Edinburgh Confronts Phrenology

Skulls, Science and Scandal: Edinburgh’s Confrontation with its Racist Past

Deep within the University of Edinburgh's Old Medical School building lies a room that holds a deeply unsettling collection. A gathering of several hundred human craniums is arranged in tall, mahogany-and-glass cabinets, their proximity a silent testament to a dark chapter in scientific history. Many bear faded labels or have inventory numbers painted on them, remnants of a time when they were objects of intense study. The space is known as the university's "skull room," an area not open to the public, containing about 1,500 craniums that force a confrontation with a difficult legacy. This collection, central to the Anatomical Museum, is intrinsically linked to the rise of phrenology, a discredited pseudoscience that propelled racist ideologies starting from the late eighteenth century.

The Allure of a New 'Science'

Phrenology appeared in the late 1700s, created by German physician Franz Joseph Gall. It was built on a few core beliefs: that the mind's organ is the brain, that the mind consists of distinct faculties, and that the cranium's size and shape reflect the power of these underlying faculties. This theory, which claimed one could read a person's character and intelligence from the bumps on their head, gained enormous traction. In an era of rapid social and industrial change, it offered a simple, materialist explanation for human behaviour and potential.

Edinburgh: The Phrenological Epicentre

Edinburgh quickly became a global hub for phrenological thought. In 1820, The Edinburgh Phrenological Society was established by George Combe, a lawyer, and his sibling Andrew, a physician. Both were university alumni, and they successfully drew many of the city's medical professionals into their circle. The book by George Combe, The Constitution of Man, became an international bestseller, outselling Charles Darwin's On the Origin of Species in the 19th century. Through lectures and publications, the society popularised phrenology, turning it from a fringe theory into a widespread cultural phenomenon.

Image Credit - The University of Edinburgh

Amassing a Global Collection

The society's work depended on a vast collection of skulls for measurement and study. These remains were acquired through numerous channels, painting a grim picture of 19th-century ethics. While some craniums were given willingly by supporters, many were acquired without permission. The collection includes remains from executed criminals, like the infamous murderer William Burke, whose skeleton is also on display. Others were taken from asylums, hospitals, and archaeological digs across Scotland and beyond. A significant number came from the expanding British Empire, collected and sent back by a worldwide web of graduates from Edinburgh.

An Imperial Ideology

Phrenology was not merely a scientific curiosity; it became a powerful tool of empire. Practitioners used their skull measurements to construct a racial hierarchy that, unsurprisingly, placed white European men at the apex of a person's intelligence and morality. This "science" provided a convenient justification for colonialism and slavery, framing them as natural outcomes of biological difference. Racist ideas were presented as objective fact, reinforcing notions of white superiority. These theories, though not an official part of the curriculum at the university, were spread by influential members of its community.

Challenging Voices and Complicated Beliefs

Despite its popularity, phrenology faced criticism from some within Edinburgh's medical elite who questioned its scientific rigour. However, even some of its staunchest detractors were not immune to the prevailing racial biases of the time. Alexander Monro III, a professor of anatomy, lectured that the cranium of a "Negro" was smaller than that of a European. Robert Jameson, a professor of natural history, used diagrams in his talks delivered at the institution to illustrate a racial hierarchy based on brain size. This demonstrates how deeply embedded these ideas were, even among those who rejected the specific methods of phrenology.

A Painful Case: The Richards Brothers

Among the collection are the craniums of two siblings, George Richards and Robert Bruce. They died in Edinburgh in the 1830s while studying medicine and divinity, respectively. Researchers believe the siblings had a combined African and European heritage from Barbados, where their father, a doctor educated in Edinburgh, was an owner of enslaved individuals. The Edinburgh Phrenological Society's catalogue lists their skulls as belonging to "mulatto" students, a term that fascinated phrenologists. It is almost certain they were acquired specifically to investigate perceived racial distinctions, their bodies removed from their remains after their deaths.

A University's Enduring Connection

Phrenology was never formally integrated into the curriculum by the University of Edinburgh. Yet, its entanglement with the pseudoscience is undeniable. Key academics were participating members of the Phrenological Society, and the university ultimately became the custodian of its grim collection. When the new medical school building was erected in the 1880s, Sir William Turner, the anatomy professor at the time, assisted in supervising the building of the skull room specifically to house these remains. This physical integration of the collection into the university's infrastructure underscores its tangled historical position.

The Combe Trust's Modern Legacy

The influence of phrenology persists in unexpected ways. The Combe Trust, established with funds from George Combe's bestselling books and speaking engagements, continues to operate. In 1906, the trust provided the endowment for Edinburgh's first professorship in psychology. It still funds annual fellowships at the university's Institute for Advanced Studies in the Humanities. This direct financial lineage from the promotion of a racist pseudoscience to modern academic funding presents a stark and challenging legacy for the institution to navigate.

A Global Pseudoscience

The reach of phrenology extended far beyond Scotland. Phrenological societies sprang up in different parts of the world, including in Calcutta, India, in 1825. The theory was adapted and used in various colonial contexts to categorise and control local populations. However, the story is not entirely one-sided. Some colonised peoples and anti-slavery activists attempted to use phrenology as a counter-narrative, arguing that a true "science of the mind" would expose the injustices of empire. This complex global history shows how scientific ideas can be adopted and repurposed for vastly different political ends.

The Modern Reckoning Begins

In recent years, the institution in Edinburgh has started to confront its part in developing and spreading scientific racism. A comprehensive decolonisation report has shed light on the university's historical links to slavery and colonial exploitation. The report's recommendations include providing greater backing for the return of ancestral bones to their communities of origin. This marks a significant shift towards acknowledging past harms and seeking a path toward reparatory justice for the individuals whose remains are held in the collection.

The Complex Path to Repatriation

Returning ancestral remains is a profoundly complex process. The university's current Chair of Anatomy, Professor Tom Gillingwater, highlights the immense challenges involved. Each case can require a lengthy period of effort, demanding painstaking research to establish provenance and building deep, trusting relationships with descendant communities. Even in seemingly clear-cut situations like the case of the Richards siblings, the standard of proof needed for a definitive forensic identification is incredibly high, often conflicting with strong circumstantial evidence.

Legal and Bureaucratic Hurdles

The process of repatriation is further complicated by legal and bureaucratic obstacles. In the wider UK, legislation like the British Museum Act of 1963 can forbid institutions from deaccessioning items from their collections, except in very specific circumstances. Furthermore, there can be geopolitical tensions or disagreements between different descendant communities over who possesses the most valid entitlement to the remains. These hurdles mean that even with the best intentions, the return of ancestors to their homelands is often a slow and arduous journey.

Successful Returns and Ongoing Dialogue

Despite the challenges, progress is being made. The University of Edinburgh has participated in returns since as early as 1947. A notable recent success was the 2019 repatriation of nine skulls to the Vedda people of Sri Lanka. This return followed a collaborative project led by Vedda elders and has fostered an ongoing relationship, with the community now developing its own museum to house the ancestors. Similarly, UK institutions like the Pitt Rivers Museum and the Natural History Museum in Oxford have returned ancestors to First Nations communities in Australia.

Image Credit - The University of Edinburgh

The Unidentifiable and the Duty of Care

A haunting reality of the collection is that a large number of the craniums will not ever be identified. Their origins are lost to history, their stories erased by the passage of time and poor record-keeping. This presents a profound ethical dilemma. For these individuals, repatriation is not an option. Professor Gillingwater expresses this burden, stating that the university's primary responsibility now is to look after them with the respect and dignity they were denied in the past. They remain in the university's care, silent witnesses to a troubling history.

A Call for Broader Change

The issues faced by the institution in Edinburgh are not unique. Museums and institutions across the UK are grappling with the legacy of colonial collecting. Campaign groups and parliamentary committees are now calling for sweeping changes. Recommendations include banning the sale of human remains, ending their public display without consent, and establishing a national body to oversee repatriation claims. This growing movement signals a potential shift in how the nation confronts the more difficult aspects of its imperial past.

The Cost of Justice

While there is growing political and social will to address these historical wrongs, practical barriers remain. Museum budgets have faced continuous cuts, and the painstaking work of research and community consultation required for repatriation is both time-consuming and expensive. Without dedicated government funding and political support to back up these initiatives, progress can be slow and piecemeal. Experts argue that true restorative justice requires not just good intentions but also the resources to see them through.

Moving Beyond Display

A significant step many institutions are taking is the removal of human remains from public display. The Pitt Rivers Museum in Oxford took this step in 2020, removing its famous collection of shrunken heads and other remains from its galleries. This reflects a growing consensus that the exhibition of human remains is ethically problematic and causes profound distress to many communities. It marks a shift from viewing these individuals as curiosities to recognising them as ancestors who deserve peace.

The Future of the Skull Room

The future of the "skull room" in Edinburgh remains a subject of intense discussion. While it stands as a stark reminder of a racist scientific past, it also serves as a catalyst for important conversations about ethics, identity, and repair. The university continues to engage in research and dialogue, balancing the need to acknowledge its history with the profound moral obligation it has to the individuals whose remains it holds. The path forward is complex, but the commitment to treating these ancestors with dignity represents a crucial step toward healing.