muscles conform to these offices-1. In drawing back the eyelids— 2. In expanding the nostrils with unusual freedom-3. In the power of projecting the lips from the incisor teeth, and in a certain muscularity in the cheek, which is necessary to put the food under the operation of the grinding teeth. ESSAY IV. OF THE EXPRESSION OF PASSION, AS ILLUSTRATED BY A COMPARISON OF THE MUSCLES OF THE FACE IN MAN AND IN ANIMALS, AND OF THE MUSCLES PECULIAR TO MAN, AND THEIR EFFECTS IN BESTOWING HUMAN EXPRESSION. THE violent passions mark themselves so distinctly on the countenance, both of man and of animals, that we are led even in the very first inquiry to consider the movements by which they are indicated, as certain signs or characters provided by nature for the express purpose of intimating the internal emotion; and to suppose that they are interpreted by the observer, in consequence of a peculiar and instinctive faculty. This view, however, which appears to me so natural and just, is not received; an opposite theory has vailed, in which instinctive agency is rejected, and the appearances are explained from a consideration of the necessities and the voluntary exertions of the animal. With regard to the observer, it has been asserted, that it is by experience alone that he distinguishes the signs of the passions; that we learn, while infants, to consider smiles pre I as expressions of kindness, because they are accompanied by acts of beneficence, and by endearments; and frowns as the contrary, because we find them followed by blows; that the expression of anger in a brute is only that which has been observed to precede his biting, and that of fondness, his fawning and licking of the hand. With regard to the creature itself, it is said, what have been called the external signs of passion are merely the concomitants of those voluntary movements, which the passion or habits suggest; that the glare of the lion's eye, for example, is the consequence of a voluntary exertion to see his prey more clearly-his grin or snarl, the natural motion of uncasing his fangs before he uses them. Men will reason in this manner who have not duly considered the instrument or apparatus of expression. But, on the other hand, the power over the voluntary muscles may be retained, while the expression is destroyed; and although the muscles serve two purposes which may be confounded, there is no expression, properly so called, unless these muscles be moved by an appropriate nerve of expression. Attending merely to the evidence furnished by anatomical investigation, a remarkable difference is to be found between the anatomy and range of expression in man and in animals: In the former, there seems to be a systematic provision for that mode of communication and that natural language, which is to be read in the changes of the countenance; there is no emotion in the mind of man which has not its appropriate signs; and there are even |