The Philosophy of Beards A Lecture Physiological, Artistic & Historical — Reading Companion

(0 User reviews) 216

In Category - Logic

Authors: Gowing, Thomas S. Digital Source: Project Gutenberg Gutenberg Release Year: 2019 First Publication Year: Not confirmed

Key Word: Beards Target Reader: Readers of public-domain and historical texts

Book Edition: Project Gutenberg digital edition Book Language: en

Edition facts

Words 21,196

Reading time 93 min

Text sections 8

This digital edition of The Philosophy of Beards A Lecture Physiological, Artistic & Historical — Reading Companion is described by source-level measurements including 21,196 words, 1 hr 33 min estimated reading time, and 8 detected text sections.

The text analysis averages about 28.2 words per sentence, while the detected sections provide another way to judge how the source is divided.

Project Gutenberg metadata also associates the work with “Beards,” connecting these edition facts with the source record’s subject description.

Source: Project Gutenberg record #60009

Thomas S. Gowing's 1853 lecture defends beards through physiological, artistic, and historical arguments, using Shakespeare, Chaucer, and anecdotes to advocate against shaving.

Editorial Edition Score 4.7/5

★★★★★ ★★★★★

Calculated from edition completeness, EPUB availability, text structure and catalogue metadata. Not a user rating.

How this score is calculated

Description quality20 pts
Title & short description10 pts
Source metadata20 pts
Text length15 pts
Chapters / structure15 pts
EPUB file integrity20 pts

Total of 100 points, scaled to a 2.5-5.0 range. Editions with an empty description or a missing EPUB file are not scored.

Edition quality

File: pg60009

Read the Text

ved that most of the usages established by Moses had more or less reference to Egyptian customs, from which he was desirous of weaning them. As might be expected from the inspired Lawgiver, whose sublime books start with the grand assertion, that man was made “in the express image of God,” any attempt to alter the natural features of the “human face divine,” was denounced and emphatically interdicted. Twice is the commandment issued—first to the whole people, “thou shalt not mar the corners of thy Beard,” in other words, thou shalt not alter the form thereof, which I thy God have appointed! Then to the Priests, with the addition, that they should not make baldness upon their heads. It is of the utmost consequence to recall the superstitious practice of the Egyptian Priests, and to remember that Moses issued this command to the Aaronites, fresh from Egypt, because it most convincingly shews that the practice of shaving, even when resorted to with the view of pleasing the Deity, by an extreme degree of external purity, in approaching His mysterious presence, was directly and most absolutely forbidden. It is as if God had said, “What art thou, O man! who thinkest in thy vain imagination that I, thy Creator, knew not how to fashion thee! and blasphemously supposest that thou canst please me, by superstitiously sacrificing what I, in my Almighty wisdom, had endowed thee with, for protection and ornament!” And, as if to mark the distinction more strongly, Moses enjoined in the strictest manner every ordinary and natural method of purifying the person.

It cannot but be instructive to note, that thus on the very threshold of history, we have two customs so opposite brought into contrast—the one strongly condemned, the other most awfully sanctioned. And it is the more necessary to mark this, because there are many religious persons who have by custom acquired the Egyptian notion, and forgotten its emphatic condemnation. There are many who, though told that certain diseases to which the more active of the clergy are specially liable, might be prevented and may be cured, by simply wearing the Beard, will still insist upon their ministers paying the penalty invariably attaching to a violation of God’s laws, because their prejudices lead them to fancy a smooth face rather than a manly one.

As further confirmation of our idea that the object of this law of Moses was to prevent any of the natural features from being materially altered—he objected not to trimming the Beard, which was a common Jewish practice—is to be found in the first verse of the 14th chapter of Deuteronomy, where the people are commanded not to shave their eyebrows; which was a customary mark of grief among some bearded nations. The Jews too, unlike the Persians and others, instead of shaving the Beard in time of mourning—though in the violence of oriental grief they sometimes plucked it—usually left it merely untrimmed or veiled, till the days of mourning were passed.

You all remember the fearful vengeance David took when his ambassadors were disgraced by shaving their Beards.

The Beard continued to be worn in all its glory by these chosen people, and it would be impossible for us to imagine to ourselves the appearance of any of their patriarchs, judges, priests, prophets, or mature kings—or of the sublime founder of our religion—or of the chosen twelve—save the youthful John, without this venerable and venerated feature. What painter would dare such an offence to our most sacred associations, as to represent any of these with the smirking smoothness of razored neatness!

That in Mahomet’s time, the Jews still held to their primitive custom, is evident from that lawgiver’s command to his followers to clip the whiskers and Beard, in order to distinguish themselves from the Jews. Indeed the latter, in every way most remarkable people, have clung to the prescribed custom with all the force of religious feeling and firm conviction. And however in modern times some of the laity, impelled by a desire to mix unobserved amongst the populations of Western Europe, may have sacrificed conviction to convenience, their Rabbies have remained invariably consistent in their testimony to truth and nature; and one of the most enduring impressions of my youth is the remembrance of the Chief Rabbi Herschel treading the streets of London, like the last of the prophets, in dark robes, with long pale face and flowing Beard,

And eyes, whose deep mysterious glow, Disdainful of each fleeting show, Dwelt in the old and sacred past, Or Seer-like scann’d the future, vast.

ASSYRIANS AND BABYLONIANS.

Continue Reading →

Thomas S. Gowing opens his lecture by invoking Hamlet's praise of man as 'the beauty of the world! the paragon of animals!' only to lament that this same creature 'can despise his reason! ignore his infinite faculties! deliberately deface that form so express and admirable!' by shaving. This rhetorical pivot—from Shakespearean elevation to satirical dismay—establishes Gowing's method: he uses literary and historical evidence to argue that beards are natural, artistic, and patriotic. The lecture, originally delivered to a 'numerous and good-humoured auditory' in Ipswich, was expanded with notes for publication. Gowing's preface thanks his publisher and notes that illustrations, including a drawing of 'the ape and the goat,' were adapted for the printed edition.

A Rhetoric of Contrasts

Gowing's prose relies on sharp juxtapositions. He sets Hamlet's noble vision against the 'parody of animals' produced by shaving, and personifies Fashion as a 'most capricious goddess' who can transform the lovely into the disgusting. This binary structure—reason versus folly, nature versus artifice—recurs throughout. In the historical section, he contrasts the bearded majority with smooth-faced courtiers, as when he notes that Edward IV 'shaved out of foppery' while Richard III, 'that smooth-faced rascal,' could 'smile and smile and be a villain.' The allusion to Shakespeare's Hamlet and Richard III is not merely decorative; it anchors Gowing's moral argument in familiar cultural touchstones. He also uses Chaucer's descriptions of pilgrims' beards—the merchant's 'forked Beard,' the miller's 'red as a fox'—to show that facial hair once signified character and station. By contrasting these vivid portraits with the 'Pardonere' who 'had no Beard,' Gowing implies that shaving erases individuality.

Anecdotes as Evidence

Gowing's historical argument proceeds through a series of pointed anecdotes rather than systematic analysis. He recounts how Sir Thomas More, before his execution, placed his beard aside on the block, remarking 'that it at least was guiltless of treason.' The story serves both as a moral lesson and as a wry commentary on political hypocrisy. Another anecdote describes the chancellor Duprat taxing clergy beards, leading to a revenge plot in which a bishop-elect was barred from his see unless he sacrificed his 'handsomest' beard—a humiliation said to have caused his death. Gowing also reports that Emperor Charles V's painter, John Mayo, had a beard so long he could stand on it, and that the emperor would unfasten it at table to watch it blow into courtiers' faces. These tales, drawn from sources Gowing does not always name, are chosen for their dramatic and comic value, reinforcing his claim that beards have been central to identity, power, and ridicule.

The Physiology of Hair

Though the excerpts do not include the full physiological argument, Gowing's title promises a 'Physiological' dimension, and his preface indicates that notes were added after delivery. The lecture likely draws on contemporary medical ideas about hair growth and health, common in Victorian hygiene debates. Gowing's approach is not clinical but persuasive: he treats the beard as a natural outgrowth that shaving opposes. His reference to 'the Ape and the Goat' in the preface and title page suggests he used animal comparisons to mock the shaven face as unnatural. The physiological section probably argued that shaving weakens the body or exposes the skin to harm, though the surviving text emphasizes historical and artistic evidence. Readers should note that Gowing's 'philosophy' is less a systematic treatise than a polemic marshaling whatever evidence supports his case.

Patriotic and Moral Overtones

Gowing closes his preface with a salute: 'Vivat Regina! Floreat Barba!'—'Long live the Queen! May the Beard flourish!' This pairing of monarchy and facial hair is no accident. Throughout the lecture, English kings are judged by their beards: Henry VIII 'had his Beard close clipped,' while Edward VI 'died before his Beard developed.' Gowing implies that a bearded nation is a virtuous one, and that shaving follows foreign or decadent fashions. He praises the common people who 'stuck to their Beards, uninfluenced by the fluctuations of court fashions,' aligning the beard with sturdy English independence. The lecture thus becomes a patriotic appeal as much as a physiological or aesthetic one. Gowing's tone is consistently good-humored, but his underlying argument is serious: the beard is a marker of natural order, national character, and moral integrity.

Gowing's lecture is best approached as a period piece of Victorian polemic—learned, witty, and unapologetically biased. Readers interested in the history of grooming, nineteenth-century popular science, or the rhetoric of reform will find it a rich specimen. The author's voice is confident and conversational, peppered with literary allusions and comic asides. Those seeking a balanced medical or historical survey should look elsewhere; Gowing's aim is persuasion, not impartiality. The lecture rewards attention to its rhetorical strategies and the cultural assumptions it reveals.

Some evenings, one finds a peculiar comfort in old defenses—a beard’s quiet rebellion, or a soul’s solitary examination. Gowing’s whiskered earnestness and the mystical treatises share a whispered kinship: both are stubborn, kindly witnesses to a gentler interior struggle. Decades shelved together, they breathe the same patient air, like The Cell of Self-Knowledge : seven early English mystical treatises printed by Henry Pepwell in 1521 — A Reader’s Guide, asking only for unhurried attention.