sciences; on the contrary it is rather the other sciences that make use
of painting, as, for instance, astrology, which effects nothing without
the aid of perspective, the principal link of painting,--that is,
mathematical astronomy and not fallacious astrology (let those who by
reason of the existence of fools make a profession of it, forgive me).
The poet says he describes an object, that he represents another full
of beautiful allegory; the painter says he is capable of doing the
same, and in this respect he is also a poet. And if the poet says he
can incite men to love, which is the most important fact among every
kind of animal, the painter can do the same, all the more so because he
presents the lover with the image of his beloved; and the lover often
does with it what he would not do with the writer's delineation of the
same charms, i.e. talk with it and kiss it; so great is the painter's
influence on the minds of men that he incites them to love and {79}
become enamoured of a picture which does not represent any living woman.

And if the poet pleases the sense by means of the ear, the painter does
so by the eye, which is the superior sense. I will enlarge no further
on this theme save to say that if a good painter were to represent the
fury of a battle, and if the poet were to describe one, and both
representations were put before the public together, you will see
before which of the two most of the spectators will stop, to which of
the two they will pay most attention, which of the two will be the most
praised and give the greater satisfaction. Without any doubt, the
painting, being infinitely the most beautiful and useful, will please
the most. Write the name of God in some spot, and set up His image
opposite, and you will see which will be the most reverenced. While
painting embraces in itself all the forms of nature, you have nothing
save words, which are not universal, like forms. If you have the
effects of the representation, we have the representation of the
effects. Take a poet who describes the charms of a woman to her lover,
and a painter who represents her, and you will see whither nature leads
the enamoured critic. Certainly the proof should rest on the verdict
of experience. You have classed painting among the mechanical arts,
but, truly, if painters were as apt at praising their own works in
writing as you are, it would not lie under the stigma {80} of so
unhonoured an name. If you call i