ii6 N O T E S. 



great object of our feareh, it can be found no where elfe ; we 

 can no more form any idea of Beauty fuperior to Nature than 

 we can form an idea of a fixth fenfe, or any other excellence 

 out of the limits of the human mind y we are forced to con- 

 fine aur conception even of heaven itfelf and its inhabitants 

 to what we fee in. this world; even the Supreme Being, if he 

 is reprefented at all, the Painter has no other way of reprefent- 

 ing than by reverfmg the decree of the infpired Lawgiver, and 

 making God after his own image.. 



Nothing can be fo unphilofophical as a fuppofition that we 

 can form any idea of beauty or excellence out of or beyond 

 Nature, which is and. muft be the fountain-head from whence 

 all our ideas muft be derived. 



This being acknowleged, it muft follow, of courfe, that 

 all the rules which this theory, or any other, teaches, can be 

 no more than teaching the art of feeing nature. The rules of 

 Art are formed on the various works of thofe who have ftudied 

 Nature the moft fuccefsfully : by this advantage of obferving 

 the various manners in which various minds have contem- 

 plated her works, the artift enlarges his own views, and is 

 taught to look for and fee what would otherwife have efcaped 

 his obfervation. 



It is to be remarked, that there are two modes of imitating 

 nature j one of which refers to the fenfations of the mind for 

 its truth, and the other to the eye. 



Some fchools, fuch as the Roman and Florentine, appear 

 to have addreffed themfelves principally to the mind ; others 

 folely to the eye, fuch as the Venetian in the inftances of 

 Paul Veronefe and Tintoret : others again have endeavoured 

 to unite both, by joining the elegance and grace of ornament 

 with the ftrength and vigour, of defign; fuch are the fchools 

 of Bologna and Parma. 



All 



