follows that progressive actions, as such, cannot be included among the subjects proper for the pencil, which must be confined to actions which are simultaneous, or to mere figures which indicate an action by their positions. I shall examine this matter more closely in the next section.

SIXTEENTH SECTION.

Further Consideration of the Subject.—Illustrations drawn from the Practice of Homer.

Now,

My view of the matter is this. In the first place I presume it will scarcely admit of dispute that the imitations of painting are effected by means entirely different from those of poetry; the former employing figures and colors in space, and the latter articulate sounds in time. as it is evident that the signs employed must bear a suitable relation to the things represented, it follows that those signs which are arranged in juxta-position with each other, can only express co-existent objects, or an object whose parts are co-existent, while those signs which are consecutive, can only express things which, either of themselves, or in their component parts, are consecutive.

Those objects which are co-existent, or whose

parts are co-existent, are called bodies; consequently bodies, with their visible properties, are the legitimate subjects of painting. Those things, on the contrary, which are consecutive, or whose parts are consecutive, are termed, generally speaking, actions. Actions are therefore the legitimate subjects of poetry.

All bodies, however, exist in time as well as space. It is their nature to endure, and at each separate moment of their duration, they may appear under a different aspect, and in new combinations. Each of these momentary appearances and combinations is the effect of one which has preceded, and may be the cause of one which is to follow; it will thus form the centre of an action. Painting may, therefore, represent actions, but it can only be by intimation, through means of bodies.

Actions, on the other hand, cannot exist of themselves, but must depend on certain conditions. In so far then as these conditions are bodies, or are regarded as such, poetry also delineates bodies, but it will only be by intimamation, through means of actions.

The painter can only employ, in his compositions of co-existing bodies, one single moment of the action, and he must therefore select, as far as possible, that which is at once expressive of the past, and pregnant with the future.

In like manner the poet, in his consecutive imitations, can employ but one single attribute of bodies, and must therefore select that which awakens the most sensible image of the body under that particular aspect which he has chosen to represent. On this principle is founded the rule of unity in the pictorial epithets of the poet, and of parsimony in his delineations of bodily objects.

I should place less confidence in this dry series of conclusions, did I not find them completely confirmed by the practice of Homer, if indeed I should not rather say that it was the practice of that great poet which has led me to form them. Such principles alone will enable us to define and explain the grandeur of Homer's style, as well as to estimate as it deserves the opposite practice of so many modern poets, who vainly seek to compete with the painter on a

point on which they must of necessity be surpassed by him.

I find that Homer paints nothing but progressive actions; and each body, each individual thing which he introduces, he delineates only on account of the part it bears in these actions, and even then, in general, with but a single trait. Is it then surprising that the painter can find little or nothing to do where Homer has employed his powers of delineation, and that the only field he can find to work on is where the story brings together a number of beautiful bodies, in fine positions, and within a space advantageous to art, however slight the poet's delineation of all these circumstances may be? An examination of the whole series of pictures, drawn by Caylus from Homer, would fully illustrate the truth of these remarks. But I shall here take leave of the Count, who would have the painter's success to form the test of the poet's merits, and proceed to illustrate more particularly the style of Homer.

I have said that, for any single object, Homer employs in general but a single trait. A ship