All the authors who have written on Expression, with the exception of
Mr. Spencer the great expounder of the principle of Evolution appear to
have been firmly convinced that species, man of course included, came
into existence in their present condition. Sir C. Bell, being thus
convinced, maintains that many of our facial muscles are purely
instrumental in expression; or are a special provision for this sole
object.[12] But the simple fact that the anthropoid apes possess the
same facial muscles as we do,[13] renders it very improbable that these
muscles in our case serve exclusively for expression; for no one, I
presume, would be inclined to admit that monkeys have been endowed with
special muscles solely for exhibiting their hideous grimaces. Distinct
uses, independently of expression, can indeed be assigned with much
probability for almost all the facial muscles.
Sir C. Bell evidently wished to draw as broad a distinction as possible
between man and the lower animals; and he consequently asserts that
with the lower creatures there is no expression but what may be
referred, more or less plainly, to their acts of volition or necessary
instincts. He further maintains that their faces seem chiefly capable
of expressing rage and fear. [14] But man himself cannot express love
and humility by external signs, so plainly as does a dog, when with
drooping ears, hanging lips, flexuous body, and wagging tail, he meets
his beloved master. Nor can these movements in the dog be explained by
acts of volition or necessary instincts, any more than the beaming eyes
and smiling cheeks of a man when he meets an old friend. If Sir C. Bell
had been questioned about the expression of affection in the dog, he
would no doubt have answered that this animal had been created with
special instincts, adapting him for association with man, and that all
further enquiry on the subject was superfluous.
Although Gratiolet emphatically denies[15] that any muscle has been
developed solely for the sake of expression, he seems never to have
reflected on the principle of evolution. He apparently looks at each
species as a separate creation. So it is with the other writers on
Expression. For instance, Dr. Duchenne, after speaking of the movements
of the limbs, refers to those which give expression to the face, and
remarks:[16] Le createur n a donc pas eu a se preoccuper ici des
besoins de la mecanique; il a pu, selon sa sagesse, ou que l on me
pardonne cette maniere de parler par une divine fantaisie, mettre en
12