Materials of the Mind

The quest for objectivity and measurements in phrenology’s “bumpy” history.

“…Even more has been written about its transition from a scientific endeavor to a popular social movement (e.g., Cooter, 1976c, 1984; Davies, 1955; de Giustino, 1975, Parssinen, 1974; Shapin, 1975; Shyrock, 1960; Sokal, 2001; Stern, 1971; Van Wyhe, 2004). Additionally, some scholars have begun to look more closely at how phrenology was transmitted from Britain to America to other parts of the world (e.g., Poskett, 2019; Sakalauskaitė-Juodeikienė et al, 2017; Storey, 2020), as well as how it impacted the arts (e.g., Colbert, 1997; Finger & Eling, 2019, pp. 339–336) and reflected gender and racial beliefs (Anderson & Perrin, 2009; Bittel, 2013, 2019; Carson, 2007; Cornel, 2014).…”

“…The Fowlers provided materials (e.g., skulls, busts, charts) for anyone wishing to engage in phrenology, as well as courses, books, and (starting in 1838) a journal initially titled The Phrenological Journal of Science and Health. By midcentury, their products were familiar to Americans in communities large and small, as well as to readers in Western Europe and more distant parts of the world (Poskett, 2019).…”

“…Phrenological cranioscopy, clearly the doctrine’s weakest feature, did not, however, disappear overnight in places where phrenology had made inroads. As recently documented by James Poskett (2019), it would continue to be utilized as a scientific basis for degrading various groups of people and supporting racist beliefs in both advanced and developing countries throughout the world. It would also continue to have a place in literature and in the fine arts (Colbert, 1997).…”

Race, material culture, and the global history of science

“…'Phrenology was both a mental science and a racial science,' I argued in the introduction. 12 And it wasn't just that phrenology happened to be both a science of the mind and a science of race. Rather, over the course of the nineteenth century, the distinction between a mental science and a racial science completely broke down.…”

“…Instead, I argued, 'material culture should be treated as a continuum'. 23 In fact, I tend to think in terms of a 'material world'-incorporating infrastructure, environment, and labour, as well as non-museum objects-rather than just 'material culture', which tends to be confined to the museum. 24 As my earlier discussion of race indicates, my focus on materiality was also part of an attempt to ground what could very easily have been a purely intellectual history in the real world of action.…”