TREATISE ON PAINTING. 
By an admirable effort of human genius, Painting 
offers to the eye every thing which is molt valuable in the 
uriiverfe. Its empire extends over every age and country. 
It prefents to us the heroic deeds of ancient times, as well 
as the fadls in which we are more converfant j and diftant 
objedls, as well as thofe which we daily fee. In this re- 
fpedl, it may be confidered as a fupplement to Nature, 
which gives us only a view of prefent objefls. 
Mr. Shee,. in the notes to his Rhymes on Art, main¬ 
tains the fuperiority of painting over poetry; but the ar¬ 
gument is idle and abfurd. The powers of the painter 
and of the poet are both creative ; and, when employed 
under the i-nfpiration of real genius, the effefls of both 
are eminently ftriking. In fome inftances, the painter 
has the advantage of the poet, and in others the re¬ 
verie may be ftated. If the former exceeds the latter in 
the exadlnefs with which his conceptions are embodied, 
the latter often prefents pictures to the imagination which 
the former cannot exprefs by the utmoft force of his art. 
The painter can only catch a particular inftant, while the 
poet can exhibit the progrefs of an adlion ; and, though 
the artift may boaft of the fuperiority of imitation over 
defcription, he muff know that “ the poet’s eye in a fine 
frenzy rolling” often fees more than lines and colours can 
poffibly exhibit. Which has the precedence, we (hall not 
decide ; but we fhall hope that the partnerfhip which has 
fo long fubfifted between poetry and painting will not now 
be interrupted. 
The painter who is diftinguifhed for noble and pro¬ 
found conceptions; who, by means of a perfedf delinea¬ 
tion, and colours more capable of fixing the attention 
than dazzling the eye, conveys to the fpedlators thefen- 
timents with which he himfelf was infpired; who ani¬ 
mates them with his genius, and makes a lafting impref- 
fion on their minds ; this artift is a poet, and worthy to 
fhare even in the glories of Homer. But, if he feek only 
to pleafe or aftonifh by the illuiion of colours, he mill 
reft contented with the fecondary merit of flattering the 
eye with the variety and oppofition of tints, or of making 
an induftrious aflemblage of a great multiplicity of ob- 
jedls. It is in painting as it is in poetry: the man w'ho 
clothes trivial or common ideas in verfe, exercifes the 
profeflion of twilling fyllables into a certain meafure ; 
the poet, who clothes in good verfe ideas and fentiments 
that are merely agreeable, profeffes an agreeable art. But 
he who, by the magic of verfe, of ideas, of imagery, or 
of colours, adds fublimity to the fublime objects of na¬ 
ture, is a great poet and a great painter. He deferves the 
crown which the nations have decreed to Homer, Virgil, 
Milton, Raphael, and the ftatuary who modelled the an¬ 
cient Apollo. It is reafonable to place in the fame clafs 
thofe who have expreffed the fame ideas, whether it be in 
verfe or in colours, on brafs or on marble. The painter 
and ftatuary, who excel in their profeftions, deferve all 
the refpeft due to genius : they are of the number of 
thofe men whom nature, fparing of her beft gifts, grants 
but occafionally to the inhabitants of the earth. If they 
are fublime, they elevate the human race ; if they are 
agreeable only, they excite thofe fweet fenfations necef- 
fary to our happinels. 
HISTORY of ANCIENT PAINTING. 
The defire of imitation appears to be fo congenial to 
the mind, that one can fcarcely imagine there could have 
been any lengthened period of time when it was not called 
into a£lion,as an agent, either of amufement, of informa¬ 
tion, or of inftru6lion. Of drawing or painting more 
particularly, it appears reafonable to fuppofe, that it mull 
have been adopted for either or all of thefe purpofes in 
the earlieft ftages of human fociety, though in its very 
fimpleft and rudell form. 
It is to be imagined that men mull naturally, and very 
early, have conceived an idea of the firft principles of the 
art of painting: the ftiadow of each plant and animal, 
and of every object in nature, mull have afforded them 
the means of conceiving, and pointed out the pollibility 
of imitating, the figures of all bodies. In accordance 
with this idea, Pliny tells a llory, which makes love the 
origin of painting: he fays that one Corinthia, a girl of 
Sicyon, being in love with a certain youth who was to 
depart the next day, and finding him alleep near a lamp 
that was burning, the ftiadow of his face, which appeared 
on the wall, feemed fo like him, that ftie was incited to 
draw the extremities of it; and thus made a portrait of her 
lover. 
The favage nations, an emblem of what men w-ere in 
the infancy of fociety, poffefs the firft rudiments of this 
art, even before thofe wdiich are ufeful and almoft necef- 
fary to exiftence: their naked bodies are covered with 
pundlures of various forms, into which they infufe 
indelible colours. The next demand for this art, is 
to prelerve the memory of warlike exploits. It is more 
natural to form fome reprefentation of an adlion, than 
to give an account of it by means of arbitrary cha¬ 
racters. Hence the pifture-writing of the Mexicans, 
and the more complex hieroglyphics of Egypt. 
Plato, who lived 4.00 years before the Chriftian era, in¬ 
forms us that painting had been praftifed in Egypt for 
ten thoufand years ; that fome of the productions of that 
high antiquity were in exiftence ; and that they bore an 
exaCl refemblance to thofe which the Egyptians executed 
in his'time. Without regarding the period of ten thou¬ 
fand years mentioned by Plato, it is reafonable to confider 
it as an indeterminate period, which carries us back to 
very remote antiquity. 
The figures, either in the painting or fculpture of 
Egypt, were extremely ftiff; the legs were drawn toge¬ 
ther, and the arms w'ere parted to the fides. It appears 
that their only model was their mummies, and that their 
flcill in anatomy was derived from embalming them. They 
were extremely incorreCl in every part of the head ; they 
placed the ears much higher than the nofe. Befides, 
they gave the face the form of a circle inftead of an oval ; 
the chin was ftiort and rounded; the cheeks exceftively 
fo ; and they turned upwards the corners of the mouth 
and eyes. Some of thefe faults may be afcribed to the 
formation of the human face in Egypt; but the pla¬ 
cing of the ears could only bo founded in caprice or ig¬ 
norance. 
TheexaClnefs of the Egyptian proportion is much ce¬ 
lebrated ; but, although we grant that they obferved the 
proper length of the different parts of the human body, 
they were llill defeClive artifts, fince they did not obferve 
the breadth, and were moreover ignorant altogether of 
the ftiape and fize of the mtifcles. Works converted to 
religious purpofes chiefly occupied the Egyptian painters. 
They had figures for imitation from which they w'ould 
not depart, and thofe figures were monftrous: the bodies 
of animals with the heads of men ; the bodies of men 
■with the heads of animals ; or, if the figure was more 
agreeable to nature in its parts, yet it was fo deformed 
and imaginary, as to have nothing fimilar to it as a 
whole. 
The monuments of Egyptian painting with which we 
are beft acquainted (fays Winklemann) are the cherts of 
mummies. Thefe works have refilled the injuries of time, 
and are ftill fubmitted to the examination of the curious; 
The white, made of white-lead, is fpread over the ground 
ot 
4-, 
