not this help, let us fee whether proportion can in any fenfe be confidered as the caufe of beauty, as hath been fo generally, and by fome fo confidently affirmed. If proportion be one of the conftituents of beauty, it muft derive that power either from fome natural properties inherent in certain meafures, which operate mechanically; from the operation of cuftom; or from the fitnefs which fome measures have to anfwer fome particular ends of conveniency. Our bufinefs therefore is to inquire, whether the parts of those objects, which are found beautiful in the vegetable or animal kingdoms, are conftantly fo formed according to fuch certain meafures, as may ferve to fatisfy us that their beauty refults from those measures on the principle of a natural mechanical cause; or from custom; or, in fine, from their fitness for any determinate purpofes. I intend to examine this point under each of thefe heads in their order. But before I proceed further, I hope it will not be thought amifs, if I lay down the rules which governed me in this inquiry, and which have misled me in it, if I have gone aftray. 1. If two bodies produce the fame or a fimilar effect on the mind, and on examination they are found to agree in fome 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 ef

fe&t

fect of a natural object from the effect of an artificial object. 3. Not to account for the effect of any natural object from a conclufion of our reafon concerning its uses, if a natural cause may be affigned. 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 oppofite 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, whilft I examined into the power of proportion confidered as a natural caufe; and thefe, if he thinks them juft, I request the reader to carry with him throughout the following difcuffion; whilst we inquire in the first place, in what things we find this quality of beauty; next, to fee whether in these we can find any affignable proportions, in fuch a manner as ought to convince us that our idea of beauty results from them. We fhall confider this pleasing power, as it appears in vegetables, in the inferiour animals, and in man. Turning our eyes to the vegetable creation, we find nothing there fo beautiful as flowers; but flowers are almoft of every fort of fhape, and of every fort of difpofition; they are turned and fashioned into an infinite variety of forms; and from these forms botanifts have given them their names, which are almoft as various. What proportion do we discover between the ftalks and the

I

leaves of flowers, or between the leaves and the piftils? How does the flender ftalk of the rofe agree with the bulky head under which it bends? but the rofe is a beautiful flower; and can we undertake to fay that it does not owe a great deal of its beauty even to that difproportion; the rofe is a large flower, yet it grows upon a small fhrub ; the flower of the apple is very fmall, and grows upon a large tree yet the rofe and the apple bloffom are both beautiful, and the plants that bear them are most engagingly attired, notwithftanding this difproportion. What by general confent is allowed to be a more beautiful object than an orange tree, flourishing at once with its leaves, its bloffoms, and its fruit? But it is in vain that we fearch here for any proportion between the height, the breadth, or any thing elfe concern ing the dimenfions of the whole, or concerning the relation of the particular parts to each other. I grant that we may obferve in many flowers, fomething of a regular figure, and of a methodical difpofition of the leaves. The role has fuch a figure and fuch a disposition of its petals; but in an oblique view, when this figure is in a good mea fure left, and the order of the leaves confounded, it yet retains its beauty; the rofe is even more beautiful before it is full blown; and the bud, be fore this exact figure is formed; and this is not the only inftance wherein method and exacthefs,

VOL. I.

P

the

the foul of proportion, are found rather prejudi cial than ferviceable 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 greateft variety of shapes and difpofitions of parts, are well fitted to excite this idea. The swan, confeffedly a beautiful bird, has a neck longer than the reft of his body, and but a very fhort tail: is this a beautiful proportion? we muft allow that it is. But then what shall we fay to the peacock, who has comparatively but a fhort neck, with a tail longer than the neck and the reft 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 oppofite to each other! and yet many of these birds are extremely beautiful; when upon confidering them we find nothing in any one part that might determine us, à priori, to fay what the others ought to be, nor indeed to guess any thing about. them, but what experience might fhew to be full of disappointment and miftake. And with regard to the colours either of birds or flowers, for there

is fomething fimilar in the colouring of both, whether they are confidered in their extenfion or gradation, there is nothing of proportion to be obferved. Some are of but one fingle colour; others have all the colours of the rainbow; fome are of the primary colours, others are of the mixt; in fhort, an attentive observer may foon 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 fettled thefe propor tions as a standard of beauty, then take a dog or cat, or any other animal, and examine how far the fame proportions between their heads and their necks, between thofe and the body, and fo on, are found to hold; I think we may fafely fay, that they differ in every fpecies, yet that there are individuals found in a great many fpecies fo differing, that have a very ftriking beauty. Now, if it be allowed that very different, and even contrary, forms and difpofitions are confiftent with beauty, it amounts I believe to a conceffion, that no certain meafures, operating from a natural principle, are neceffarý to produce it, at least fo far as the brute ecies is concerned.