member, the smallest joint of the finger, the proportion of the whole, the length and breadth of the body may be found; so also may the form of the whole from the form of each single part. When the head is long, all is long, or round when the head is round, or square when it is square. One form, one mind, one root appertain to all therefore is each organized body so much a whole, that, without discord, destruction, or deformity, nothing can be added or diminished.

Every thing in man is progressive; every thing congenial; form, stature, complexion, hair, skin, veins, nerves, bones, voice, walk, manner, style, passion, love, hatred. One and the same spirit is manifest in all. He has a determinate sphere, in which his powers and sensations are allowed, within which they may be freely exercised, but beyond which he cannot pass. Each countenance is, indeed, subject to momentary change, though not perceptible, even in its solid parts; but these changes are all proportionate: each is measured, each proper and peculiar to the countenance in which it takes place. The capability of change is limited. Even that which is affected, assumed, imitated, heterogeneous, still has the properties of the individual originating in the nature of the whole, and is so definite, that it is only possible in this, but in no other being.

I almost blush to repeat this in the present age. What, Posterity! wilt thou suppose, thus

to see me so often obliged to demonstrate to pretended sages, that nature makes no emendation? She labours from one to all. Her's is not disjointed organization, not mosaic work. The more there is of the mosaic in the works of artists, orators, or poets, the less are they natural; the less do they resemble the copious streams of the fountain; the stem extending itself to the remotest branch.

The more there is of progression, the more there is of truth, power, and nature; the more extensive, general, durable, and noble is the effect. The designs of nature are the designs of a moment; one form, one spirit, appear through the whole. Thus nature forms her least plant, and thus her most exalted man. I shall have effected nothing by my physiognomonical labours, if I am not able to destroy that opinion, so tasteless, so unworthy of the age, so opposite to all sound philosophy, that nature patches up the features of various countenances, in order to make one perfect countenance; and I shall think them well rewarded, if the congeniality, uniformity, and agreement of human organization be so demonstrated, that he who shall deny it, will be declared to deny the light of the sun at noon-day.

The human body is a plant, each part of which has the character of the stem. Suffer me to repeat this continually, since this most evident of all things is continually controverted, among all ranks of men, in words, deeds, books, and works

of art. I therefore find the greatest incongruities in the heads of the greatest masters. I know no painter, of whom I can say he has thoroughly studied the harmony of the human outline, not even Poussin, no, not even Raphael himself. Let any one class the forms of their countenances, and compare them with the forms of nature. Let him, for instance, draw the outlines of their foreheads, and endeavour to find similar outlines in nature, and he will find incongruities, which could not have been expected in such great masters.

Chodowiecki, excepting the too great length and extent, particularly of his human figures, perhaps had the most exact feeling of congeniality in caricature, that is to say, of the relative propriety of the deformed, the humorous, or other characteristical members and features. For as there is conformity and congeniality in the beautiful, so is there also in the deformed. Every cripple has the distortion peculiar to himself, the effects of which are extended to his whole body. In like manner, the evil actions of the evil, and the good actions of the good, have a conformity of character; at least, they are all tinged with this conformity of character.

Little as this seems to be remarked by poets and painters, still is it the foundation of their art; for wherever emendation is visible, there admiration is at an end. Why has no painter yet been pleased to place the blue eye beside the brown one? Yet, absurd as this would be, no

less absurd are the incongruities continually encountered by the physiognomonical eye-the nose of Venus on the head of Madona.-I have been assured by a man of fashion, that, at a masquerade, with only the aid of an artificial nose, he entirely concealed himself from the knowledge of all his acquaintance. So much does nature reject what does not appertain to herself.

I have never yet met with one Roman nose among an hundred circular foreheads in profile. In an hundred other square foreheads, I have scarcely found one in which there were not cavities and prominences. I never yet saw a perpendicular forehead with strongly arched features in the lower part of the countenance, the double chin excepted.

I meet no strong-bowed eye-brows combined with bony perpendicular countenances.

Wherever the forehead is projecting, so in general are the under lips, children excepted.

I have never seen gently arched, yet much retreating foreheads, combined with a short snub nose, which in profile, is sharp and sunken.

A visible nearness of the nose to the eye, is always attended by a visible wideness between the nose and mouth.

A long covering of the teeth, or, in other words, a long space between the nose and mouth, always indicates small upper lips. Length of form and face is generally attended by welldrawn fleshy lips.

I shall at present produce but one more ex

ample, which will convince all who possess acute physiognomonical sensation, how great is the harmony of all nature's forms, and how much she hates the incongruous.

Take two, three, or four shades of men remarkable for understanding; join the features so artificially that no defect shall appear, as far as relates to the act of joining; that is, take the forehead of one, add the nose of a second, the mouth of a third, the chin of a fourth, and the result of this combination of the signs of wisdom shall be folly. Folly is perhaps nothing more than the emendation of some heterogeneous addition." But let these four wise countenances be supposed congruous." Let them so be supposed, or as nearly so as possible, still their combination will produce the signs of folly.

Those therefore who maintain that conclusion cannot be drawn from a part, from a single section of the profile, to the whole, would be perfectly right, if unarbitrary Nature patched up countenances like arbitrary Art; but so she does not. Indeed, when a man, being born with understanding, becomes a fool, there expression of heterogeneousness is the consequence. Either the lower part of the countenance extends itself, or the eyes acquire a direction not conformable to the forehead, the mouth cannot remain closed, or the features of the countenance, in some other manner, lose their consistency: all becomes discord; and folly, in such a countenance, is very manifest. Let him who would study physiognomy,