S|.26 On Pbyftognomy. 



fe6t ; nor is it tinlikely from the myfterious and 

 a'ftfetic nature of the dodrines and difcipline of 

 the Pythagoreans, that- they alfo, were firft 

 tempted to difgra'ce the fcience of phyliognomy 

 in Greece, 'bfy annexing to it the art divination. 



From this time to the clofe of the Roman 

 republic, few obfervations occur refpe6ling 

 the literary hiftory of phyfiognomy. About 

 that period however, and from thence to the 

 decline of the Roman empire under the latter 

 'emperors; it appears to have been attended 

 to, as an" important branch of knowledge, and 

 adopted as a profefiion by pcrfons pretending 

 to fuperior fkill in it. 



There are many phyfiognomical remarks 

 interfperfed in the works of Hippocrates* and 

 of Galen, f as may well be prefumed from their 

 medical profeflion — Cicero appears to have 

 been particularly attached to it ; for he not 

 only rela;(j:s the ftory of Zopyrus and Socrates 

 in his book de fato,% and his Tufculan 

 Queftions,:}: but his orations abound with phy- 

 fiognomical opinions. Thus, his oration againft 

 Pifo, commences with the following abufivc 

 paffage. Jamne vides bellua qua fit bominum 



• In his book de Aquis Aeris et Locis. 



f In his paflages refpefting the temperament. 



X Ubi fup. 



querela 



