which he recognised as the Sclavonic type. It is found in the east of Europe, mixed with the German type, occurring very frequently among the nations above mentioned, and also among the Russians and Austrians. It is unnecessary to enter into details on this part of the subject.

Among the Sclavonic nations, Dr Edwards includes only a portion of the Hungarians, chiefly those inhabiting a circular strip of territory, varying in width, on the frontier of Hungary. But the central part of Hungary is peopled by a nation speaking the Madgiar language, which is quite different from the Sclavonic Hungarian. This would lead us to conclude, without consulting history, that a foreign people had established themselves among the Sclavonians, who may possibly represent the Dacians, the earliest inhabitants of this part of Europe. But what was the crigin of the Madgjars? Dr Edwards has observed that many of those who speak the Madyiar language and pass for Madgiars, are of Sclavonic type. Supposing the Madgiars to have conquered Hungary, they would, from their political ascendency, have perpetuated their language ; while the Sclavonians, from their superiority.of number, would have perpetuated their type. But Dr Edwards has shewn, that another type exists in Hungary, and is quite peculiar. He found it by comparing those Hungarians who were not of Selavonic type. This new type corresponds accurately with the descriptions given by ancient authors of the Huns, who, in the fifth century, overran Hungary. The establishment of the Madgiars took place in the ninth century. This type, which Dr Edwards calls the Hun type, seems to him too abundantly diffused to have resulted from the Huns alone, whose empire in Hungary fell to pieces soon after the death of Attila, and who must have been greatly reduced in number by their constant wars. It has even been said that they were exterminated, which is improbable, but at all events their type must have been extended by some subsequent irruption of a similar race, probably the Madgiars. Now the tradition of the latter people is, that their chief, Arpad, was descended from Attila.

But further, the Hun type is Mongolian, and therefore we should trace the Huns to Asia. Now, De Guignes, in studying the races of the east of Asia, shows us a tribe called Hioungnou in their original seat, follows them to the westward, and finds them connecting themselves with the Finns, and establishing themselves in Hungary. Dr Edwards tells us, that the Finnish type is different, but that the Madgiar language is Finnish to a great extent, thus confirming the deductions of De Guignes, which were founded solely on historical considerations. The Hun or Mongol type, therefore, which is almost universal in the eastern half of Asia, is found in different parts of the west of that continent, in Russia, and in Hungary. The study of the languages of the people possessing this type connects them all with the Mongol race.

It is justly observed by Dr Edwards, that this correspondence in the results obtained by different means, adds greatly to their interest. “If,” says he, “ De Guignes, beginning in the east of Tartary, recognises the same people in their distant expeditions, and in their communications with the Finns, and follows them even into Hungary; on the other hand I recognise, in a part of the inhabitants of Hungary speaking a Finnish dialect, physical characters which prove their ancestors to have come from Eastern Asia."

Dr Edwards gives some very ingenious remarks on language, and particularly on pronunciation, as a natural character. He distinctly traces, on the authority of Mezzofante the celebrated linguist of Bologna, the resemblance of the dialects and especially the pronunciation of northern Italy to those of France, to the fact that in both countries the Latin language was imposed on a Gaulish tribe ; and shews that, as in the case of the English, the original tongue, (in this case Celtic), although lost, communicates a peculiar and recognisable accent to the language which has supplanted it. We shall not, however, dwell on this division of the subject, but rather offer a few remarks on that part of the work which more particularly interests us as phrenologists.

No one can read Dr Edwards's interesting statement without regretting that he had not the assistance of Phrenology, which would have doubled the interest and importance of his discoveries.

But, although not a phrenologist, we find him describing the characters drawn from the head and face as the most important, and laying great stress on the form of the head in all his types. We are therefore entitled to conclude, that where the type of a race appears pure, we shall find likewise the prevailing cerebral development of that race; and it is much to be desired that some of the many scientific men who have the opportunity, should endeavour to fill up the blank left by Dr Edwards. We should then see the national character as described in history illustrated by the development, while the identity of the race would be shown by the external characters or type.

While, therefore, we would offer our best thanks to Dr Edwards for this valuable contribution to the natural history of man, we earnestly hope to see the subject taken up, not only on a more extended scale, as Dr Edwards himself recommends, but also on phrenological principles.

7

ARTICLE II.

AN ESSAY ON THE TEMPERAMENTS. By Mr Daniel NOBLE,

Member of the Royal College of Surgeons in London. Read before the Members of the Manchester Phrenological Society, April 30. 1834. *

The doctrine of the temperaments has been variously considered, in different ages, and by different individuals. The ancients, with Hippocrates at their head, regarded the bodies of all the higher classes of animals as consisting of four elements, viz. of blood, of a watery fluid, and of two kinds of bile, yellow and black; and the temperament was defined according as each of these assumed elements had the predominance. The word temperament is derived from the Latin temperare, to mix, to temper; and, in the popular acceptation of the terin in modern times, it is used to denote the result of a mixture or tempering of all the qualities, bodily or mental, characteristic of the individual ; just as, by the ancients, it was employed to designate the kind of mixture in each animal body, of what were considered to be its elementary constituents. Hippocrates, in following up the views of his predecessors and contemporaries, established four genera of temperaments, which he denominated from the fluids whose excess he regarded as the cause of their existence :—first, the sanguine, produced by an undue predominance of the quantity of blood in the system ; next, the lymphatic, dependent upon an excess of the watery fluid in the various animal tissues ; third, the bilious or choleric, resulting from a surplus of the yellow bile; and, lastly, the atrabiliary, or melancholic, produced by an excess of the fancied elementary black bile. These respective peculiarities of temperament were considered to be associated with corresponding powers and dispositions ; and thus what in the present day we regard as the combined effect of temperament and cerebral organization, was attributed by the disciples of this school to the influence of the temperament only; the sanguine temperament, for instance, being considered to be associated with quickness of perception, tenacity of memory, a lively and luxuriant imagination, a disposition readily roused to anger but as easily appeased, and an undue attachment to the indulgence of sense ; and, in like man

; ner, each of the other temperaments was regarded as the cause

This essay, which we have taken the liberty slightly to compress, is in. serted not so much on account of any novelty in the author's viewe, as with the object of keeping alive the attention of phrenologists to the very important subject of the temperaments, and of stimulating to farther diligence those who have of late years been endeavouring to elucidate their origin and effects.. -ED.

of certain other mental characteristics. These views, in their main bearings, have continued in great favour with many physiologists even to the present day. In its popular acceptation, the word temperament is employed in a more extensive sense ; for we frequently hear the slightest peculiarity in individuals attributed to their temperament: thus the brave man is said to be of a courageous temperament; lazy people are said to be of an indolent temperament; individuals distinguished for warmth of feeling are described as being of an ardent temperament; persons of great muscular energy and agility are said to be of an athletic temperament, and so on.

It would appear from an attentive observation of facts, that the

powers of the mind, as well as the vegetative and mechanical functions of the system, are influenced, in a variety of ways, by the quality of their material organs; and whilst it would seem that mere native power of function is intimately dependent upon the character of the solid structures of the frame, it would appear that the activity of the functions, and more especially the cerebral, is intimately connected with the character of the fluids. No illustration is required by the members of this Society to enable them to appreciate the distinction between power and activity of any human faculty. We are all aware that, in respect to the muscular system, one man is exceedingly quick, restless, and vivacious, but unfit for energetic labour; while another is little disposed to exertion, tardy in his motions, but able, when set to work, to execute feats of strength which the first individual would attempt in vain. There is a perfect analogy, in this respect, between muscular power and all the other animal functions, including those of the brain and nervous system; and this difference is to be traced to variations in the character of the organs necessary for their manifestation. As a general rule, I think it may be stated that power is for the most part depend. ent on the quantity of the solid material of the organization, and activity upon the character of the Auids. I am aware that it may be objected, that it is a difficult and almost hopeless attempt, to point out the lines of demarcation—where the solid and where the fluid materials begin, end, or run into each other. My reply is, that we have here an objection to which the present state of our knowledge will not afford a complete or satisfactory answer ; but nevertheless, although, at present, we can receive but minute glimpses in our investigations of this subject, still we must avail ourselves of the lights we happen to possess, and not reject partial illumination because we cannot, at once, enjoy the full blaze of a meridian sun. For ordinary purposes, there can be no difficulty in specifying the solid and the fluid constituents of the body.

The temperaments are considered, by phrenologists, as fairly

divisible into four genera ; and the division is, to some extent, founded on the principle which guided Hippocrates in his classification. Spurzheiin regarded the activity of the mental powers as being modified by the influence of the sanguineous, lymphatic, and biliary fluids ; and by peculiarities in the excitability of the nervous system, probably dependent upon the existence of a nervous fluid, as supposed by many physiologists. He considered the lymphatic temperament as least, and the nervous as most, predisposing to cerebral activity, and in estimating, by physical signs, the mental characteristics of any individual, he never lost sight of the importance of the temperament. It is to be regret

. ted that Spurzheim's example, in this respect, has not been well followed by many of his disciples, who, in their phrenological manipulations, are all alive to the size of the organs, but almost totally neglect the circumstances affecting their quality. In consequence of this neglect, numerous errors have been fallen into.

As least favourable to functional activity, I shall first describe the characters and general results of the lymphatic temperament. This is considered to depend upon an undue predominance of the watery constituents of the various animal materials, as in the glandular, serous, and mucous secretions, and of the quantity of the serous portion of the blood. And as the various organs of the human frame, more particularly the brain, seem to act upon the application of stimuli, so it is considered, that, with the lymphatic temperament, the Auids of the body are of the least stimulating quality. The physical characteristics of this temperament are a softness of the fleshy parts, from undue repletion of the cellular tissue ; commonly a fairness though thickness of the skin ; the hair most usually of light, flasen, or sandy complexion; a plumpness of figure, but without expression; the pulse weak and slow; and a languor and want of energy in all the vital actions. Individuals of this temperament are generally remarkable for their aversion to both mental and corporal exercise ; and whatever be the native power in either of these respects, the deficiency of activity, in its exercise, will even operate as an unsurmountable barrier to the attainment of first rate excellence in any pursuit. Persons of the lymphatic temperament, with the highest mental power, will be surpassed in their qualifications for the common and extraordinary duties of life, by individuals of far less native strength of mind, but who, with a more favourable temperament and consequent love of exercise, have laid in larger stores of mental possessions. In drawing inferences, therefore, from combinations of development of the cerebral organs, the greatest possible caution should be observed when the temperament is lymphatic, as sometimes the activity of powerful organs will hardly have been induced, in the absence of strong external stimuli.