Physiognomy

I began reading through Physiognomy Illustrated by Joseph Simms (1889) on Google Books. I was very disappointed that despite the entertaining illustrations, this book seems very morally bankrupt and silly. Compared to Fowler's book, this book is extremely racist, sexist and Euro-centric. All other races are 'proven' to be worse than Europeans, the lower classes considered criminals by nature, and women only worthwhile humans if they are docile and friendly. In addition, there is a lot of silly information, such as people with large noses being good at smelling things, and people who are gluttonous to have double chins. He also tries to prove points by giving animal examples, sometimes ones that seem very strange, such as crows having 'high suspiciousness' and owls having very small. (Aren't owls as suspicious as any bird?)
As I continued on in the book, I came across increasingly ridiculous parts, such as 'dog headed' people of the world, and that people in Zanzibar have noses that zig zag shaped. I can't imagine that people were still thinking ridiculous things like this in 1889, so I'm not sure what to think about this book.

Phrenology and Physiognomy

Sorry for the lack of updates lately, I've been reading way too many books on these subjects, and gotten a bit behind. I thought I would make some quick thoughts before I post about an experiment or two I will undertake this weekend.
One thing that struck me interesting, was that phrenology is much more general than I thought. I had always heard it was about 'looking for lumps' on a person's head, but it's actually more about the general shape, size and appearance of the head. Physiognomy of the skull, in a manner of speaking.
I was also surprised as I read a book by the Fowler brothers, (one of the brothers) that they seemed rather progressive for the time. The book I'm reading was written in 1899, but it is not nearly as racist as some books on physiognomy I've read from forty or fifty years later. There is quite a bit of Euro-centrism, (the European face seemingly the 'average' face,) but women are included in the book without derogatory remarks, and some differences in the races commented on, but nothing very dismissive or offensive. (Any more offensive than saying that people with small foreheads are 'idiots.') Overall, surprising for this time period.
I checked out more modern books, but they seem to mostly just be rehashing information from these older books, and taking out some parts that seem bizarre or offensive to modern people. I love reading these old books, I scanned the oldest, and will post images from it, (if not the whole book,) on Monday. In all of them, people have underlined passages, and made notes. One book in particular has nearly every page covered in tiny illegible penciled words. I love old books, and the more it shows that people have actually read them over the years, the more I like them.