searches. I shall transcribe no further. The physiognomonical remarks, and the similarities to beasts, which he has produced, are generally unfounded in experience.

D.

RESEMBLANCES BETWEEN THE COUNTENANCES OF MEN AND BEASTS.

AFTER Aristotle, Porta most has observed the resemblances between the countenances of men and beasts, and has extended this enquiry the farthest. He, as far as I know, was the first who rendered this similarity apparent, by placing the countenances of men and beasts beside each other. Nothing can be more true than this fact; and, while we continue to follow nature, and do not endeavour to make such similarities greater than they are, it is a subject that cannot be too accurately examined. But, in this respect the fanciful Porta appears to me to have been often misled, and to have found resemblances which the eye of truth never could discover. I could find no resemblance between the hound and Plato, at least from which cool reason could draw any conclusions. It is singular enough that he has also compared the heads of men and birds. He might more effectually have examined the excessive dissimilarity than the very small, and almost imperceptible, resemblance which can exist. He speaks little concerning the horse, elephant, and monkey, though it is certain that these animals have most resemblance to man.

154

ADDITIONS.

I.

a. REPORT makes the monkey most resemble man; and, certainly, there is a kind of men who greatly resemble this animal, particularly about the eyes.-The two countenances here given are some of the most accurate compared by Porta; and, if a man were really found so like a monkey, we might then, without all fear, ascribe to the man much of the character of the monkey; a great want of faculties, feeling, and mind. But let us be careful not to believe too great an approach of character, from the similarity here produced, which certainly is not founded in nature. The nature of man will ever possess unattainable advantages over that of brutes. If we compare, for example, the outline of the scull to the ears, how essentially different are the modes of arching! How dissimilar are the cheeks, and the chin!