158 Phymgnomy. [Chap. XL 



]\fagiCj Alchew.y, and Judicial Aslrologif were fashi- 

 onable pursuits, and were interwoven with ahiiost 

 every other object of study. Unfortunately phy- 

 siognomy was rarely spoken of, or investigated 

 but in connection with those playthings of ancient 

 folly, now so justly ridiculed and exploded. 

 From the middle of the seventeenth century we 

 may date the downfal of the reign of alchemy and 

 astrology, and with them, as one of the sciences 

 denominated Occult, physiognomical inquiries for 

 a time also declined. 



Philosophers, however, soon learned to distin- 

 guish between the science itself and that perver- 

 sion of it which had arisen from an unnatural con- 

 nection. Accordingly, early in the century under 

 consideration, it was taken notice of respectfully 

 by Dr.. Gwither*; and afterward, in a still more 

 pointed and able manner, by Dr. Parsons f . Be- 

 side these British writers, Lancisius, of Italy ; 

 Ilaller, of Switzerland ; and Buffon^, of France, 

 published observations on certain branches of the 

 subject, which it is scarcely necessary to say were 

 ingenious and interesting. But the first discussion 

 relating to the science of physiognomy, in the 

 eighteenth century, which excited much atten- 

 tion, was that which took place in 1769, between 

 M. Pernetty and ]\I. le Catt, and is recorded in the 

 jMemolrs of the Acadcmif of Sciences J. Both these 

 gentlemen contended for the reality and import- 

 ance of the science; but differed widely with re- 



* Vhilosophical Transaction/^, vol. xvlii. 

 f Human Pbjsiognojny explained, 1747. 

 X Man. Acad, Scicn. 1709^ Mem. 4th aiid 5Ui. 



