catch the Homunculus in the act of undreffing, or of putting on humanity-but to no purpose-as that important bufinels, if it is ever performed, certainly paffes in a more comfortable and, retired place than the flider of a microscope. This chapter erds with fome curious quotations from St. Auguftine and Ariftotle, which are new to us; from which it appears that they were well acquainted with certain infects which had the property of living (it does not clearly appear from thefe quotations how long) after being cut into feveral parts, and confequently refembling the Polypes of modern days, or rather the worms difcovered by Reaumur and Bonnet. The experiments which the Saint made with the infect which he met with in his walks, and which he calls reptantem beftiolam multipedem, and vermiculum longum, which Mr. D. tranflates a Polype, aftonished him greatly, and feem to have been productive of the fame metaphyfical doubts and difficulties concerning the nature of the foul which the modern experiments have given rife to. The reader may find the whole paffage in St. Auguftine de quantitate animæ, cap. 62. p. 431. Edit. Paris. 1679. fol. In the following chap. Mr. D. fhews that the fexual system of plants was known to the antients, who, he affirms, have fpoken with more precifion on this point than many of the moderns are willing to allow them to have done. The quotations from Aristotle, &c. are fufficiently decifive in fhewing that the ufe of the farina fæcundans of the male palm tree, in particular, in impregnating the female, was well known to them; and it is pretty clear from the paffage produced from Pliny, that he as well as other naturalifts of that time extended the diftinction of fexes and this ufe of the male duft, to plants in general. We fhall not stop to enumerate after our Author the many well known difcoveries of the antients in the mathematical sciences and the arts depending on them, though we cannot quit this part of the work without acknowledging that he has fufficiently proved the existence of Archimedes's mirrors, with which he is faid to have burnt the Roman fleet under Marcellus, before Syracufe, at the diftance of bow fhot. The utter impoffibility of this matter Descartes undertook to demonftrate; and Monf. Perrault, fpeaking of it, is very willing to allow that the antients were at least equal to the moderns in the art of lying. Mr. D. on this occafion collects feveral witneffes who fpeak pofitively to the fact, but none fo particularly as Tzetzes, who describes the very conftruction of the machine by which this mafter-stroke of antient engineering was effected. Indeed, at prefent, there is no difputing the poffibility of it, as Monf. Buffon, profiting by this description, as Monf. D. juftly supposes, conftructed fome years ago a compound burning mirror, con fifting fifting of 400 plain fpecula, which fet fire to wood at above the diftance of 150 feet. The laft part of our Author's work is principally employed in reprefenting the very juft ideas which many of the antients entertained of the fupreme Being, and of the nature of the foul. In the last chap. he affirms that even the doctrine of original fin was discovered by them, without any affittance from revelation. Our Author, who appears to be fo well read on all the subjects of which he treats, cannot certainly be ignorant that Plato, whom he principally quotes on this occafion, has been fuppofed by many writers of credit to have read the books of Mofes, or at least to have been instructed in his doctrine during his travels into Egypt, and that on this account he has been called the Attick Mofes, and accused by some antient writers of having wholly ftolen his fyftem of the world from the Jewish lawgiver. We have now finished our account of this performance, of the merit of which we entertain a very favourable idea, though we have been led to criticife fome parts of it in a manner we hope not offenfive to the Author. The lovers of antiquity will be pleased with the many interefting quotations which he has here collected, though all will not be difpofed to give that weight or meaning to many of them affigned by the Author; the upper part of whofe page will appear to many to contain several rather too flattering likeneffes of the quotations at the bottom. Mr. D. views the works of the antients with the eyes of a lover. Where a common eye can fee nothing but the bare fkin and bones of a fyftem, he perceives the most perfect plumpness and rotundity; going even beyond the lover in Lucretius, who gives his miftrefs the palliative epithet of flim or flender, when to every other eye fhe is a perfect scarecrow ισχύον εξωμγειον tum fit, quum vivere non quit Præ macie. Notwithstanding the proofs which Mr. D. has occafionally given us of his partiality to antiquity, we cannot difmifs this article without thanking him for the new information which he has afforded us in fome points, and for the entertainment with which he has furnished us by his manner of presenting what was already known; and we heartily recommend the perufal of his work to all lovers of knowlege, antient or modern. Hiftoire de l'Art chez les Anciens; par Mr. J. Winckelmann, prefident des Antiquités a Rome, &c. The Hiftory of Art among the Antients, &c. tranflated from the German. 2 Vol. 8vo. Amfterdam. 1766. EW of our English connoiffeurs, we imagine, are unacquainted with the reputation of the prefent fuperintendant F O o 2 of of antiquities at Rome. The curious have already been entertained with other pieces of his, on fimilar fubjects with the prefent, but of inferior note; this being not only his laft, but also his moft capital performance; the defign of which will beft appear from the following paffages tranflated from the preface. The history of arts, fays our Author, which I have undertaken to write, is not a mere chronological narration of its changes and revolutions in the course of time. I ufe the word History in its moft extenfive fignification in the Greek language, my defign being to give an effay towards a general fyftem of Art. This I have endeavoured to execute in the first part of this work, in treating of Art among the ancients. I confider the state of Art in each nation diftinctly; but I dwell with peculiar pleasure among the Greeks. The fecond part contains the history of Art, in the more strict fenfe of the word; that is, the history of its fate and revolutions among the Greeks and Romans only. My principal object, throughout the whole work, is the Nature of Art: the hiftory of artifts, the particulars of whofe lives have been collected by other writers, is foreign to my plan. Nevertheless, in the fecond part, will be pointed out fuch monuments of antiquity as will ferve to throw a new light not only on the arts themselves, but on the hiftory of thofe by whom they were principally cultivated." The world hath already seen a variety of publications nearly under the same title with the prefent; but former writers have generally acquired their knowlege of antiquity from books, whilft M. Winckelmann, on the contrary, reasons only from what he has feen. Indeed, the generality of former writers on these fubjects, being themselves but very fuperficial connoiffeurs, have been guilty of great mistakes, especially in the hiftorical part of their works: for inftance, fays our Author, We are told that among the ftatues in the collection of Lord Pembroke at Wilton, there are four by a Greek artift, named Cleomenes. But they prefume greatly on our credulity when they affure us, that an equestrian statue of Marcus Curtius, in the fame collection, is the work of a sculptor fent from Corinth to Rome by Polybius, the historian, no doubt. It would hardly have been more impertinent to have faid that he was fent by Polybius to Wilton. Richardfon has given us a defcription of the palaces and villas of Rome, and of the ftatues they contain, like a man who beheld thefe things in a dream. His ftay in that city was fo fhort, that he only faw fome palaces once, and others not at all. He mistakes a painting of Guido in fresco for antique. But we must not be too minute with an author of his reputation a reputation, however, which he by no means deferves. Keyfler, where he treats of the monuments of Art at Rome Rome and elfewhere, merits not the leaft attention, having taken all he says from the most contemptible books.' Thefe we have felected from a confiderable number of animadverfions, in this preface, on the mistakes of former wriLers; mistakes which our author is of opinion have, in a great measure, proceeded from a want of diftinguishing those parts which have been fupplied by modern artists in order to compleat fuch ftatues as were mutilated. We fhall now proceed to the author's plan. The whole work is divided first into two parts: the first comprehending the confiderations of Art in its nature, (dans fa nature); the fecond, the hiftory of its progrefs among the Greeks. The first part is again divided into five chapters, the general fubjects of which are, 1. Of the origin of Art, and the causes of its difference in different nations; 2. Qf Art among the Egyptians, the Phoenicians and Perfians; 3. Of Art among the Etrufcans, and among their neighbours; 4. Of Art among the Greeks; 5. Of Art among the Romans. The first of these five chapters is fubdivided into three fections under the following general heads, 1. Of Art in its primitive form; 2. Of the different materials employed in fculpture; 3. Of the causes of the difference of Art in different nations. The fecond chapter is also fubdivided into three fections, viz. 1. Of Art among the Ægyptians; 2. Of Art among the Phoenicians and Perfians; 3. General obfervations on Art among the Egyptians the Perfians, and Phoenicians. The heads of the three fections of Chap. 3. are, Of the knowlege requifite to eftimate properly the arts of the Etrufcans; of the ftyle of the Etrufcan artists; and of Art among the adjacent nations. Chapter the fourth has the following fections, viz. Of the reafons and caufes of the perfection of Art among the Greeks, and its fuperiority over that of other nations; of the effentials of Art; of the progrefs and decline of Art in Greece; of the mechanical part of Grecian fculpture; of the paintings of ancient Greece. The fubdivifions of the fifth chapter are, an examination of the Roman ftyle in arts; of the Roman drefs. Part 2d. is not, like the firft, divided into chapters, but into fections only, the titles of which are: Of Art from the most remote period of time to Phidias; of Art from Phidias to Alexander the Great; of Art after the times of Alexander, and its decline; of the Grecian Arts among the Romans under the Emperors: and of the decline of Art under Septimus Severus. Having thus taken a general view of our Author's plan, we fhall now fit down to read his book, with a pen in our hand; and fhall felect, as we proceed, fuch particular parts as we think will afford moft general inftruction or entertainment to our readers. 003 Vol. Vol. I. p. 35. In fpeaking of beauty being proportioned to the heat and purity of the climate, It is not difficult, fays he, even for those who have never been in Italy, to judge of the beauty of its inhabitants from the delicacy of its compofitions, both proceeding from the fame caufe.'-Sublime beauty, that beauty which confifts not only in the foft fulness of a fatiny fkin, the bloom of rofes and fillies, the feducing languor of a moift or the vivid poignancy of a brilliant, meaning eye; but which confifts alfo in a regular fymmetry and exact proportion.of features: this beauty,. I fay, is moft generally to be found in warm climates, and under ferene fkies. If the Italians, fays an English author of fome note, are the only people capable of painting beauty, which is almoft the fame thing as to create it, it is owing to the beautiful objects which in Italy are continually before their eyes: by this frequent contemplation of beautiful nature, they learn to reprefent her in greater perfection, that is to copy her more juftly. Here we must stop a moment, in behalf of our fair country-women, to declare that we do not affent to the author's hypothefis; for we apprehend it not to be founded on fact. We do not deny that there are in Italy many beautiful women; but there are countries in the world, which though much inferior in point of climate are much fu perior to them in point of beauty. The fouth of France is as remarkable for the warmth and ferenity of its climate, as the ugliness of its beau Jexe. Cotta, in Cicero de Nat. Deor. tells us, that in his time, among the brilliant youth at Athens, there were very few that were really beautiful, In Sweden, and in the northern parts of Germany, the women are infinitely handfomer, than in any part of France. So that, in regard to the beauty of women, our author talks like an antiquarian, as he is. Having difmiffed this fubject, our Author proceeds to the confideration of the influence of education, conftitution, and government, on the genius of different nations. The genius,' fays he, of paft ages feems to be preferved, in fome refpects, in a country where the influence of climate concurs with the fhadow of ancient liberty to produce the fame effect. I speak of Rome (we should hardly have gueffed it) where the people enjoy a liberty diffolved in the ecclefiaftical government; where there might still be found an army of heroes who, like their anceftors, would brave the greateft dangers; where, among the women, there might ftill be found, fome of thofe ancient ma-' trons whofe intrepidity nothing could shake. It were eafy to confirm what I have advanced by various ftriking examples; but this is not the place: nor is the fubject a part of my plan. And therefore might as well have been omitted, if it had not been neceflary to flatter my mafler, the POPE. The |