Hints to craniographers / by J. Aitken Meigs.

  • Meigs, James Aitken, 1829-1879.
Date:
[1858?]
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Hints to craniographers / by J. Aitken Meigs. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by The Royal College of Surgeons of England. The original may be consulted at The Royal College of Surgeons of England.

    1/6
    3 j Hints to Craniographers. BY J. AITKEN MEIGS, M. D Everywhere Ethnology, the youngest and most ambitious of the sciences, is at length beginning to receive that earnest attention which the grandeur, im- portance and acknowledged complexity of its problems demand. Treated at first as an eminently speculative and metaphysical study, it has come at length to be considered as amenable chiefly, if not entirely, to the purely scientific methods of research employed by the naturalist. Long ago, the Ethnology of the so-called philosophical school was simply a meagre Anthropology, made up almost wholly of certain national, psychologic phenomena of uncertain value and unknown relations. In the metaphysical systems of this school physical characters and the working formal® of the naturalist found no place. But the attempt to separate the phenomena of mind from the physical conditions with which they are constantly associated in nature, proved as barren in results, as it was irrational in conception. Anterior to the time of Linnceus the philosophy of man was everything, the science nothing. Of the latter, the great Swedish naturalist was himself the founder and first exponent. After Linnmus, came Buffon, Daubenton, Camper, Soemmering, Blumenbach, Zimmerman, and others, who, by regarding, and therefore treating man, as falling legitimately within the scope of the zoological method, attracted serious attention to the study of Anthropology as one of the natural sciences. The labors of these savants formed the foundation of this study, and gave it an impetus which is felt even at the present day. It must be confessed, however, that since the days of Blumenbach, in whose hands it received its more exact and scientific form, the progress of the study has been both slow and irregular; and the facts collected neither so extensive, nor for the most part so thoroughly and satisfactorily established as could be desired. Buflfon, Cuvier, Lawrence, Peron, Kombst, Davis, Wilson and others, have all, at different times, taken occasion to deplore and comment upon this evident neglect of an important investigation. Closely examined, the cause of this manifest neglect, and consequent slow pro- gress of the Ethnological branch of Anthropology, will be found to be two-fold. In the first place and for a long time, the study of man was by many entirely separated from that of the rest of creation. Barbangois, Marcel de Serres, Ray, Brisson, Pennant, Vicq d’Azyr, and other naturalists following Aristotle, the illustrious founder of philosophical natural history, have all in succession ignored the physical character of man, by excluding him in their classifications from the animal kingdom. Thus effectually isolated, he has been treated from a mental point of view only, and his zoological affinities and analogies com- pletely overlooked. Another class of observers, however, having a more com- prehensive conception of nature, and the unity of design which pervades it, have at length recognised the animality of man, and placed him accordingly among, and at the head, of the Mammalia. In the second place, the study has thus far been one of divided effort, under- taken by individuals who, at different times and in different places, widely separated from each other, have worked at and attempted to solve with varying .success, each his own favorite problem, with little or no aid from, or corres- pondence with others interested in, and studying the same specialty. In a word, there has been little or no combination, or regularly systemized effort among the students of Ethnology. Attempts, it is true, have not been wanting to establish such combinations, and appeals have been made to the scientific and general public, from time to time, by enthusiastic archeologists and ethnologists, in behalf of some of the objects of their respective sciences. As early as 1817., Dr. Hodgkin, in an Essay on the Promotion of Civilization, pointed out the importance of preserving from annihilation the uncivilized races of men, that their physical characters, tradi- tions, &c., might be carefully studied. In 1837, an Aborigines Protection Society