opinion, had no great vigour of mind or strength of original genius. He
rarely seizes the imagination by exhibiting the higher excellences, nor
does he captivate us by that originality which attends the painter who
thinks for himself. He knew and practised all the rules of art, and from
a composition of Raffaelle, Caracci, and Guido, made up a style, of which
its only fault was, that it had no manifest defects and no striking
beauties, and that the principles of his composition are never blended
together, so as to form one uniform body, original in its kind, or
excellent in any view.

I will mention two other painters who, though entirely dissimilar, yet by
being each consistent with himself, and possessing a manner entirely his
own, have both gained reputation, though for very opposite
accomplishments.

The painters I mean are Rubens and Poussin. Rubens I mention in this
place, as I think him a remarkable instance of the same mind being seen
in all the various parts of the art. The whole is so much of a piece
that one can scarce be brought to believe but that if any one of them had
been more correct and perfect, his works would not be so complete as they
now appear. If we should allow a greater purity and correctness of
drawing, his want of simplicity in composition, colouring, and drapery
would appear more gross.

In his composition his art is too apparent. His figures have expression,
and act with energy, but without simplicity or dignity. His colouring,
in which he is eminently skilled, is, notwithstanding, too much of what
we call tinted. Throughout the whole of his works there is a
proportionable want of that nicety of distinction and elegance of mind
which is required in the higher walks of painting; and to this want it