or

the constituents of beauty, it must derive that power either from some natural properties inherent in certain measures which operate mechanically; from the operation of custom; or from the fitness which some measures have to answer some particular ends of conveniency. Our business, therefore, is to inquire whether the parts of those objects, which are found beautiful in the vegetable or animal kingdoms, are constantly so formed according to such certain measures, as may serve to satisfy us that their beauty results from those measures on the principle of a natural mechanical cause; from custom; or in fine, from their fitness for any determinate purposes. I intend to examine this point under each of these heads in their order. But, before I proceed farther, I hope it will not be thought amiss if I lay down the rules which governed me in this inquiry, and which have misled me in it if I have gone astray. 1. If two bodies produce the same or a similar effect on the mind, and on examination they are found to agree in some of their properties, and to differ in others, the common effect is to be attributed to the properties in which they agree, and not to those in which they differ. 2. Not to account for the effect of a natural object from the effect of an artificial object. 3. Not to account for the effect of any natural object from a conclusion of our reason concerning its uses, if a natural cause may be assigned. 4. Not to admit any determinate quantity, or any relation of quantity, as the cause of a certain effect, if the effect is produced by different or opposite measures and relations; or if these measures and relations may exist, and yet the effect may not be produced. These are the rules which I have chiefly followed whilst I examined into the power of proportion considered as a natural cause; and these, if he

thinks them just, I request the reader to carry with him throughout the following discussion, whilst we inquire, in the first place, in what things we find this quality of beauty; next to see whether in these we can find any assignable proportion, in such a manner as ought to convince us that our idea of beauty results from them. We shall consider this pleasing power as it appears in vegetables, in the inferior animals, and in man. Turning our eyes to the vegetable creation, we find nothing there so beautiful as flowers; but flowers are almost of every sort and shape, and of every sort of disposition; they are turned and fashioned into an infinite variety of forms, and from these forms botanists have given them their names, which are almost as various. What proportion do we discover between the stalks and the leaves of flowers, or between the leaves and the pistils? How does the slender stalk of the rose agree with the bulky head under which it bends? But the rose is a beautiful flower; and can we undertake to say that it does not owe a great deal of its beauty even to that disproportion? The rose is a large flower, yet it grows upon a small shrub : the flower of the apple is very small, and grows upon a large tree; yet the rose and the apple blossom are both beautiful, and the plants that bear them are most engagingly attired, notwithstanding this disproportion. What, by general consent, is allowed to be a more beautiful object than an orange tree, flourishing at once with its leaves, its blossoms, and its fruit? But it is in vain that we search here for any proportion between the height, the breadth, or any thing else concerning the dimensions of the whole, or concerning the relation of the particular parts to each other. I grant that we may observe in many flowers something of a regular figure, and

of a methodical disposition of leaves.—The rose has such a figure and such a disposition of its petals; but, in an oblique view, when this figure is in a good measure lost, and the order of the leaves confounded, it yet retains its beauty; the rose is even more beautiful before it is full blown; and the bud, before its exact figure is formed: and this is not the only instance wherein method and exactness, the soul of proportion, are found rather prejudicial than serviceable to the cause of beauty.

SECT III.-PROPORTION NOT THE CAUSE OF BEAUTY IN ANIMALS.

THAT proportion has but a small share in the formation of beauty is full as evident among animals. Here the greatest variety of shapes, and disproportions of parts, are well fitted to excite this idea. The swan, confessedly a beautiful bird, has a neck longer than the rest of his body, and but a very short tail is this a beautiful proportion? we must allow that it is. But, then, what shall we say to the peacock, who has comparatively but a short neck, with a tail longer than the neck and the rest of the body taken together? How many birds are there that vary infinitely from each of these standards, and from every other which you can fix, with proportions different, and often directly opposite to each other; and yet many of these birds are extremely beautiful; when upon considering them, we find nothing in any one part that might determine us a priori, to say what the others ought to be, nor indeed to guess any thing about them, but what experience might shew to be full of disappointment and mistake. And with regard to the colours either of birds or flowers, for there is something similar in the colouring of both, whether they are

considered in their extension or gradation, there is nothing of proportion to be observed. Some are of but one single colour, others have all the colours of the rainbow; some are of the primary colours, others are of the mixed; in short, an attentive observer may soon conclude that there is as little of proportion in the colouring as in the shapes of these objects. Turn next to beasts: examine the head of a beautiful horse; find what proportion that bears to his body, and to his limbs, and what relations these have to each other; and, when you have settled these proportions as a standard of beauty, then take a dog or cat, or any other animal, and examine how far the same proportions between their heads and their neck, between those and the body, and so on, are found to hold; I think we may safely say, that they differ in every species! yet that there are individuals found in a great many species so differing that have a very striking beauty. Now, if it be allowed that very different, and even contrary forms and dispositions are consistent with beauty, it amounts, I believe, to a concession, that no certain measure, operating from a natural principle, are necessary to produce it, at least so far as the brute species are concerned.

SECT. IV.-PROPORTION NOT THE CAUSE OF BEAUTY IN THE HUMAN SPECIES.

THERE are some parts of the human body that are observed to hold certain proportions to each other; but, before it can be proved that the efficient cause of beauty lies in these, it must be shewn that, wherever these are found exact, the person to whom they belong is beautiful: I mean in the effect produced on the view, either of any member distinctly considered, or of the whole body together. It must

one

be likewise shewn that these parts stand in such a relation to each other, that the comparison between them may be easily made, and that the affection of the mind may naturally result from it. For my part, I have at several times very carefully examined many of those proportions, and found them hold very nearly, or altogether alike, in many subjects, which were not only very different from another, but where one has been very beautiful, and the other very remote from beauty. With regard to the parts which are found so proportioned, they are often so remote from each other in situation, nature, and office, that I cannot see how they admit of any comparison, nor consequently how any effect owing to proportion can result from them. The neck, say they, in beautiful bodies, should measure with the calf of the leg; it should likewise be twice the circumference of the wrist.

And an

infinity of observations of this kind are to be found in the writings and conversations of many. But what relation has the calf of the leg to the neck; or either of these parts to the wrist? These proportions are certainly to be found in handsome bodies: they are as certainly in ugly ones; as any, who will take the pains, to try, may find. Nay, I do not know but they may be the least perfect in some of the most beautiful. You may assign any proportions you please to every part of the human body; and I undertake that a painter shall religiously observe them all, and notwithstanding produce, if he pleases, a very ugly figure. The same painter shall considerably deviate from these proportions, and produce a very beautiful one. And indeed it may be observed in the masterpieces of the ancient and modern statuary, that several of them differ very widely from the proportions of others, in parts very