made the Laocoon, as it were, my starting-point, and having afterwards recurred repeatedly to it, I have thought it fitting to give the name itself a place on my title-page. Other little digressions on several points connected with ancient art, contribute less to the general object in view, and are left where they stand only because I have no hope of ever being able to give them a better place.

Finally, it is proper to mention that under the general term "Painting," I desire to be understood the arts of design in all their departments, in the same way as I would employ, if it were necessary, the name of "Poetry," to designate those arts in general whose imitation consists in the progressive principle.

CONTENTS.

FIRST SECTION.-Consideration of Winkelmann's The-

ory, that the primary Law of the Arts of Design

among the Ancients consisted in a noble Simplicity

and tranquil Grandeur, both in Attitude and Expres-

sion,

SECOND SECTION.-The primary Law of the Arts con-

sists in Beauty. This Principle at once explains the

difference observable in the Treatment of the Laocoon

between the Poet and the Painter,

THIRD SECTION.-It is impossible that Truth and Ex-

pression can form the primary Law of Art, as the

Artist's Imitation is confined to a single Moment, and

the Painter is, moreover, limited to one single Point

of View. The Delineation of the utmost Extent of

Expression confines the Imagination of the Spectator.

All transitory Effects become permanently fixed by Art,

and an extreme Expression, when too long continued,

becomes disgusting. On the Diversity of the Signs

PAGH

1

12

PAOK.

employed by the Fine Arts depends the Facility, and

even the Possibility, of combining several of them in

order to produce a common Effect,

FOURTH SECTION.-The Range of the Poet is unlimited.
The whole Realm of Perfection lies open to his

Imitation. He is not obliged to concentrate his Sub-

ject into one single Moment.-Observations on the

Drama, which may be viewed as a speaking Picture.—

Illustration of the Philoctetes of Sophocles,

FIFTH SECTION.-Of the Laocoon of Virgil, and the

sculptured Groupe of the same Subject. It seems

more probable that the Artist imitated Virgil, than

that the latter took the Groupe for his Model,

SIXTH SECTION.-The Supposition that the Sculptor of

the Laocoon has imitated the Poet, conveys no Impu-

tation derogatory to the Genius of the former,

SEVENTH SECTION.-On the two different Kinds of

Imitation, that of the Artist of Genius, and of the

servile Copyist.-Caution to the Critics not to be too

ready to attribute Imitation to the Poet, a Propensity

which has led Spence and Addison to do much unde-

served Injury to the Reputation of the ancient classical

Authors,

EIGHTH SECTION.-Difficulties and Inconsistencies into

which Spence has been led by the System deprecated

in the foregoing Section,

NINTH SECTION.-In estimating the Works of the

ancient Artists, a Distinction must be made between

those which they have executed as mere Specimens of

Art, and those which they have destined for religious

Purposes,

TENTH SECTION.-Those Objects which are addressed

solely to the Eye must not be employed by the Poet.

-Among these Objects may be reckoned all the vari-

ous Attributes of Divinities.-Misapprehension of

Spence on this Point,

ELEVENTH SECTION.-Similar Mistake of the Comte de

Caylus. Invention the pre-eminent Merit of the Poet.

Execution that of the Artist,

PAGE

303

111

117

TWELFTH SECTION.-Further Misapprehensions of Cay-

lus. Visible and invisible Actions,

126

THIRTEENTH SECTION.-The poetical Pictures of Homer

far surpass all the Attempts of the Artist to embody

them; while those passages, on the contrary, in which

but little Description is introduced, frequently present

admirable Subjects for Painting,

136

FOURTEENTH SECTION.-Continuation of the Subject.

-Refutation of Caylus's Censure of Milton,

142

FIFTEENTH SECTION.-The essential Difference between

the Painter and the Poet.-Time is the Sphere of the

Poet, and Space that of the Painter,

146