The Hand Phrenologically Considered 5

The Hand Phrenologically Considered 5

Upon another occasion, from a careful consideration of the form and

size of a toe found in the Palatinate, near Eppelsheim, Cuvier was able

to determine that the animal to which it belonged was of the edentate

tribe of _Pangolins_. It was from an examination of the hand that

Cuvier decided upon the nature of the _Pterodactylus_. This curious

animal partook of the nature of both the reptile and the bird. Like

the bird, it was furnished with a long neck and a horny beak, but in

its jaws and teeth it resembled the crocodile. It had not, however,

like the bird, feathered wings without fingers to strengthen them, nor

had it a wing in which the thumb alone is free, like that of the bat.

Instead of the bony pieces of all the fingers being equally prolonged,

the second finger only was extended to a great length, and from it the

wing spread out, the other fingers being short and furnished with nails

like the toes of ordinary animals. Collini, its discoverer, supposed it

to be of marine origin; Soemmerring contended that it was a mammal; but

its true place in the animal series was first assigned to it by Cuvier,

who has satisfactorily shewn that it is in fact intermediate between a

bird and a reptile.

 

A knowledge of the form of the extremities of animals has been of great

service to palæontology in another way—in proving the existence of

certain species of animals at given periods of the earth’s formation,

from the print of their footsteps left upon the sand or other

material of the strata while it was yet in a soft state. Such traces

were first observed by Dr. Duncan in Dumfries-shire. On examining a

sandstone quarry, he found these prints not on one only, but on several

successive layers of the stone; so that they must have been made at

periods distant from each other. Similar impressions have been since

observed in the Forest marble-beds near Bath, at Hessburg in Saxony, in

the State of Connecticut, and in some other parts of the world.

 

“The marks found in Dumfries-shire, of which there were as many as

twenty-four upon a single slab, formed as it were a regular track,

with six distinct repetitions of each foot, the fore and hind feet

having left different impressions, and even the marks of the claws

being discernible. They appear to have been made by some animal of the

tortoise kind. At Hessburg the impressions were discovered in quarries

of grey and red sandstone alternating; and the marks were both larger

and more distinct than those found in Scotland. In one the hind foot

measured twelve inches in length, and the fore foot always appeared

much smaller than the hind. From this circumstance, and from the

distance between the two being only fourteen inches, it is conjectured

that the animal was a marsupial like the kangaroo, and it has been

termed by Dr. Kaup _Chirotherium_, from the supposed resemblance of the

four toes and turned-out thumb to a hand. In the State of Connecticut,

near Northampton, footsteps differing exceedingly in size have been

found in inclined strata of sandstone. They were evidently made before

it assumed its present position. The marks are always in pairs, and the

tracts cross each other like those of ducks on the margin of a muddy

pond. One is of the length of fifteen or sixteen inches, and a feathery

spur or appendage appears to have been attached to the heel, eight or

nine inches long. The distance between the steps is proportioned to

their length, but in every case the pace appears to have been longer

than that of the existing species of birds to which they approach

nearest—the ostrich, and the animal must consequently have been

proportionably larger. How much larger he was than the ostrich may be

gathered from this, that the large African ostrich has only a foot ten

inches long, less than two-thirds that of this bird, and yet stands

nine feet high. These proportions would give a height of fourteen feet

to the extinct animal.”[4]

 

The characters afforded by the foot have recently enabled Mr.

Strickland to determine that the dodo, a bird now extinct, is not

related either to the gallinaceous birds,—the vulture or the ostriches

as some have conjectured,—but is closely allied to the pigeons.

 

From this cursory examination of the animal world we may gather the

important conclusion, that from the structure of an extremity we may

obtain a complete insight into the entire organisation of an animal;

and thus the paws furnished with sharp retractile claws of the lion

indicate at once to a naturalist its strong teeth, its powerful

jaws, and its muscular strength of limb; while from the cleft foot

of the cow, the complicated structure of its stomach, the definite

peculiarities of its jaws, and its vegetable diet, may with equal

certainty be predicated.

 

Thus, as Paley justly observes, “In the swan, the web foot, the spoon

bill, the long neck, the thick down, the graminivorous stomach, have

all a relation to one another, inasmuch as they all concur in one

design, that of supplying the occasions of an aquatic fowl, floating

upon the surface of shallow parts of water, and seeking its food at

the bottom. Begin with any one of these peculiarities of structure, and

observe how the rest follow it. The web foot qualifies the bird for

swimming, the spoon bill enables it to graze. But how is an animal,

floating upon the surface of pools of water, to gaze at the bottom

except by the mediation of a long neck? And a long neck is accordingly

given to it. Again, a warm-blooded animal, which was to pass its life

upon water, required a defence against the coldness of that element.

Such a defence is furnished to the swan in the muff in which its body

is wrapped. But all this outward apparatus would have been in vain if

the intestinal system had not been suited to the digestion of vegetable

substances.”[5]

 

And, again, of the mole: “The form of the feet fixes the character of

the animal. They are so many shovels; they determine its action to

that of rooting in the ground; and every thing about its body agrees

with this destination. The cylindrical figure of the mole, as well as

the compactness of its form, arising from the terseness of its limbs,

proportionally lessens its labour; because, according to its bulk, it

thereby requires the least possible quantity of earth to be removed for

its progress. It has nearly the same structure of the face and jaws

as a swine, and the same office for them. The nose is sharp, slender,

tendinous, strong; with a pair of nerves going down to the end of it.

The plush covering, which, by the smoothness, closeness, and polish of

the short piles that compose it, rejects the adhesion of almost every

species of earth, defends the animal from cold and wet, and from the

impediment which it would experience by the mould sticking to its body.

From soils of all kind the little pioneer comes forth bright and clean.

Inhabiting dirt, it is of all animals the neatest.”

 

 

 

 

CHAPTER IV.

 

“Some animals have horns, some have hoofs, some talons,

some claws, some spurs and beaks; man hath none of all

these, but is weak and feeble, and sent unarmed into the

world. Why?—a hand, with reason to rise it, supplies the

place of all these.”—RAY.

 

FORM OF EXTREMITIES DIFFERS IN INDIVIDUALS OF THE SAME SPECIES.

 

 

Sir J. Barrow states of the Hottentot that there is not an animal among

the numbers that range the wilds of Africa, if he be at all acquainted

with it, the print of whose foot he cannot distinguish. The print of

any of his companions’ feet he would single out among a thousand.

That particular species of animals can be distinguished by their feet

appears, then, an undoubted fact; and it is not less true than that

modifications in the form of the extremities are met with among animals

of the same species. Thus the male frog is distinguished from the

female by the presence of a more fully-developed thumb and the addition

of a velvety, cushion-like substance to its outer surface, by means

of which he is enabled to grasp the latter more securely, and ensure

the fecundation of the eggs. The land-frog (_Hyla_) differs from the

common frog (_Rana_) in possessing a viscous disc at the extremity of

each toe, so that this animal can readily mount the branches of trees

in search of prey. The courage of the falcon is estimated by the form

and disposition of the wing feathers, and that of the fighting cock by

the conformation of his foot. But it is to the hand of man,—the emblem

of his vast superiority over all the lower animals, that we would more

particularly invite attention. The hand of man, like the appendages

to the trunk of animals, has a certain definite relation with his

whole organisation. As Sir C. Bell observes, “The possession of an

instrument like the hand implies that there must be a great part of the

organisation which strictly belongs to it concealed. The hand is not

a thing appended, or put on to the body, like an additional movement

in a watch; but a thousand intricate relations must be established

throughout the whole frame in connexion with it.”

 

The form of the hand, like that of the entire body, is materially

influenced by age, sex, and race; and it is not less affected by the

particular kind of organisation, the mental disposition, and the

temperament of the individual.

 

_Age._—In the minute germ, or embryo of a month, the form of the hand

resembles that of one of the lower animals. It puts on the appearance

rather of a respiratory organ than of an instrument of prehension,

and, being completely destitute of fingers, presents a great analogy

in form with the fin of a fish. As the little being increases in size,

the fingers become gradually developed. They at first appear as small

bud-like projections attached to the perfectly-formed palm. By degrees

the several pieces of the fingers become more and more elongated,

and at length attain their perfect length and shape; though, even at

birth, the relative size of the palm, compared with the fingers, is

considerably greater than in the adult. During infancy and childhood

the hand retains, to a certain extent, the same character, the hand

of the child being soft and thick, with a broad palm and short

rudimentary fingers. With the period of puberty it attains its perfect

developement, and acquires characters which it preserves throughout

manhood. As old age creeps on the hand loses its softness and pliancy,

it becomes hard and insensible, and its vigour, like that of the

mind, may be said to be gone. “Le cal de la main, presque toujours,

jette une ombre sur l’esprit,” says D’Arpentigny. Politics, science,

literature—whatever active intellectual pursuit the mind formerly

delighted in, commences at this period of life to lose its former

charm, to be succeeded by a love of quiet rural occupation. In the

language of the author just quoted, “It is when our stiffened hands,

become, as it were, ossified and nearly insensible, afford a faithful

image of our impoverished intelligence, that we are the most ruled by

this mania for agricultural pursuits.”

 

_Sex._—The sexes differ as much in the form of their hands as they

do in the figure of the skeleton, and in the general habit and

conformation of the entire body. As Carus observes, “He must be but a

superficial observer of mankind who could not at once recognise the sex

from a simple inspection of the hand. The hand of woman is smaller,

more delicate, and much more finely articulated than that of man; it

has a softer palm, and joints which are but slightly prominent. The

hand of man, on the contrary, is large, firm, and broad, is furnished

with strong projecting joints, and a hard wide palm, together with a

large thumb, with a strong convex ball or root.” Here, again, we find

the physical structure in harmony with the mental disposition—the firm,

strong, broad hand of man being indicative of his active, energetic,

reasoning mind; and the soft, narrow, delicate hand of woman,

symbolical of her sensitive, yielding, contemplative character.