A history of æsthetic

Front matter

Class i . : _

Book - B( r

mz -

Preface

^ESTHETIC theory is a branch of philosophy, and exists for the sake of knowledge and not as a guide to practice. The present work is,, therefore, primarily addressed to those who may find a philosophical interest in understanding the place and value of beauty in the system of human life, as conceived by leading thinkers in different periods of the world's history. It is important to insist that the aesthetic philosopher does not commit the impertinence of invading the artist's domain with an apparatus belli of critical principles and precepts. The opinion that this is so draws upon aesthetic much obloquy, which would be fully deserved if the opinion were true. Art, we are told, is useless ; in a kindred sense aesthetic may well submit to be useless also. The aesthetic theorist, in short, desires to understand the artist, not in order to interfere with thp latter, but in order to satisfy an intellectual interest of his own. . - t :

But besides professed students of philosophy, there is a large and increasing public of readers who are genuinely attracted by a fairly clear and connected exposition of any philosophical science the subject-matter of which comes home to them, be it Logic or Ethic, Sociology, or the theory of Religion. Such readers are approaching philosophy through the subject-matter that already interests them, instead of approaching the particular subject-matter simply because it is an integral part of philosophy. I confess to cherishing a hope that in spite of the defects which deprive this book of the charm that a more skilful writer might have given to such a subject, many intelligent lovers of beauty will be glad to make acquaintance, through it, with the thoughts of great men upon this important element of the spiritual world.

I have regarded my task, however, as the history of aesthetic, and not as the history of aestheticians. I have not paid much attention to the claims of historical justice. While I feel sure that no writer of the first rank is omitted, I could not venture to say that all the

PREFACE.

writers included are more important than any that are excluded. I have thought first of the arrangement necessary or convenient in order to exhibit the affiliation of ideas, and their completest forms, and only in the second place of the individual rank and merit of the writers to be dealt with.

Moreover, as the first chapter will show, I have not been able to persuade myself to treat my subject as a mere account of speculative theory. No branch of the history of philosophy can be adequately treated in this way, and the history of aesthetic least of all. My aim has therefore been to exhibit philosophic opinion as only the clear and crystallized form of the aesthetic consciousness or sense of beauty, which is itself determined by conditions that lie deep in the life of successive ages. I have desired, in fact, so far as possible, to write the history of the aesthetic consciousness.

Many readers may complain of the almost total absence of direct reference to Oriental art, whether in the ancient world or in modern China and Japan. For this omission there were several connected reasons. I was hardly called upon, even if I had been competent for the task, to deal with an aesthetic consciousness which had not, to my knowledge, reached the point of being clarified into speculative theory. It was, moreover,, necessary to limit my subject in some definite way; and it seemed natural to exclude everything that did not bear on the continuous development of the European art-consciousness. In so far as contact with Oriental art influenced the early Greek, and again the Byzantine development, a reference to it is implied in Hegel's and Morris' treatment of those periods. And finally, this omission is not without a positive ground, though here I really touch on a matter which is beyond my competence. The separation from the life of the progressive races, and the absence of a reflective theory of beauty, must surely have a fundamental connection with the non-architectural character pointed out by Mr. Morris in the art of China and Japan (p. 456). Without denying its beauty, therefore, I regarded it as something apart, and not well capable of being brought into the same connected story with the European feeling for the beautiful. A study of such art from a competent hand, in the light of aesthetic theory, would be a welcome aid to modern speculation.

With reference to my use of authorities, while there is often more egotism than modesty in calling the public to witness the course of an author's reading, I feel absolutely bound in this case to warn my readers that the reliability of the different parts of my work is unequal. For the mediaeval period between Plotinus and Dante, and in a lesser

PREFACE.

XHl degree for the Hellenistic period between Aristotle and Plotinus, my knowledge is not, for the most part, at first hand, and represents a voyage of discovery rather than a journey on ground familiar to me. I have not for these periods been able to follow the scholar's golden rule — never to quote from a book that he has not read from cover to cover. I have drawn my quotations from works of reference, and though I have, as a rule, carefully verified them and endeavoured to judge of the context, my estimate of the writer's position usually rests on the authority, in many cases Erdmann's History of Philosophy and the articles in the Encyclopedia Britannica, which I have consulted for information. In the case of Thomas Aquinas in particular, I profess no original knowledge at all. The very full quotations most courteously furnished me by Dr. Gildea appeared too significant to be left unused, and his authority warranted me in supposing that in these passages the principal materials for forming a judgment were before me. I do not desire it to be understood that he agrees with me in the estimate which I have formed of St. Thomas's aesthetic views.

It would have been foolish, I thought, to omit the more obvious points of the mediaeval development, both in art and in opinion, the mere mention of which might be suggestive to my readers, simply because I had to take them from such writers as Prof. Adamson, Prof. Seth, Prof. Middleton, Mr. Morris and Mr. Pater, and not from original research. Some division of labour must be allowed, though the fact that it has been resorted to should always be made known.

Acknowledgments for assistance are due from me above all to Prof. A. C. Bradley, who not only furnished me with a list of books which has been of the utmost service, but lent me out of his own library many of those works, which I might otherwise have had a difficulty in procuring. I also owe the most cordial thanks to Mr. J. D. Rogers, for permitting me to embody in an Appendix his analyses of some instances of musical expression — models, as I think, of what such analyses should be — and to Dr. Gildea, for the information mentioned above. And, finally, it is only right to say, that it is on the Council of the Home Arts and Industries Association, and in contact with its workers, that I have learned to appreciate, as I hope, with some degree of justice the writings of Mr. Ruskin and Mr. Morris, which may easily remain a sealed book to those who have not observed in simple cases the relation of workmanship to life. Many readers, who are familiar with the average

XIV

PREFACE.

work of the classes of that Association, may think that it reveals no great mystery of beauty ; but I am convinced that the leaders of the Association have sound insight, and that experience, to an increasing extent, is justifying their principles.

London, April, 1892.

Preface xi

Chapter I. Page

Proposed treatment, and its connection with the definition of Beauty.

1. The History of ^Esthetic, and the History of Fine Art . . i

2. The relation of Natural Beauty to the Beauty of Fine Art . 3

3. The definition of Beauty, and its relation to the History of

^Esthetic 4

Chapter II

The creation of a poetic world, and its first encounter with reflection.

1. Early Reflection hostile to Art . . . . . . 10

2. Creation of the World of Beauty - . . . . .10

3. Reason for the Attitude of Reflection 11

4. Neglected Suggestion in the Idea of Imitation . . , .12

5. Wide use of term " Imitation " in Ancient Philosophy . . 13

6. Further Explanation how Greek Art could be called " Imitative " 13

i. Facility of Imitative Art makes it Ideal . . . 13

ii. Hellenic Art not so Abstractly Ideal as has been thought . 13 7., The Ground prepared for ^Esthetic Theory . . . .15

Chapter III

The fundamental outlines of Greek theory concerning the beautiful.

The Principles and their Connexion . . . . .16 1. The Moralistic Principle . . . . . . . 17

a. How it shows itself .18

/?. Its ^Esthetic Value 21

XV xvi

Table Of Contents

PAGE

2. The Metaphysical Principle . . . . . . 23

a. How it shows itself . . . . . . 23

Chapter IV

Signs of progress in Greek theory concerning the beautiful.

1. The three Antitheses ........ 43

2. The Pre-Socratics . ' . . 43 a. " Can the Invisible be imitated ? " . . . . -44 ft. ^Esthetic and Real Interest ...... 45

4. Pythagoreanism 46 ft. (omitted).

y. Concrete Analysis ........ 46 a. Symbolism 47

ft. ^Esthetic Interest -5°

y. Concrete Criticisms . 54

6. Aristotle 55

a. Symbolism 56

i. Selection of Phenomena. . . . . .56 iii. Poetry Philosophic . • • • • 59

iv. Musical Symbolism ...... 60

v. Art corrective of Nature 61

ft. ^Esthetic Interest . . 62

i. Beauty, Virtue, and Pleasure . . . . .62

ii. Educational Interest 63

XVII

PAGE

iii. The Function of Tragedy ..... 64

a. Materials from Aristotle ..... 64

b. Estimate of his meaning . . ' . 66 y. Concrete Criticism 68

i. History and Elements of Drama .... 68

ii. Plot and character-drawing . . . . 70

Chapter V

Alexandrian and Greco-Roman culture to the reign of constantine the great.

Character of the Period . -77

1. General Philosophy and Art . . . . . . .81

a. Philosophy 81

fi. Poetry 86

i. New and Latin Comedy . . . . .86

ii. The Idyll . .87

iii. The Anthology . 88

iv. Roman Poets . . , . . . .88 y. Formative Art and Architecture 93

2. Reflective ^Esthetic . . . . . . . . 99 iii. Aristarchus and Zoilus . . . . . . .102

iv. Later Greco-Roman Critics . . . . . .102 a. Symbolism . . . .- . . . .113 /?. ^Esthetic Interest . - . . . . .114 y. Concrete Criticism 115

Chapter VI

Some traces of the continuity of the esthetic consciousness throughout the middle ages.

Our Attitude to the Renaissance . . . . . .120

1. Tendency to extend Renaissance back towards Christian Era . 120

i. Pre-Raphaelite Painting . . . . . . .121

ii. Thirteenth Century French Literature . . . .122

iii. Abelard . -123

iv. Architecture and Decoration back to Sixth Century . . 123

v. Christian Art and Song of the Earliest Centuries . . 126

vi. Necessity of an Interval of Austerity . . . .130

TABLE OF CONTENTS.

PAGE

2. Intellectual Continuity of ^Esthetic from Plotinus . . . 131

i. From Emanation to Evolution . . . " • . -132

ii. Dualism and Love of Nature . . . . . 133

iii. Augustine on " Beauty of Universe " . . . . 133

iv. Suppression of Paganism and Increasing Austerity . .136

v. Significance of Iconoclasm . . . . . 137

vi. The System of Scotus Erigena 139

vii. Anticipation of End of World in 1000 a.d. . . . 143

viii. The Modern Mind in St. Francis 144

ix. The ^Esthetic Ideas of St. Thomas Aquinas . . . 146

Chapter VII. A Comparison Of Dante And Shakespeare In Respect Of Some

FORMAL CHARACTERISTICS.

1. Limits of the subject " . . 151

2. The Selection of Artistic Form by the two Poets . . .152

3. The Kind of Significance aimed at by each . . . .156

4. The true Relations of the later Renaissance . . . .162

CHAPTER VIII. The problem of modern esthetic philosophy

1. The Process of Preparation . . . . . .166

2. The Prolonged Interruption of ^Esthetic . . . . .166

3. Preparation of the Problem : Descartes to Baumgarten . .170

i. The two Tendencies, " Universal " and " Individual " . 170

ii. Distinguished from Ancient Philosophy . . . .171

iii. From each other .' -173

iv. Connexion with Mediaeval Dualism . . . . .174

v. ^Esthetic Ideas in pre-Kantian Philosophy . . 175

a. Leibnitz .177

b. Shaftesbury . . . . . . . 177 d. Nature of the Advance . . . . .180

TABLE OF CONTENTS.

XIX

Chapter IX. Page

The data of modern aesthetic philosophy.

Limits of the Subject . . . . . . . .188

1. Classical Philology . . .188

i. Joseph Scaliger . . . - . . . . 188

ii. F. A. Wolff 189 i. Early Discoveries on Italian Soil . . . . .191

ii. Early Travels in Greece . . . . . . .192

iii. Herculaneum and Pompeii 192

iv. Greece proper 193 i. Pierre Corneille 197

ii. Fontenelle and Voltaire . . . . . . .201

iii. The British Writers 202

a. Burke and Lord Kaimes . . ... . 203

a. Burke's Purgation Theory .... 203

b. The Sublime akin to Ugliness .... 203

c. Painful Reality not Disagreeable . . .204

d. Anticipations of Later Ideas . . . -205

p. Hogarth . .206

y. Reynolds - . .209

iv. Germans before Lessing . . . . . .210 p. The "Swiss" 214 a. His Conception of Criticism . . . . .217

p. Aim of the Laocoon 220

7. Demarcation of " Painting " and Poetry . . . 223

8. Lessing's Attitude towards the Problem of Ugliness . 225 €. A point in which his Classicism was justified . . 229 £. His Theory of the Drama . . . . .230

vi. Winckelmann. His Characteristics 239

a. Feeling for Art as Human Production . . . 240

p. True sense of a History of Art .... 242

7. Recognition of Phases in Beauty .... 244

S. Conflict between Beauty and Expression . . . 248

vii. Data not utilized by the Critics 251

viii. Indications of a Transition 252 xvni

TABLE OF CONTENTS.

PAGE

Intellectual Continuity of ^Esthetic from Plotinus

• I 3 I i.

From Emanation to Evolution ....

ii.

Dualism and Love of Nature iii.

Augustine on " Beauty of Universe "...

iv.

Suppression of Paganism and Increasing Austerity .

v.

Significance of Iconoclasm .

• 137 vi.

The System of Scotus Erigena ....

• 139 vii.

Anticipation of End of World in iooo a.d.

• 143 viii.

The Modern Mind in St. Francis ....

. 144 ix.

The ^Esthetic Ideas of St. Thomas Aquinas

. 146

CHAPTER VII.

A COMPARISON OF DANTE AND SHAKESPEARE IN RESPECT OF SOME

FORMAL CHARACTERISTICS.

1. Limits of the subject . . . . " . . 151

2. The Selection of Artistic Form by the two Poets . . .152

3. The Kind of Significance aimed at by each . . . .156

4. The true Relations of the later Renaissance .... 162

CHAPTER VIII.

The problem of modern aesthetic philosophy.

1. The Process of Preparation . . . . . .166

2. The Prolonged Interruption of ^Esthetic 166

3. Preparation of the Problem : Descartes to Baumgarten . .170

i. The two Tendencies, " Universal " and " Individual , 170

ii. Distinguished from Ancient Philosophy . . . -171

iii. From each other . . . . . . .173

iv. Connexion with Mediaeval Dualism . . . . .174

v. ^Esthetic Ideas in pre-Kantian Philosophy . . 175 b. Shaftesbury 177 d. Nature of the Advance . . . . . .180

TABLE OF CONTENTS. XIX

CHAPTER IX,

PAGE

The data of modern esthetic philosophy.

Limits of the Subject . . . . . . . .188

1. Classical Philology 188

i. Joseph Scaliger . . . . . 188

ii. F. A. Wolff 189 i. Early Discoveries on Italian Soil . . . . .191

ii. Early Travels in Greece . . . . . . .192

hi. Herculaneum and Pompeii 192

iv. Greece proper . 193 i. Pierre Corneille . . . . . . . 197

ii. Fontenelle and Voltaire .201

hi. The British Writers . . . . . ... 202

a. Burke and Lord Kaimes . . ... -203

a. Burke's Purgation Theory .... 203

b. The Sublime akin to Ugliness . . . -203

c. Painful Reality not Disagreeable . . .204

d. Anticipations of Later Ideas . . . .205 iv. Germans before Lessing . . . . . . .210

(3. The " Swiss " 214 a. His Conception of Criticism . . . . .217

ft. Aim of the Laocoon 220

y. Demarcation of " Painting " and Poetry . . .223

8. Lessing's Attitude towards the Problem of Ugliness . 225

e. A point in which his Classicism was justified . . 229

£. His Theory of the Drama 230

vi. Winckelmann. His Characteristics . . . . .239

a. Feeling for Art as Human Production . . . 240 True sense of a History of Art .... 242 y. Recognition of Phases in Beauty .... 244 3. Conflict between Beauty and Expression . . . 248

vii. Data not utilized by the Critics 251

viii. Indications of a Transition -252

XX

TABLE OF CONTENTS.

CHAPTER X. Kant — The problem brought to a focus

1. His Relation to the Problem and the Data . . . . 255

2. Place of the ^Esthetic Problem in his System . . . -256

3. Why the ^Esthetic Judgment is the Answer to the Problem . 261

i. Demarcation of ^Esthetic Consciousness .... 265

ii. Positive Essence of ^Esthetic Consciousness . . .265

iii. Its Subjectivity . . 266

4. Conflict of Abstract and Concrete in Kant's ^Esthetic . . 267

5. Range and Subdivision of Esthetic Perception . . -274

i. Theory of Sublime . . . . . . . 275

ii. Classification of Arts . . . . . . .279

CHAPTER XL

The first steps of a concrete synthesis — Schiller and

Goethe.

I. Schiller 286

1. Objectivity of Beauty 288

a. Esthetic Semblance . . . . . . .292

b. The Play-impulse . . . . . . .294

2. Opposition of " Antique " and " Modern " . . . 296

3. Schlegel on Schiller ........ 300

4. Schiller on Schlegel -301

II. Goethe 304

1. Gothic Architecture . . . . . . . . 305

i. Attitude to the Renaissance Tradition . . . 306

ii. " Gothic " as a disparaging term 307

iii. " Characteristic " Art . . . . . . 309

2. Definitions of Hirt and Meyer . . . . . 311

3. Goethe's Analysis of the Excellent in Art . . . -312

CHAPTER XII. Objective idealism — Schelling and Hegel

i. Objectivity of Art and Beauty 319

ii. Historical Treatment of " Ancient and Modern " . . 322

iii. The Particular Arts 327

TABLE OF CONTENTS.

XXI

PAGE

II. i. Hegel — Dialectic in the ^Esthetic 334

ii. The Conception of Beauty ...... 336

a. The Beauty of Nature . . . . . -337

(1) Beauty of Abstract Form .... 338

(2) Beauty in Unity of Sense-Material . . . 339 /3. Beauty of Art ; the Ideal . . . . . 340

(1) Nature and the Ideal 340

(2) The Ideal in Life and Action . . . -343

(3) Evolution of the Ideal . . - . . . 345

The Symbolic Art-form .... 346 Classical Art-form ..... 346 Romantic Art-form . . . . -347

(4) Classification of the Arts .... 349

a. The Double Basis ..... 349 (B. Facts that Support the Double Basis . 350 y. Principle of the Analytic Classification . 352 i ii_ Four Leading Conceptions Defined . . . -355

(1) Ugliness 355

(3) The Tragic . . ■ 358

(4) The Comic . . 360

iv. Conclusion . , . . . . . . 360

CHAPTER XIII. " Exact " ^esthetic in Germany

1. Need of Exact ^Esthetic . . 363 i. Schopenhauer a kind of post-Kantian . . . 363

ii. His account of the Beautiful, and its Modifications . . 365

iii. Criticism of Schopenhauer ...... 368 i. His Formalism and its Consequences . 369

ii. His Division of ^Esthetic Relations ..... 370

iii. Classification of the Arts . 371

iv. Criticism and Estimate . . . . . 372

4. Zimmermann 373

i. The Distinctive Work of Formal ^Esthetic . . -374

ii. Meaning of the " Together " 376

iii. Elementary and Simple Forms . . . -377

iv. Psychological Meaning of the Theory, and its Value. . 380

XXI 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS.

PAGE i. Criticism of Previous Inquiries . . . -381

ii. Experiments with Rectangles, etc. ..... 382

iii. Esthetic Laws ........ 384

6. Stumpf — Scope of his Analysis . . . . . -387 i. How to judge of Formal ^Esthetic . . 388

ii. Lesson of its History ....... 389

iii. Inclusion of Exact ^Esthetic in Idealism . . . 391

CHAPTER XIV. The methodical completion of objective idealism

1. Type of the later Objective Idealism ..... 393

2. Transition to the later Objective Idealism .... 394

o.. Solger 394

/?. Reference to Weisse and Vischer . . . . -397 y. Rosenkranz .......... 400

i. Ugliness as such . . . . . , .401

ii. Ugliness in art . 403

iii. The forms of opposition ...... 406

3. The later Objective Idealism . . . . . . 409

a, Carriere . . 410 ii. Division of the Arts . . . . . .411

iii. Attitude to the Renaissance . . . . .412 ft. Schasler . . . 414

i. Conceptions indicated by the " History " . . . 414

ii. Ugliness, and Modifications of the Beautiful . -417

iii. The Classification of the Arts 419

a. The Parallelism 420

b. The Mimic Dance 422

c. The Material .423 i. Significance of the History 425

ii. The Degrees of Beauty ; and Ugliness . . .429

a. The Orders of Formal Beauty . . . -429

b. Ugliness in Nature 429

c. Ugliness in Beauty ? 43 1

(1) No Ugliness in Beauty . . . -432

(2) Real Ugliness 435

iii. The Division of the Arts ...... 436

TABLE OF CONTENTS. XX111

Chapter XV. Page

Beginnings of a theoretical reunion of content and expression.

1. Philosophical Conditions of Recent English Esthetic . • 441

2. General Influences of the Time ...... 442 c. Romantic Naturalism . . . . . . 445

d. The Democratic Spirit 446

3. Synthesis of Content and Expression ..... 447

i. The Characteristic ........ 448

ii. The Life of the Workman . . . . 45 1

iii. The " Lesser Arts " . . . . . . 454

iv. Penetrative Imagination and the Limits of Beauty . -458

v. Classification by Material, Applied to Poetry . . . 460

4. Conclusion . . .462

i. Requirements of ^Esthetic Science to-day . . . 463

ii. The Future of Art . . . . . . 467

APPENDIX I.

Hegel's Abstract of his ^Esthetic System 471

APPENDIX II.

• Some Analyses of Musical Expression, by Mr. J. D. Rogers . 488

Index 499

HISTORY OF ^ESTHETIC.

Chapter I. Proposed Treatment, And Its Connection With The Definition Of Beauty

S e tSc° r an°d I - * T was not before the latter half of the eightthe mstory of eenth century that the term "Esthetic" was

FiziB Ail*!) • • • •

adopted with the meaning now recognised, in order to designate the philosophy of the beautiful as a distinct province of theoretical inquiry. But the thing existed before the name ; for reflection upon beauty and upon fine art begins among Hellenic thinkers at least as early as the time of Socrates, if not, in a certain sense, with still earlier philosophers.

If, then, "^Esthetic" means the Philosophy of the Beautiful, the History of ^Esthetic must mean the History of the Philosophy of the Beautiful ; and it must accept as its immediate subject-matter the succession of systematic theories by which philosophers have attempted to explain or connect together the facts that relate to beauty.

But this is not all. It is found necessary in a historical treatment, even of logic or of general philosophy, to bring them into continuous relation with the concrete life that underlies the formal conceptions which are being passed in review. The speculation of every age issues on the one hand from the formal teaching of the past, but on the other from the actual world as it urges itself upon consciousness in the present. As the history of logic or of general philosophy cannot be wholly dissociated from the history of science or of civilization, so the history of ethical or of aesthetic ideas is necessarily treated in some connection with the history of morals or of fine art.

But within this analogy there is a notable distinction.

B

HISTORY OF /ESTHETIC.

When we read, for example, the history of the Inductive Sciences in connection with the growth of logical theory, we can take little interest in the bygone phases of particular branches of knowledge, except in as far as they help us to understand that development of the human mind which is at the moment the subject of our study. Antiquated chemistry or astronomy have for us an interest of curiosity no greater than that which a pile-dwelling or a flint hatchet has for the anthropological student. The same is true of many other elements of civilization, such as the details of political form or of social custom, the niceties of language, the minutiae of religious dogma. In all these aspects of life, although it is true that to have deciphered the past greatly aids us in understanding the present, yet on the whole, excepting with a view to scientific research or historical realization, we are accustomed to let bygones be bygones. Moral and religious ideas, indeed, such as have been all-powerful in a remote past, generally retain a capacity of arousing our present interest ; so deep is the identity of man's moral nature throughout all its manifestations. But nothing is in this respect on a level with the greater creations of fine art, including noble literature. They alone have an importance which rather increases than diminishes as the ages go by. And thus when we attempt the task of tracing the aesthetic consciousness through the stages of its development, we have before us a concrete material not of mere antiquarian interest, but constituting a large proportion of what is valued for its own sake in the surroundings of our present life. The History of Fine Art is the history of the actual aesthetic consciousness, as a concrete phenomenon ; aesthetic theory is the philosophic analysis of this consciousness, for which the knowledge of its history is an essential condition. The history of aesthetic theory, again, is a narrative which traces the aesthetic consciousness in its intellectual form of aesthetic theory, but never forgets that the central matter to be elucidated is the value of beauty for human life, no less as implied in practice than as explicitly recognised in reflection. In spite of the natural repugnance which may be felt against analytic intermeddling with the most beautiful things which we enjoy, it must be counted an advantage of this branch of the history of philosophy that it promises us not merely a theoretical interpretation of what is past and gone, but some aid at least in our appreciation of realities

PROPOSED TREATMENT.

which appear to be the least perishable inheritance that the

world possesses.

2. I have assumed in the last section that Fine Natural Beauty Art may be accepted, for theoretical purposes, as tothe Beauty t h e chief, if not the sole representative of the

of Fine Art. . \ . r . .

world of beauty, it is necessary to explain the point of view from which this assumption appears justifiable.

All beauty is in perception or imagination. When we distinguish Nature from Art as a province of the beautiful, we do not mean to suggest that things have beauty independently of human perception, as for example in reactions upon one another such as those of gravitation or solidity. We must therefore be taken to include tacitly in our conception of natural beauty some normal or average capacity of aesthetic appreciation: But if so, it is plain that " nature " in this relation differs from "art" principally in degree, both being in the medium of human perception or imagination, but the one consisting in the transient and ordinary presentation or idea of the average mind, the other in the fixed and heightened intuitions of the genius which can record and interpret.

Now in studying any department of physical causation, we should not think it possible to restrict ourselves to considering the so-called facts which daily meet the eye of the untrained observer. It is from science that we must learn how to perceive ; and it is upon science that we rely, both in our own observations as far as we are qualified observers, and also in the organized and recorded perceptions of others, from which almost the whole of our natural knowledge is practically derived.