istence (Ph. d. Unbru., 8ter Ausg., cap. 10, Schluss), the scarcity of palæontological forms is, indeed, explained, and the hope of further discovery still left open, but the prospect of ever filling up such gaps with continuous series of transitional forms is gone forever.

When, on the other hand, the continuity of the form-line is preserved, the necessary evidence that such line is really a genealogical, and not merely a systematic, one (see the distinction between these in the preceding chapter) is entirely wanting. The existence of a genealogical series would be only probable, though by no means certain, if geology showed that the horizontal strata contained types of a very different kind, and that these types formed a continuous scale in a vertical direction, and developed themselves perpendicularly, or by means of bifurcations, and did not, as it were, in cyclic fashion return to themselves.

But, as a matter of fact, this state of things is not found, and, when closely examined, the facts which are most triumphantly advanced in favor of the transmutation theory oppose it, and support heterogeneous generation, as regards the transition from a variety of one species to that of another.

HEGEL ON CLASSIC ART.

[TRANSLATED FROM THE SECOND FRENCH EDITION OF CHARLES BÉNARD'S TRANSLATION OF THE SECOND PART OF HEGEL'S ESTHETICS.]

BY WM. M. BRYANT.

PART II.

CHAPTER V.-OF THE CLASSIC FORM OF ART.

1. Unity of Idea and Form as the Fundamental Characteristic of the Classic.-2. Of Greek Art as Realization of the Classic.-3. Position of the Artist in this new Form of Art.

The intimate union of matter or content with form — the mutual adaptation of these elements together with their

perfect harmony-constitutes the central point of art. This realization of the idea of the beautiful, to which symbolic art vainly strives to attain, is accomplished for the first time in Classic Art.

We have already seen what is here to be understood by the Classic. Its characteristics are summed up in the ideal. This perfect mode of representation fulfills the condition which is the very end of art.

But, in order that this condition might be accomplished, there was need of all the particular moments or elements which appear in symbolic art. For the basis of classic beauty is not a vague and obscure conception; it is the free idea, which is its own significance, and which, therefore, manifests itself on its own account-in a word, it is spirit, which seizes itself as its own object. In thus presenting itself to itself as an object of contemplation, it assumes an external form; and this, identical with the matter which it manifests, becomes its faithful, adequate expression. The consciousness which it possesses of itself permits it to reveal itself clearly.

This is what Symbolic Art, with that species of unity which constitutes the symbol, has been able to present us. Now it is nature with its blind forces which forms the source of its representations; again, it is the spiritual Being which it conceives in a vague manner, and which it personifies in gross divinities. Between idea and form there is revealed a simple affinity, an external correspondence. The attempt to conciliate them, under their opposition, is still more striking; or art, as in Egypt, in wishing to give expression to spirit, creates only obscure enigmas. Above all, there is betrayed the absence of true personality and freedom; for these can unfold only with the evolution of complete self-consciousness on the part of the spirit.

We have, it is true, encountered this idea of the nature of spirit as opposed to the sensuous world, clearly expressed in the religion and the poetry of the Hebrew people. But that which is born of this opposition is not beauty; it is the sublime. A lively sentiment of personality manifests itself also with the Arab race. But with them this is only a superficial

side, stripped of depth and of generality; it is not true personality fixed upon a solid basis, upon the knowledge of spirit and of the moral nature.

All these elements, therefore, whether separated or combined, cannot present us the ideal. They are antecedents, conditions, and materials. Their collective totality presents nothing which corresponds to the idea of real beauty. This ideal beauty we have found realized for the first time in Classic Art, which endeavors to give it a more precise characterization.

I. In classic art, spirit does not appear under its infinite form. It is not the thought which thinks itself, the absolute which reveals itself to itself as the universal. It manifests itself still in an immediate, natural, and sensuous existence. But at least the idea, in so far as it is free, chooses for itself in art its appropriate form, and possesses within itself the principle of its external manifestation. It must then return to nature, but only to become its master. Those forms which it borrows from nature, instead of being simply material, lose their independent value in order to become exclusively the expression of spirit. Such is the identification, conformable to spirit itself, of the two elements, spiritual and sensuous. In place of being neutralized the one by the other, the two elements rise to a higher harmony which consists in each being preserved in the other; in idealizing and spiritualizing nature. This unity is the basis of Classic Art.

By virtue of this identification of significance with sensuous form, no separation can take place, and thus there is no interruption of their perfect union. Thus, too, the inner principle cannot retire into itself as pure spirit and abandon corporeal existence. Besides, as the objective and outer element in which spirit manifests itself is entirely definite and particular, the free spirit, such as art exhibits it, can only be the equally definite and independent spiritual individuality in its natural form. Hence man constitutes the true center of classic beauty.

It is clear, also, that this intimate union of the spiritual with the sensuous element can be no other than the human form. For, though this participates especially in the animal type, it is none the less the sole manifestation of spirit. There is in

it the inanimate, the ugly; but the task of art is to cause to disappear from it this opposition between matter and spirit, to embellish the body, to render this form more perfect, to animate it, to spiritualize it.

As classic art represents free spirituality under the human, individual, and corporeal form, it has often been reproached with anthropomorphism. With the Greeks, Xenophanes had already attacked the popular religion in saying that, if lions had had sculptors among them, they would have given to their gods. the form of lions. The French have in this sense a witty saying, that "God created man in His image, and men have shown their appreciation by providing themselves with gods in human form." But it is to be remarked that, if classic beauty is, in one respect, imperfect when compared with the romantic ideal, the imperfection does not reside in anthropomorphism as such. Far from this, we must admit that, if Classic Art is sufficiently anthropomorphic for art, it is too little so relatively to a more advanced religion. Christianity has pushed anthropomorphism much further; for, in the Christian doctrine, God is not merely a divine personification under the human form; He is at once very God and very Man. He passed through every phase of human existence. He was born, He suffered, and died. In Classic Art, sensuous nature does not die, but neither is it resuscitated. Thus this religion does not wholly satisfy the human soul. The Greek ideal has for its basis an unchangeable harmony between spirit and sensuous form-the unalterable serenity of the immortal gods; but this calm has about it something cold and inanimate. Classic Art has not comprehended the true essence of the divine nature, nor penetrated to the depths of the soul. It has not known how to develop its inmost powers in their opposition, and again to reëstablish their harmony. All this phase of existence, the evil, the sinful, the unhappy, moral suffering, the revolt of the will, remorse, and the agonies of the soul, are unknown to it. Classic art does not pass beyond the proper domain of the veritable ideal.

II. As to its realization in history, it is scarcely necessary to say that we must seek it among the Greeks. Classic beauty,

with the infinite wealth of ideas and forms which compose its domain, has been allotted to the Greek people, and we ought to render homage to them for having raised art to its highest vitality. The Greeks, to consider their history only from the external side, lived in the happy medium of self-conscious, subjective freedom and moral substantiality. They were not enchained in the immobile unity of the Orient, of which the result is political and religious despotism, where the personality of the individual is absorbed and annulled in the universal substance, and has thence neither rights nor moral character. On the other hand, they proceed no further than to that stage where man concentrates himself within himself; separates himself from society, and from the world which environs him, in order to live retired within himself. Hence they connect their conduct with real interests only in turning toward a purely spiritual world. In the moral life of the Greek people the individual was, it is true, independent and free, yet without being able to isolate himself from the general interests of the State, or to separate his freedom from that of the city of which he formed a part. In Greek life the sentiment of general order as basis of morality remains in changeless harmony with that of personal freedom.

At the epoch when this principle reigned in all its purity, the opposition between political and moral law which is revealed by the moral consciousness was not yet manifest. The citizens were still penetrated by the spirit which constitutes the basis of public customs. They sought their own freedom only in the triumph of the general interest.

The sentiment of this happy harmony penetrates through all the productions in which Greek freedom has become conscious of itself. So that this epoch is the medium in which beauty begins its true life, and enters into full possession of its serene domain. It is the medium of free vitality — which is not here merely a product of nature, but a creation of spirit and by this right it receives its manifestation in art; it is a mingling of spontaneity and reflection, where the individual is not isolated, but where also he cannot connect his faith, his sufferings, and his destiny with a more elevated principle, and