DESCRIPTIONS OF NATURE BY THE AN'CIENTS. 21 



merits which we have already named, viz., the description of 

 nature when springing from an animated impression of terres 

 trial forms ; the delineative art of landscape painting ; and, 

 lastly, the direct objective consideration of the r^.haracteristic 

 features of natural forms. The power exercised by these in- 

 citements is, however, limited to the sphere embraced by mod- 

 ern cultivation, and to those individuals whose minds have 

 been rendered more susceptible to such impressions by a pe 

 culiar disposition, fostered by some special direction in the de 

 velopment of their mental activity. 



DESCRIPTION OF NATURE.— THE DIFFERENCE OF FEELING EXCITED 

 BY THE CONTEMPLATION OF NATURE AT DIFFERENT EPOCHS AND 

 AMONG DIFFERENT RACES OF MEN. 



It has often been remarked that, although the enjoyment 

 derived from the contemplation of nature was not wholly un- 

 known to the ancients, the feeling w^as, nevertheless, much 

 more rarely, and less vividly expressed than in modern times. 

 In his considerations on the poetry of the sentimerics, Schiller 

 thus expresses himself:^ " If we bear in mind the beautiful 

 scenery with which the Greeks ^^'cre surrounded, and remem- 

 ber the opportunities possessed by a people living in so genial 

 a climate, of entering into the free enjoyment of the contem- 

 plation of nature, and observe how conformable were their 

 mode of thought, the bent of their imaginations, and the hab- 

 its of their lives to the simpjicity of nature, which was so faith- 

 fully reflected in their poetic works, we can not fail to remark 

 with surprise how few traces are to be met among them of 

 the sentimental interest with which we, in modern times, at- 

 tach ourselves to the individual characteristics of natural scen- 

 ery. The Greek poet is certainly, in the highest degree, 

 correct, faithful, and circumstantial in his descriptions of na- 

 ture, but his heart has no more share in his words than if he 

 were treating of a garment, a shield, or a suit of armor. Na- 

 ture seems to interest his understanding more than his moral 

 perceptions ; he does not cling to her channs with the fervoi 

 and the plaintive passion of the poet of modern times." 



However much truth and excellence there may be in these 



* See Schiller's SdmmtUche V/erke, 1826, bd. xvlii., s. 231, 473, 480 

 488; Gerviniis, Neuere GescJi. der Poet. National-hitler attr der Dcui 

 tcken, 1840, bd. i., s. 135; Adolph Bekker, in Charikles th. i., s. 219 

 Compare, also, Eduard Miiller, Ueher Sophokleische Naturanschawmj^ 

 *tnd di£ tiefe Naturempjindung der Griechen. 1842, s. 10, 26. 



