parts about the eye than in those near the mouth. But, where that is not sufficient, I have recourse to the descent of the forehead to the nose, and that of the nose to the mouth. These two firm and almost unchangeable parts of the profile I delineate in imagination, that I may afterward be able to represent and preserve them in an actual drawing.

Accurate examination, and repeated comparison, between the two moveable, and the two immoveable lines, will teach us, that they, as in general all the features of the countenance, have a most immediate relation to each other; so that the one will immediately be denoted by the other; and experience will teach us, in time, having the one given, to produce the other. In order to acquire this perfection, so indescribably important, it is necessary to draw nothing but the outlines of the upper eyelid and the mouth, of the same person, and to draw them, continually, on the same paper; each pair of such lines, separately, on one paper, that they may the more easily be placed side by side, compared, and classed. The two other lines may easily be obtained by the means of shades. A number of these should also be drawn, on separate cards, that they

may be arranged. After which their exact proportions are to be determined.

Yet I say not, noble Count, to the physiognomist, study, describe, draw, select, compare by repeated observation, these characteristic, illustrating traits, alone.-NoStudy all, neglect no part, of the countenance. Each trait contains the whole character of man, as, in the smallest of the works of God, the character of Deity is contained. God can create nothing which is not divine. The truly wise man, as wise, utters not the smallest folly. His smallest actions have meaning. To sin against a part of the countenance, by despising it, is to sin against the whole. He who formed the eye, to see, also planted the ear. He is

never at variance with himself. How can I often enough, emphatically enough, awfully enough, declare God and nature are never at variance! As is the eye so is the ear; as the forehead so each individual hair. Every minute part has the nature and character of the whole. Each speaks truth, the truth of the whole *. To us, indeed, one speaks with

* Nulla enim corporis pars est, quamlibet minuta et exilis, quantumvis abjecta et ignobilis, quæ non aliquod argumentum insitæ naturæ, et quo animus inclinet, exhibeat. Lemnius.

a louder, another with a more gentle, voice; but the language of all is the same. It is the harmony of innumerable voices proclaiming truth.-There are some moments in which the whispers of nature are more intelligible than her loudest cries. Frequently the passage of an author which shall seem widest of meaning explains something the most essential. A trifling, inferior, trait in the countenance shall often be the key to the whole. The solemn testimony of St. Paul is here applicable. "There is nothing common of itself, but to him only that esteemeth any thing to be common." Yes, "Heaven and earth shall sooner pass away than one jot, or one tittle, of the countenance, lose its signifying power."

Thou art unworthy, that is to say, incapable, to study the countenance of man, if thou excludest the smallest thing as unworthy of remark.

I add, however, the student may, probably, have a particular capacity for the observation of this or that particular feature, or member. As various men are variously affected by different arts and sciences, so is it with the countenance. He, therefore, should carefully examine how far he has such propensities, for the examination of one trait or member, more than another, and

such trait or member he should study, first, and most; as if no other were to be studied, but that the whole character were contained in this particular trait.

Whoever would study physiognomy should apply himself to the study of shades. He that despises them despises physiognomy. If he have no physiognomonical sensation for shades, he has none for the human countenance; while he who possesses this physiognomonical sensation, at the sight of shades, will read the countenance with as much facility as he would read an open book.

Make the taking of shades a practice, and to write down what is known of the character of the original, in the most clear and precise terms.

Having obtained a number of such accurate shades, the characters of the originals of which are well known; do not first arrange those which appear to have a similarity of intellectual or moral character. For, first, the most precise unphysiognomonical description, in words, is indeterminate; and, secondly, which is the consequence of the first, there are innumerable moral and intel

lectual excellencies and defects, to describe which we have but some general term, and which, internally, are widely different, therefore, are expressed in the countenance by traits as widely different as themselves. Thus two men of extraordinary genius may have countenances the most opposite. For this reason, we must not begin with classing their shades by words, which may characterise the originals. For example, we must not say this is a man of genius; this is another man of genius: therefore we will compare the two, and see what their shades have in common.-It may happen that they have nothing in common, but that their shades are absolutely dissimilar.-The shades, therefore, should first be ranged according to their resemblance.-The resemblance of the forehead." These foreheads are not alike

-Where then is the likeness of their minds to be discovered? This forehead retreats, is thus or thus arched, forms this kind of angle, and this is much the same. Let us examine whether their minds are equally similar." To answer such questions, with all possible precision, the great shades should, first, be measured by a proper instrument, and their proportions ascertained between the height from the eyebrows to the crown of the head; so should their diagonal lines. Thus will