412 On Phyftogttomy. 



tion now mentioned. So alfo does Boyle,* 

 and it feems to have been the common one 

 with us, in the time of Hudibras.j* At pre- 

 fent phyfiognomy feems to be confined to the 

 knowledge of the moral and intelledlual cha- 

 rafter of human creatures, from their external 

 manners and appearance. 



Thefe variations of the meaning however, it 

 was proper to notice, not only for the reafon 

 before afligned, but becaufe the definition of 

 phyfiognomy was a fubjefl of long difcuflion 

 between two modern authors of fome note, in 

 the Berlin Tranfaftions, f M. Pernetty and 

 M. Le Cat. The former infift:ed that all know- 

 ledge whatever, was merely phyfiognomy, and 

 the latter, as unrcafonably, confined it to the 

 fubjedl of the human face. Mr. Pernetty's fe- 

 cond Memoire is entirely occupied, in defending 

 the extenfive fignification he has annexed to 



* Experimental hiftory of mineral waters ; append. 

 § 4. '* And I have fometimes fancied there may be a 

 phyfiognomy of many if not of moft other natural bodies 

 as well as of human faces, whereby an attentive and 

 experienced confiderer may himfelf difcern in them many 

 inftruftive things that he cannot fo declare to another 

 man as to make him difcern them too. 



f They'll find i'th' phyfiognomies 

 O'th planets all men's deflinies. 



t For the years 1769 and 1770. 



the 



