On Phyfiognomy. 411 



vultu, fronte prnojcere. To the fame purpofe 

 Aulus Gellius,* Id verbum fignificat mores natu- 

 rafque hominum conje£iatione quddam, de oris et vul- 

 tus ingemoy deque totius Corporis filo atque habitu 

 Jcijcitart. 



But when the ftudy of phyfiognomy was 

 revived in the middle ages, the comprehenfive- 

 nefs of the etymological meaning (as I imagine) 

 led thofe who treated on the fubjeft, to indulge 

 the prevailing tafte for the marvellous, and 

 extend the fignification of the word, far beyond 

 the ancient limits. This feems to have been 

 particularly the cafe among thofe naturalifts 

 who adopted the theory oi fignatures. Hence 

 phyfiology came to fignify, the knowledge of the 

 internal properties of any corporeal being, from 

 the external appearances. Thus Joannes Baptifta 

 Porta, a phyfiognomift and philofopher of great 

 note, wrote a treatife concerning the phyfiog- 

 nomy of plants (Phytognomonica) throughout 

 which he ufes phyfiognomy as the generic term. 

 The fame perfon I believe it was, who wrote 

 the Treatife de Phyfiognomia Avium. Gafpar 

 Schottus, in his Magia Phyftognomica^ makes the 

 phyfiognomia humana^ a fubdivifion of the fcience. 

 Hen. Alfted-[ adopts alfo the extenfive fignifica- 



• Lib. I. cap. 9. t In his Cyclopedia. 



tion 



