ON SOME PRINCIPLES OF CRITICISM 61 



of classical criticism in question, and introduced the second of 

 the three conceptions, which corresponds to what may be 

 termed romantic criticism. Meanwhile, the rapid advance of 

 science led to the third conception, which takes for granted 

 that the arts are capable of being historically studied in their 

 evolution. 



Classical criticism rested upon a logical basis. It assumed 

 the existence of certain fixed principles, from which correct 

 udgments might be deduced. Komantic criticism substituted 

 sympathies and antipathies for rules, and exchanged authority 

 for personal opinion. Scientific criticism proceeds by induc- 

 tion, historical investigation, morphological analysis, mis- 

 doubting the certainty of aesthetic principles, regarding the 

 instincts and sensibilities of the individual with distrust, 

 seeking materials for basing the canons of perfection upon 

 some positive foundation. 



According to etymology, the fundamental function of 

 criticism is judgment; and during the classical period no 

 doubt was cast upon the critic's right to judge. In the 

 romantic period this function was disputed, and the rules by 

 which a verdict could be pronounced were opened to discus- 

 sion. In scientific criticism the idea returns to itself again, 

 but on an altered basis. The critic arrives at conclusions 

 after preparatory studies in history, psychology, scholarship, 

 by means of which he hopes to ground his judgment Ion 

 sufficient demonstration. 



In each of the three stages which I have indicated, 

 judgment is undoubtedly implied. The classical critic judged 

 by principles, and by the decisions of his predecessors by 

 Aristotle, Longinus, Horace, Aristarchus, Boileau. The 

 romantic critic judged by his own preferences and pro- 

 clivities like the Semiramis of Dante 



Che libito fe lecito in sua legge. 



The scientific critic judges, but does not do so without 

 understanding the natural and historical conditions of the 

 product under examination, and without making the allow- 

 ances demanded by his sense of relativity. For example, 

 he will not, like the classical critic, pronounce the ' Divine 



