28 DR. EDWARD SCHUNCK ON THE 



indeed, been done of late to promote good taste in this as 

 in other departments of art, though our progress has pro- 

 bably been retarded by the introduction of various artificial 

 colouring matters, the extreme brilliancy of which acts as 

 a lure to the uncultivated eye. 



Though much of the uncertainty which exists as to the 

 precise meaning of the words used by the ancients to denote 

 colour is of a philological kind, part of it is due, I think, 

 to causes which are still in operation. 



i. The ancients, having no fixed scale of colour to refer 

 to, such as we possess in the spectrum, were unable to 

 compare any given tint with that which it exhibits in its 

 highest state of purity, whilst we, by means of the fixed 

 standard at our command, and with the assistance of the 

 so-called chromatic circles and other appliances, can deter- 

 mine not only the exact position and shade of any given 

 colour, but also the extent to which it is degraded or ren- 

 dered impure ; and though the general public very slowly 

 adopts scientific terms and methods, still on the whole the 

 tendency in our days is towards exactitude, and vague 

 terms for objects and sensations are more and more falling 

 into disuse. 



2. In one respect the ancients must have laboured under 

 the same disadvantage, in determining the value of colour, 

 as we moderns do. We very seldom see one colour alone, 

 but generally two or more in juxtaposition, and contrasted ; 

 and by contrast the effect of each colour on the human 

 eye is considerably modified. Complementary colours, 

 when seen in close proximity, heighten one another. Green 

 next to red will appear much brighter than when placed 

 close to blue. A colour of average purity will appear dull 

 when compared with a brighter colour of the same hue, 

 while it will seem bright when seen alongside a more dingy 

 shade, and so on. Unless great care be taken, therefore, 



