per, are stationed in a row in the ftreet to conduct the conqueror, with the head in his hand, to his own houfe, where he is received by all the women prefent, who dance around him. When he approaches the door, he finds, where the gongs ceale, a cafhion placed for him, on which he fits down, and where the head is taken from him by the women. The fortunate head hunter receives prefents from all the company, who dance and afterward partake of a repast. At the fame time fome food is thrust into the mouth of the head, and a little drink is poured into it; after which it is hung up as a perpetual trophy of victory. Thefe people, however, before they undertake expeditions of this kind in queft of Banjerele heads, always endeavour to deduce fome omen of good or bad fortune from the flight of a kind of hawk, called Falco Milvus. With this view, they entice the bird to perch on the ground, by frewing rice on it, and by other means; and if he wheels round when he rifes, and difappears in the clouds, or flies toward that quarter to which they intend to proceed, they confider it as a fign of good fortune, and they fet out with fresh courage: but if the bird directs its flight toward a quarter oppofite to that to which they wish to go, they defer the expedition till a more favourable opportunity. It often happens, that they muft wait two or three days before fuch a feathered prophet appears, to inform them, when they are to expect good fortune. The Biadjoos have carcely any form of government, and no written laws. If a perfon is accused of theft, and if fufficient proof cannot be adduced against him, the culprit and the accufer are carried before one of the oldest inhabitants. An earthen pot with ashes and water is placed on the ground, and a bit of wood, on which are depofited two small copper buttons, is laid across the pot. After an oath has been administered to eacli of the parties, the bit of wood is turned round in fuch a manner that the buttons fall into the water; the accufed and the accufer must then each draw one of the buttons from it, and be whofe button appears as if fcoured, and rendered white by the athes, gains the process. It is faid, that the Biadjpos have fome idea of a Supreme Being, to whom they addrefs prayers under the name of Dewatta; and, as they believe, that this Dewatta not only created, but fill preserves and rules the world, they requeft him to grant them happiness and profperity. Refpecting the notions which they entertain of this deity, and the particular worship they pay to him, I can give no further account. If we may judge from the character of these people, their deity must be a gloomy and revengeful being: no nation on the earth have a greater propensity to murder and revenge. When a married woman commits adultery, and is difcovered by her husband, the latter never makes any attempt against the adulterer, but contents himfelf with putting to death two or three of his flaves; after which he imagines himself freed from all fhame. The woman, on the other hand, is punished merely with words, but fometimes with blows. Do not a people, whofe conduct is regulated by fach laws, deferve pity? Revenge, fuperftition, avarice, and a fpirit of plundering, are often among civilifed as well as uncivilifed nations the ftrongest incitements to acts of cruelty and murder: but the Biadjoo, who attacks only poor defenceless beings, and carries about their heads. as trophies of his courage; who never attacks his enemy himself, but endea vours to be avenged by putting to death innocent flaves, certainly furpaffes in cruelty the ravenous animal that devours others only to appeafe* its hunger. Let us hope, for the honour of humanity, that a good deal in this imperfect relation may be exaggerated. The Biadjoos are unacquainted with polygamy. When a man wishes to feparate from his wife, in confequence of her having been guilty of fome crime, he retains her clothes and ornaments, and causes her to pay befides, a fine amounting to thirty rials. After this, each party may again marry. THE 1 Thefe people acknowledge the fultan of Banjer as their fovereign, and they also pay him yearly a fmall tribute in gold duft, of the value of twenty rials. The principal part of the information refpe&ting these people was obtained from a Mr Palm, who made a journey from Pontiana to Landac in the year 1779, on bufinefs of the Dutch Eaft- India company, and who, on this occafion, penetrated a confiderable way into the country. HISTORICAL ACCOUNT OF PHYSIOGNOMY. They'll find i' the phyfiognomies HE following appears to us a more rational and fuccinct account of the science of phyfiognomy than has yet appeared-a fcience which, though defpifed by fome, and perhaps overrated by others, is too natural to mankind not to deferve attention. It certainly occupied much of the attention of ancient philofophers, but fince the revival of learning has been in a great degree difregarded. Till of late it has feldom in modern times been mentioned, except in conjunction with the exploded arts of magic, alchemy, and judicial aftrology. Within the two laft centuries, no doubt, the bounds of human knowledge have been greatly extended by means of the patient purfuit of fact and experiment, inftead of the hafty adoption of conjecture and hypothefis. We have certainly discovered many of the ancient fyftems to be merely creatures of imagination. Perhaps, however, in fome inftances, we have decided too rapidly, and rejected real knowledge, which we would have found it tedious and troublesome to acquire. Such has been the fate of the fcience of phyfiognomy; which certainly merits to be confidered in a light very different from alchemy, Ed. Mag. June 1800. HUDIBRAS. and thofe other fanciful ftudies with which it had accidentally been coupled. The work lately published by M. Lavater on the subject has indeed excited attention, and may perhaps tend to replace phyfiognomy in that rank in the circle of the fciences to which it seems to be entitled. 3 L It does not appear that the an cients extended the compass of phyfiognomy beyond man, or at least animated nature. But the ftudy of that art was revived in the middle ages, when milled probably by the comprehenfiveness of the etymological meaning of the word, or incited by the prevalent tafte for the marvellous, thofe who treated of the fubject, ftretched the range of their fpeculation far beyond the ancient limits. The extenfion of the fignification of the term was adopted univerfally by thofe naturalifts, who admitted the theory of fignatures; and phyfiognomy came thus to mean, the knowledge of the internal properties of any corporeal exiftence from the external appearance." Boyle too adopts this extenfive fignification, which indeed feems to have been at one time the ufual acceptation of the word, and is humoroufly alluded to in the two lines from Hudig · Hudibras, prefixed to this paper. At prefent, phyfiognomy feems to mean no more than knowledge of the moral character, and extent of intellectual powers of human beings, from their external appearance and manners.' In the Berlin Tranfactions for the years 1769 and 1770, there appears a long controverfial difcuffion on the fubject of the definition of phyfiognomy, between M. Pernetty and M. le Cat, two modern authors of fome note. Pernetty contends, that all knowledge whatever is phy. fiognomy; Le Cat confines the fubject to the human face. Neither feems to have hit the medium of truth. Soon after the celebrated book of Lavater appeared. He indeed defines phyfiognomy to be, the art of difcovering the interior of man, by means of his exterior:' but in different paffages of his work, he evidently favours the extended fignification of Pernetty. This work gave occafion to M. Formey's attack upon the science itself, in the fame Berlin Tranfactions, for 1775- Formey ftrenuously controverts the extent affigned by Lavater, to his favourite fcience. Before the era of Pythagoras, the Greeks had little or no fcience, and of courfe could not be fcientifical phyfiognomifts. Phyfiognomy, however, was much cultivated in Egypt and India; and from thefe countries the fage of Samos probably introduced the rudiments of this fcience, as he did those of many others, generally deemed more important, into Greece. In the time of Socrates, it appears even to have been adopted as a pro feffion. Of this the well-known anecdote of the decifion of Zopyrus, on the real character of Socrates himself, judging from his countenance, is fufficient evidence. Plato mentions the fubject; and by Ariftotle it is formally treated of in a book allotted to the purpose. It may be worth while to give a brief outline of Ariftotle's fentiments. on this fubje&t. Phyfiognomy, he in substance obferves, has been treated of in three ways: fome philofophers claffed ani mals into genera, and afcribed to each genus a certain mental difpofition, correfponding to their corporeal appearance. Others made a further dif tinction of dividing the genera into fpecies. Among men, for instance, they diftinguished the Thracians, the Scythians, the Egyptians, and whatever nations were ftrikingly different in manners and habits, to whom ac cordingly they affigned the diftinctive phyfiognomical characteristics. A third fet of phyfiognomifts judged of the actions and manners of the individual, and prefumed that certain manners proceeded from certain difpofitions. But the method of treating the fubject adopted by Ariftotle himfelf was this: a peculiar form of body is invariably accompanied by a peculiar difpofition of mind: a human intelle&t is never found in the corporeal form of a beaft. The mind and body reciprocally affect each other; thus, in intoxication and mania, the mind exhibits the affections of the body; and in fear, joy, &c. the body difplays the affections of the mind. From fuch facts he argues, that when in man a particular bodily character appears, which by prior experience and obfervation has been found uniformly accompanied by a certain mental indifpofition, with which therefore it must have been neceffarily connected, we are intitled in all fuch cafes to infer the difpofition from the appearance. Our obfervations, he conceives, may be drawn from other animals as well as from men; for as a lion poffeffes one bodily form and mental character, a hare another, the corporeal characteristics of the lion, fuch as ftrong hair, deep voice, large extremities, difcernible in a human creature, de note note the ftrength and character of that noble animal; while the flender extremities, foft down, and other features of the hare, visible in a man, betray the mental character of that pufillanimous creature. Upon this principle, Ariftotle treats of the corporeal features of man, and the correspondent difpofitions, fo far as obferved: he illuftrates them by the analogy just mentioned, and in fome inftances attempts to account for them by phyfiological reafoning. Next after Ariftotle, his difciple and fucceffor Theophraftus, would deserve to be particularly mentioned as a writer on the subject in question. His ethic characters, a fingular and entertaining performance, compofed at the age of ninety-nine, form a diftinct treatise on a most important branch of phyfiognomy, the phyfiognomy of manners. The accuracy of obfervation and liveliness of defcription displayed in this work will preferve it high in claffical rank, while the fcience of man and the prominent characteristics of human fociety continue to be objects of attention. Polemon of Athens, Adamantius the fophift, and feveral others, wrote on the fubject about the fame period. In 1780, there was published a collection of all the Greek authors on phyfiognomy. From the number of thefe authors, it appears that the fcience was much cultivated in Greece; but the profeffors feem foon to have connected it with fomething of the marvellous. The novitiates of the Pythagorean fchool were fubjected to the phyfiognomic obfervation of their teachers, and it is probable the first phyfiognomifts by profeffion a mong the Greeks were of this fect. From the period of which we have been treating, to the clofe of the Roman republic, nothing worthy of remark occurs in the literary history of phyfiognomy. Cicero appears to have been peculiarly attached to the fci ence. In his oration against Pifo, and in that in favour of Rofcius, the reader will at the fame time perceive in what manner the orator employs phyfiognomy to his purposes, and find a curious inftance of the ancient manner of oratorical abuse. That in the Roman empire the fcience was practifed as a profeffion, ample evidence appears in the writings of the authors juft mentioned. Suetonius, for inftance, in his life of Titus, mentions that Narciffus employed a phyfiognomift to examine the features of Britannicus, who predicted that Britannicus would not fucceed, but that the empire would devolve on Titus. The science of phyfiognomy fhared the fame fate with all others, when the Roman empire was overthrown by the northern barbarians. About the beginning of the fixteenth century, it began to be again noticed. From that time, till the clofe of the feventeenth, it was one of the most fashionable studies. Within that space have appeared almost all the approved modern authors on the fubject. In every period of the hiftory of literature, there may eafily be marked a prevalence of particular ftudies. In the early period, for inftance, of Grecian literature, mythological morality claimed the chief attention of the philofophers. In the more advanced ftate of learning in Greece and Rome, poetry, hiftory, and oratory, held the pre-eminence. Under the later emperors, and for fome time afterward, the hiftory of theclogical controverfies occupied the greatest part of the works of the learned. Next fucceeded metaphyfics, and metaphyfical theology. Thefe gave place to alchemy, magic, judicial aftrology, the doctrine of fignatures and fympathies, the myftic, theofophic, and Roficrucian theology, with phyfiognomy. Such were the purfuits contemporary with the fcience, which is the object of our prefent enquiry. It is no manner of furprize, that, fo affociated, it should have fallen to contempt. To phyfiognomy, and the exploded fciences laft mentioned, fucceeded claffic philology; which gave place to modern poetry and natural philofophy; to which recently have been added the studies of rational theology, chymistry, the philofophy of hiftory, the hiftory of man, and the fcience of politics. About the commencement of the eighteenth century, and thence forward, the occult fciences, as they are termed, had declined very confiderably in the estimation of the learned; and those who treated of phy, fiognomy forbore to difgrace it by a connection with thofe branches of ideal learning, with which formerly it had been invariably conjoined. In Britain, Dr Gwither noticed it with approbation. His remarks are published in the Philofophical Tranfac tions; and Dr Parsons chose it for the fubject of the Croonean lectures, published, at first in the fecond fupplement to the 44th vol. of the Philofophical Tranfactions, and after ward (1747) in a separate treatife, entitled “Human Physiognomy explained." The obfervations, however, of thefe writers, as well as of Lancifius, Haller, and Buffon, relate rather to the tranfient expreffion of the paffions, than to the permanent features of the face and body.. During the prefent century, although phyfiognomy has been now and then attended to, nothing of im portance appeared on the fubject, tiil the difcuffion already mentioned between Pernetty and Le Cat, in the Berlin Tranfactions. The fentiments of thefe authors, in fo far as relates to the definition of phyfiognomy, have been above noticed. Their effays are befide employed in difcuffing the following questions; 1. Whether it would or would not be advantageous to fociety, were the character, difpofition, and abilities, of each individual fo marked in his appearance as to be difcovered with certainty ? 2. Whether, on the fuppofition, that by the highest poffible proficiency in phyfiognomy, we could attain a know ledge in part only of the internal character, it would be advantageous to fociety to cultivate the study, mankind being in general imperfect phyfiognomifts? No reafoning a priori can poffibly determine these questions. Time and experience alone must ascertain the degree of influence which any particular acquifition of knowledge would have on the manners and characters of mankind; but it is difficult to conceive how the refult of any portion of knowledge, formerly unknown, and which mankind would be permitted to discover, could be any thing but beneficial. Soon after this controverfy in the Berlin Tranfactions, appeared the great work of M. Lavater, dean of Zurich, which has excited no inconfiderable portion of attention in the literary world. Of this we hope to give an analysis in our next. ALAN, OR THE FOLLY OF IDLE CURIOSITY; A TALE. ND what is your business here?" 66 E.B. ters," replied the man, a pretty bufihalf the defcendants of Noah breaking one's doors, every night in the week." So faying, he fent Alan, with a violent fwing, from the threshold, and banged the door in his face. In vain the poor youth remonftrated against such treat. |