icon


Previous Section. Link to Book Room 
Next Section.

CHAPTER X - HATRED AND ANGER.

Charles Darwin (1809-1882)

CHAPTER X.


HATRED AND ANGER


Hatred--Rage, effects of on the system--Uncovering of the teeth--

Rage in the insane--Anger and indignation--As expressed by the various

races of man--Sneering and defiance--The uncovering of the canine

tooth on one side of the face.





IF we have suffered or expect to suffer some wilful injury from a man,

or if he is in any way offensive to us, we dislike him; and dislike easily

rises into hatred.  Such feelings, if experienced in a moderate degree,

are not clearly expressed by any movement of the body or features,

excepting perhaps by a certain gravity of behaviour, or by some ill-temper.

Few individuals, however, can long reflect about a hated person,

without feeling and exhibiting signs of indignation or rage.

But if the offending person be quite insignificant, we experience merely

disdain or contempt.  If, on the other hand, he is all-powerful, then

hatred passes into terror, as when a slave thinks about a cruel master,

or a savage about a bloodthirsty malignant deity.[1] Most of our

emotions are so closely connected with their expression, that they

hardly exist if the body remains passive--the nature of the expression

depending in chief part on the nature of the actions which have been

habitually performed under this particular state of the mind.

A man, for instance, may know that his life is in the extremest peril,

and may strongly desire to save if; yet, as Louis XVI.

said, when surrounded by a fierce mob, "Am I afraid? feel my pulse."

So a man may intensely hate another, but until his bodily frame

is affected, he cannot be said to be enraged.





[1] See some remarks to this effect by Mr. Bain, `The Emotions and the 
Will,'

2nd edit.  1865, p.  127.



_Rage_.--I have already had occasion to treat of this emotion in

the third chapter, when discussing the direct influence of the excited

sensorium on the body, in combination with the effects of habitually

associated actions.  Rage exhibits itself in the most diversified manner.

The heart and circulation are always affected; the face reddens

or becomes purple, with the veins on the forehead and neck distended.

The reddening of the skin has been observed with the copper-coloured

Indians of South America,[2] and even, as it is said, on the white

cicatrices left by old wounds on negroes.[3] Monkeys also redden

from passion.  With one of my own infants, under four months old,

I repeatedly observed that the first symptom of an approaching passion

was the rushing of the blood into his bare scalp.  On the other hand,

the action of the heart is sometimes so much impeded by great rage,

that the countenance becomes pallid or livid,[4] and not a few men

with heart-disease have dropped down dead under this powerful emotion.





[2] Rengger, Naturgesch.  der Saugethiere von Paraguay, 1830, s.  3.



[3] Sir C. Bell, `Anatomy of Expression,' p.  96.  On the other hand,

Dr. Burgess (`Physiology of Blushing,' 1839, p.  31) speaks of the 
reddening

of a cicatrix in a negress as of the nature of a blush.



[4] Moreau and Gratiolet have discussed the colour of the face

under the influence of intense passion:  see the edit.

of 1820 of Lavater, vol.  iv.  pp.  282 and 300;

and Gratiolet, `De la Physionomie,' p.  345.



The respiration is likewise affected; the chest heaves,

and the dilated nostrils quiver.[5] As Tennyson writes,

"sharp breaths of anger puffed her fairy nostrils out."

Hence we have such expressions as breathing out vengeance,"

and "fuming with anger."[6]



The excited brain gives strength to the muscles, and at the same

time energy to the will.  The body is commonly held erect ready

for instant action, but sometimes it is bent forward towards

the offending person, with the limbs more or less rigid.

The mouth is generally closed with firmness, showing fixed

determination, and the teeth are clenched or ground together.

Such gestures as the raising of the arms, with the fists clenched,

as if to strike the offender, are common.  Few men in a

great passion, and telling some one to begone, can resist acting

as if they intended to strike or push the man violently away.

The desire, indeed, to strike often becomes so intolerably strong,

that inanimate objects are struck or dashed to the ground;

but the gestures frequently become altogether purposeless or frantic.

Young children, when in a violent rage roll on the ground on

their backs or bellies, screaming, kicking, scratching, or biting

everything within reach.  So it is, as I hear from Mr. Scott,

with Hindoo children; and, as we have seen, with the young

of the anthropomorphous apes.





[6] Sir C. Bell `Anatomy of Expression,' pp.  91, 107) has fully discussed

this subject.  Moreau remarks (in the edit.  of 1820 of `La Physionomie,

par G. Lavater,' vol.  iv.  p.  237), and quotes Portal in confirmation,

that asthmatic patients acquire permanently expanded nostrils, owing to

the habitual contraction of the elevatory muscles of the wings of the nose.

The explanation by Dr. Piderit (`Mimik und Physiognomik,' s.  82) of the

distension of the nostrils, namely, to allow free breathing whilst the 
mouth

is closed and the teeth clenched, does not appear to be nearly so correct

as that by Sir C. Bell, who attributes it to the sympathy (_i. e_.

habitual co-action) of all the respiratory muscles.  The nostrils of an 
angry

man may be seen to become dilated, although his mouth is open.



[7] Mr. Wedgwood, `On the Origin of Language,' 1866, p.  76.  He also 
observes

that the sound of hard breathing "is represented by the syllables _puff,

huff, whiff_, whence a _huff_ is a fit of ill-temper."



But the muscular system is often affected in a wholly different way;

for trembling is a frequent consequence of extreme rage.

The paralysed lips then refuse to obey the will, "and the voice sticks

in the throat;"[7] or it is rendered loud, harsh, and discordant.

If there be much and rapid speaking, the mouth froths.

The hair sometimes bristles; but I shall return to this subject

in another chapter, when I treat of the mingled emotions of rage

and terror.  There is in most cases a strongly-marked frown

on the forehead; for this follows from the sense of anything

displeasing or difficult, together with concentration of mind.

But sometimes the brow, instead of being much contracted and lowered,

remains smooth, with the glaring eyes kept widely open.

The eyes are always bright, or may, as Homer expresses it,

glisten with fire.  They are sometimes bloodshot, and are said

to protrude from their sockets--the result, no doubt, of the head

being gorged with blood, as shown by the veins being distended.

According to Gratiolet," the pupils are always contracted in rage,

and I hear from Dr. Crichton Browne that this is the case in the

fierce delirium of meningitis; but the movements of the iris under

the influence of the different emotions is a very obscure subject.



Shakspeare sums up the chief characteristics of rage as follows:--



 "In peace there's nothing so becomes a man,

 As modest stillness and humility;

 But when the blast of war blows in our ears,

 Then imitate the action of the tiger:

 Stiffen the sinews, summon up the blood,

 Then lend the eye a terrible aspect;

 Now set the teeth, and stretch the nostril wide,

 Hold hard the breath, and bend up every spirit

 To his full height! On, on, you noblest English."

_Henry V_., act iii.  sc.  1.





[7] Sir C. Bell `Anatomy of Expression,' p.  95) has some excellent

remarks on the expression of rage.



[8] `De la Physionomie,' 1865, p.  346.





The lips are sometimes protruded during rage in a manner, the meaning

of which I do not understand, unless it depends on our descent from some

ape-like animal.  Instances have been observed, not only with Europeans,

but with the Australians and Hindoos.  The lips, however, are much more

commonly retracted, the grinning or clenched teeth being thus exposed.

This has been noticed by almost every one who has written on expression.[9]

The appearance is as if the teeth were uncovered, ready for seizing or 
tearing

an enemy, though there may be no intention of acting in this manner.

Mr. Dyson Lacy has seen this grinning expression with the Australians,

when quarrelling, and so has Gaika with the Kafirs of South America.

Dickens,[10] in speaking of an atrocious murderer who had just been caught,

and was surrounded by a furious mob, describes "the people as jumping

up one behind another, snarling with their teeth, and making at him

like wild beasts."  Every one who has had much to do with young children

must have seen how naturally they take to biting, when in a passion.

It seems as instinctive in them as in young crocodiles, who snap their

little jaws as soon as they emerge from the egg.





[9] Sir C. Bell, `Anatomy of Expression,' p.  177.  Gratiolet (De

la Phys.  p.  369) says, `les dents se decouvrent, et imitent

symboliquement l'action de dechirer et de mordre.'I If,

instead of using the vague term _symboliquement_, Gratiolet had

said that the action was a remnant of a habit acquired during

primeval times when our semi-human progenitors fought together

with their teeth, like gorillas and orangs at the present day,

he would have been more intelligible.  Dr. Piderit (`Mimik,' &c., s.

82) also speaks of the retraction of the upper lip during rage.

In an engraving of one of Hogarth's wonderful pictures, passion is

represented in the plainest manner by the open glaring eyes,

frowning forehead, and exposed grinning teeth.



[10] `Oliver Twist,' vol.  iii.  p.  245.



A grinning expression and the protrusion of the lips appear sometimes

to go together.  A close observer says that he has seen many instances

of intense hatred (which can hardly be distinguished from rage, more or

less suppressed) in Orientals, and once in an elderly English woman.

In all these cases there "was a grin, not a scowl--the lips lengthening,

the cheeks settling downwards, the eyes half-closed, whilst the brow

remained perfectly calm."[11]



This retraction of the lips and uncovering of the teeth during

paroxysms of rage, as if to bite the offender, is so remarkable,

considering how seldom the teeth are used by men in fighting,

that I inquired from Dr. J. Crichton Browne whether the habit

was common in the insane whose passions are unbridled.

He informs me that he has repeatedly observed it both with the insane

and idiotic, and has given me the following illustrations:--



Shortly before receiving my letter, be witnessed an uncontrollable

outbreak of anger and delusive jealousy in an insane lady.

At first she vituperated her husband, and whilst doing so foamed

at the mouth.  Next she approached close to him with compressed lips,

and a virulent set frown.  Then she drew back her lips,

especially the corners of the upper lip, and showed her teeth,

at the same time aiming a vicious blow at him.  A second case

is that of an old soldier, who, when he is requested to conform

to the rules of the establishment, gives way to discontent,

terminating in fury.  He commonly begins by asking Dr. Browne

whether he is not ashamed to treat him in such a manner.

He then swears and blasphemes, paces tip and down,

tosses his arms wildly about, and menaces any one near him.

At last, as his exasperation culminates, he rushes up

towards Dr. Browne with a peculiar sidelong movement,

shaking his doubled fist, and threatening destruction.

Then his upper lip may be seen to be raised, especially at

the corners, so that his huge canine teeth are exhibited.

He hisses forth his curses through his set teeth, and his

whole expression assumes the character of extreme ferocity.

A similar description is applicable to another man, excepting that

he generally foams at the mouth and spits, dancing and jumping

about in a strange rapid manner, shrieking out his maledictions

in a shrill falsetto voice.





[11] `The Spectator,' July 11, 1868, p.  810.



Dr. Browne also informs me of the case of an epileptic idiot, incapable of

independent movements, and who spends the whole day in playing with

some toys; but his temper is morose and easily roused into fierceness.

When any one touches his toys, he slowly raises his head from its

habitual downward position, and fixes his eyes on the offender,

with a tardy yet angry scowl.  If the annoyance be repeated, he draws

back his thick lips and reveals a prominent row of hideous fangs

(large canines being especially noticeable), and then makes a quick

and cruel clutch with his open hand at the offending person.

The rapidity of this clutch, as Dr. Browne remarks, is marvellous

in a being ordinarily so torpid that he takes about fifteen seconds,

when attracted by any noise, to turn his head from one side to the other.

If, when thus incensed, a handkerchief, book, or other article,

be placed into his hands, he drags it to his mouth and bites it.

Mr. Nicol has likewise described to me two cases of insane patients,

whose lips are retracted during paroxysms of rage.



Dr. Maudsley, after detailing various strange animal-like traits

in idiots, asks whether these are not due to the reappearance

of primitive instincts--"a faint echo from a far-distant past,

testifying to a kinship which man has almost outgrown."

He adds, that as every human brain passes, in the course

of its development, through the same stages as those occurring

in the lower vertebrate animals, and as the brain of an idiot

is in an arrested condition, we may presume that it "will

manifest its most primitive functions, and no higher functions."

Dr. Maudsley thinks that the same view may be extended to the brain

in its degenerated condition in some insane patients; and asks,

whence come "the savage snarl, the destructive disposition,

the obscene language, the wild howl, the offensive habits,

displayed by some of the insane?  Why should a human being,

deprived of his reason, ever become so brutal in character,

as some do, unless he has the brute nature within him?"[12] This

question must, as it would appear, he answered in the affirmative.



_Anger, Indignation_.--These states of the mind differ from rage only

in degree, and there is no marked distinction in their characteristic 
signs.

Under moderate anger the action of the heart is a little increased,

the colour heightened, and the eyes become bright.  The respiration

is likewise a little hurried; and as all the muscles serving for this

function act in association, the wings of the nostrils are somewhat

raised to allow of a free indraught of air; and this is a highly

characteristic sign of indignation.  The mouth is commonly compressed,

and there is almost always a frown on the brow.  Instead of the frantic

gestures of extreme rage, an indignant man unconsciously throws himself

into an attitude ready for attacking or striking his enemy, whom he will

perhaps scan from head to foot in defiance.  He carries his head erect,

with his chest well expanded, and the feet planted firmly on the ground.

He holds his arms in various positions, with one or both elbows squared,

or with the arms rigidly suspended by his sides.  With Europeans

the fists are commonly clenched.[13] The figures 1 and 2 in Plate VI.

are fairly good representations of men simulating indignation.

Any one may see in a mirror, if he will vividly imagine that he has

been insulted and demands an explanation in an angry tone of voice,

that he suddenly and unconsciously throws himself into some such attitude.





[12] `Body and Mind,' 1870, pp.  51-53.



Rage, anger, and indignation are exhibited in nearly the same manner

throughout the world; and the following descriptions may be worth giving

as evidence of this, and as illustrations of some of the foregoing remarks.

There is, however, an exception with respect to clenching the fists,

which seems confined chiefly to the men who fight with their fists.

With the Australians only one of my informants has seen the fists clenched.

All agree about the body being held erect; and all, with two exceptions,

state that the brows are heavily contracted.  Some of them allude to

the firmly-compressed mouth, the distended nostrils, and flashing eyes.

According to the Rev. Mr. Taplin, rage, with the Australians, is expressed

by the lips being protruded, the eyes being widely open; and in the case

of the women by their dancing about and casting dust into the air.

Another observer speaks of the native men, when enraged, throwing their

arms wildly about.





[13] Le Brun, in his well-known `Conference sur l'Expression'

(`La Physionomie, par Lavater,' edit.  of 1820, vol.  lx.  p.  268), 
remarks

that anger is expressed by the clenching of the fists.  See, to the

same effect, Huschke, `Mimices et Physiognomices, Fragmentum 
Physiologicum,'

1824, p.  20.  Also Sir C. Bell, `Anatomy of Expression,' p.  219.



I have received similar accounts, except as to the clenching of the fists,

in regard to the Malays of the Malacca peninsula, the Abyssinians,

and the natives of South Africa.  So it is with the Dakota Indians

of North America; and, according to Mr. Matthews, they then hold

their heads erect, frown, and often stalk away with long strides.

Mr. Bridges states that the Fuegians, when enraged, frequently stamp

on the ground, walk distractedly about, sometimes cry and grow pale.

The Rev. Mr. Stack watched a New Zealand man and woman quarrelling,

and made the following entry in his note-book: "Eyes dilated, body swayed

violently backwards and forwards, head inclined forwards, fists clenched,

now thrown behind the body, now directed towards each other's faces."

Mr. Swinhoe says that my description agrees with what he has seen

of the Chinese, excepting that an angry man generally inclines

his body towards his antagonist, and pointing at him, pours forth

a volley of abuse.



Lastly, with respect to the natives of India, Mr. J. Scott has sent

me a full description of their gestures and expression when enraged.

Two low-caste Bengalees disputed about a loan.  At first they were calm,

but soon grew furious and poured forth the grossest abuse on each

other's relations and progenitors for many generations past.

Their gestures were very different from those of Europeans;

for though their chests were expanded and shoulders squared,

their arms remained rigidly suspended, with the elbows turned

inwards and the hands alternately clenched and opened.

Their shoulders were often raised high, and then again lowered.

They looked fiercely at each other from under their lowered and

strongly wrinkled brows, and their protruded lips were firmly closed.

They approached each other, with heads and necks stretched forwards,

and pushed, scratched, and grasped at each other.  This protrusion

of the head and body seems a common gesture with the enraged;

and I have noticed it with degraded English women whilst quarrelling

violently in the streets.  In such cases it may be presumed that

neither party expects to receive a blow from the other.



A Bengalee employed in the Botanic Gardens was accused, in the presence

of Mr. Scott, by the native overseer of having stolen a valuable plant.

He listened silently and scornfully to the accusation; his attitude erect,

chest expanded, mouth closed, lips protruding, eyes firmly set

and penetrating.  He then defiantly maintained his innocence,

with upraised and clenched hands, his head being now pushed forwards,

with the eyes widely open and eyebrows raised.  Mr. Scott also watched

two Mechis, in Sikhim, quarrelling about their share of payment.

They soon got into a furious passion, and then their bodies became less 
erect,

with their heads pushed forwards; they made grimaces at each other;

their shoulders were raised; their arms rigidly bent inwards at the elbows,

and their hands spasmodically closed, but not properly clenched.

They continually approached and retreated from each other, and often raised

their arms as if to strike, but their hands were open, and no blow was 
given.

Mr. Scott made similar observations on the Lepchas whom he often

saw quarrelling, and he noticed that they kept their arms rigid and almost

parallel to their bodies, with the hands pushed somewhat backwards

and partially closed, but not clenched.





_Sneering, Defiance:  Uncovering the canine tooth on one side_.--

The expression which I wish here to consider differs but little from

that already described, when the lips are retracted and the grinning

teeth exposed.  The difference consists solely in the upper lip

being retracted in such a manner that the canine tooth on one

side of the face alone is shown; the face itself being generally

a little upturned and half averted from the person causing offence.

The other signs of rage are not necessarily present.  This expression

may occasionally be observed in a person who sneers at or defies another,

though there may be no real anger; as when any one is playfully

accused of some fault, and answers, "I scorn the imputation."

The expression is not a common one, but I have seen it exhibited with

perfect distinctness by a lady who was being quizzed by another person.

It was described by Parsons as long ago as 1746, with an engraving,

showing the uncovered canine on one side.[14] Mr. Rejlander,

without my having made any allusion to the subject, asked me whether I

had ever noticed this expression, as he had been much struck by it.

He has photographed for me (Plate IV.  fig 1) a lady, who sometimes

unintentionally displays the canine on one side, and who can do

so voluntarily with unusual distinctness.



The expression of a half-playful sneer graduates into one

of great ferocity when, together with a heavily frowning

brow and fierce eye, the canine tooth is exposed.

A Bengalee boy was accused before Mr. Scott of some misdeed.

The delinquent did not dare to give vent to his wrath in words,

but it was plainly shown on his countenance, sometimes by a

defiant frown, and sometimes "by a thoroughly canine snarl."

When this was exhibited, "the corner of the lip over the eye-tooth,

which happened in this case to be large and projecting, was raised

on the side of his accuser, a strong frown being still retained

on the brow."  Sir C. Bell states[15] that the actor Cooke

could express the most determined hate "when with the oblique

cast of his eyes he drew up the outer part of the upper lip,

and discovered a sharp angular tooth."





[14] Transact.  Philosoph.  Soc., Appendix, 1746, p.  65.



The uncovering of the canine tooth is the result of a double movement.

The angle or corner of the mouth is drawn a little backwards, and at the 
same

time a muscle which runs parallel to and near the nose draws up the outer

part of the upper lip, and exposes the canine on this side of the face.

The contraction of this muscle makes a distinct furrow on the cheek,

and produces strong wrinkles under the eye, especially at its inner corner.

The action is the same as that of a snarling dog; and a dog when pretending

to fight often draws up the lip on one side alone, namely that facing

his antagonist.  Our word _sneer_ is in fact the same as _snarl_,

which was originally _snar_, the _l_ "being merely an element implying

continuance of action."[16]



I suspect that we see a trace of this same expression in what is

called a derisive or sardonic smile.  The lips are then kept

joined or almost joined, but one corner of the mouth is retracted

on the side towards the derided person; and this drawing back

of the corner is part of a true sneer.  Although some persons

smile more on one side of their face than on the other,

it is not easy to understand why in cases of derision the smile,

if a real one, should so commonly be confined to one side.

I have also on these occasions noticed a slight twitching

of the muscle which draws up the outer part of the upper lip;

and this movement, if fully carried out, would have uncovered

the canine, and would have produced a true sneer.





[15] `Anatomy of Expression,' p.  136.  Sir C. Bell calls (p. 131)

the muscles which uncover the canines the snarling muscles.



[16] Hensleigh Wedgwood, `Dictionary of English Etymology,'

1865, vol.  iii.  pp.  240, 243.



Mr. Bulmer, an Australian missionary in a remote part of Gipps' Land, says,

in answer to my query about the uncovering of the canine on one side, "I 
find

that the natives in snarling at each other speak with the teeth closed,

the upper lip drawn to one side, and a general angry expression of face;

but they look direct at the person addressed."  Three other observers

in Australia, one in Abyssinia, and one in China, answer my query on this

head in the affirmative; but as the expression is rare, and as they

enter into no details, I am afraid of implicitly trusting them.

It is, however, by no means improbable that this animal-like expression

may be more common with savages than with civilized races.  Mr. Geach is

an observer who may be fully trusted, and he has observed it on one 
occasion

in a Malay in the interior of Malacca.  The Rev. S. O. Glenie answers,

"We have observed this expression with the natives of Ceylon, but not 
often."

Lastly, in North America, Dr. Rothrock has seen it with some wild Indians,

and often in a tribe adjoining the Atnahs.



Although the upper lip is certainly sometimes raised on one

side alone in sneering at or defying any one, I do not know

that this is always the case, for the face is commonly

half averted, and the expression is often momentary.

The movement being confined to one side may not be an essential

part of the expression, but may depend on the proper

muscles being incapable of movement excepting on one side.

I asked four persons to endeavour to act voluntarily in

this manner; two could expose the canine only on the left side,

one only on the right side, and the fourth on neither side.

Nevertheless it is by no means certain that these same persons,

<251> if defying any one in earnest, would not unconsciously have

uncovered their canine tooth on the side, whichever it might be,

towards the offender.  For we have seen that some persons cannot

voluntarily make their eyebrows oblique, yet instantly act

in this manner when affected by any real, although most trifling,

cause of distress.  The power of voluntarily uncovering

the canine on one side of the face being thus often wholly lost,

indicates that it is a rarely used and almost abortive action.

It is indeed a surprising fact that man should possess the power,

or should exhibit any tendency to its use; for Mr. Sutton has never

noticed a snarling action in our nearest allies, namely, the monkeys

in the Zoological Gardens, and he is positive that the baboons,

though furnished with great canines, never act thus, but uncover

all their teeth when feeling savage and ready for an attack.

Whether the adult anthropomorphous apes, in the males of whom

the canines are much larger than in the females, uncover them

when prepared to fight, is not known.



The expression here considered, whether that of a playful sneer

or ferocious snarl, is one of the most curious which occurs in man.

It reveals his animal descent; for no one, even if rolling on the ground

in a deadly grapple with an enemy, and attempting to bite him,

would try to use his canine teeth more than his other teeth.

We may readily believe from our affinity to the anthropomorphous apes

that our male semi-human progenitors possessed great canine teeth,

and men are now occasionally born having them of unusually large size,

with interspaces in the opposite jaw for their reception.[17] We may

further suspect, notwithstanding that we have no support from analogy,

that our semi-human progenitors uncovered their canine teeth

when prepared for battle, as we still do when feeling ferocious,

or when merely sneering at or defying some one, without any intention

of making a real attack with our teeth.





[17] `The Descent of Man,' 1871, vol.  L p.  126.

Previous Section. Link to Book Room 
Next Section.

LinkExchange


This World Wide Web document is a personal research project motivated by the following claim: "Truth is the object of Knowledge of whatever kind; and when we inquire what is meant by Truth, I suppose it is right to answer that Truth means facts and their relations, which stand towards each other pretty much as subjects and predicates in logic. All that exists, as contemplated by the human mind, forms one large system or complex fact, and this of course resolves itself into an indefinite number of particular facts, which, as being portions of a whole, have countless relations of every kind, one towards another." (The Idea of a University, John Henry Newman, 1801-1890)


Top of Page