardly conceivable), instead of
air through his mouth and nostrils, his features would not have expressed his
feelings much more efficiently than now do his hands or limbs. Rage and
disgust, however, would still have been shown by movements about the lips and
mouth, and the eyes would have become brighter or duller according to the state
of the circulation. If our ears had remained movable, their movements would
have been highly expressive, as is the case with all the animals which fight
with their teeth; and we may infer that our early progenitors thus fought, as
we still uncover the canine tooth on one side when we sneer at or defy any one,
and we uncover all our teeth when furiously enraged.
The movements of
expression in the face and body, whatever their origin may have been, are in
themselves of much importance for our welfare. They serve as the first means of
communication between the mother and her infant; she smiles approval, and thus
encourages her child on the right path, or frowns disapproval. We readily
perceive sympathy in others by their expression; our sufferings are thus
mitigated and our pleasures increased; and mutual good feeling is thus
strengthened. The movements of expression give vividness and energy to our
spoken words. They reveal the thoughts and intentions of others more truly than
do words, which may be falsified. Whatever amount of truth the so-called
science of physiognomy may contain, appears to depend, as Haller long ago
remarked,[4] on different persons bringing into frequent use different facial
muscles, according to their dispositions; the development of these muscles
being perhaps thus increased, and the lines or furrows on the face, due to
their habitual contraction, being thus rendered deeper and more conspicuous.
The free expression by outward signs of an emotion intensifies it. On the other
hand, the repression, as far as this is possible, of all outward signs softens
our emotions.[5] He who gives way to violent gestures will increase his rage;
he who does not control the signs of fear will experience fear in a greater
degree; and he who remains passive when overwhelmed with grief loses his best
chance of recovering elasticity of mind. These results follow partly from the
intimate relation which exists between almost all the emotions and their
outward manifestations; and partly from the direct influence of exertion on the
heart, and consequently on the brain. Even the simulation of an emotion tends
to arouse it in our minds. Shakespeare, who from his wonderful knowledge of the
human mind ought to be an excellent judge, says:-- Is it not monstrous that
this player here, But in a fiction, in a dream of passion, Could force his soul
so to his own conceit, That, from her working, all his visage wann'd; Tears in
his eyes, distraction in 's aspect, A broken voice, and his whole function
suiting With forms to his conceit? And all for nothing!
Hamlet, act ii. sc. 2.
We have seen that the
study of the theory of expression confirms to a certain limited extent the
conclusion that man is derived from some lower animal form, and supports the
belief of the specific or sub- specific unity of the several races; but as far
as my judgment serves, such confirmation was hardly needed. We have also seen
that expression in itself, or the language of the emotions, as it has sometimes
been called, is certainly of importance for the welfare of mankind. To
understand, as far as possible, the source or origin of the various expressions
which may be hourly seen on the faces of the men around us, not to mention our
domesticated animals, ought to possess much interest for us. From these several
causes, we may conclude that the philosophy of our subject has well deserved
the attention which it has already received from several excellent observers,
and that it deserves still further attention, especially from any able
physiologist.
[1] See the interesting
facts given by Dr. Bateman on `Aphasia,' 1870, p. 110.
[2] `La Physionomie et
la Parole,' 1865, pp. 103, 118.
[3] Rengger,
`Naturgeschichte der Säugethiere von Paraguay,' 1830, s. 55.
[4] Quoted by Moreau,
in his edition of Lavater, 1820, tom. iv. p. 211.
[5] Gratiolet (`De la
Physionomie,' 1865, p. 66) insists on the truth of this conclusion.
251>