phere of action.

And as, on this point, Monsieur Cahusac, an ingenious French
writer, has treated the historical part of it with so much
accuracy, that it was hardly possible to offer any thing new
upon it, beyond what he has furnished; and that not to make use
of his researches would only betray me into a fruitless
affectation of originality, I am very ready to confess, that for
the best and greatest part of what I am now going to offer upon
this subject I am indebted to his production.

That prodigious perfection to which the antients carried the
pantomime art, appeared so extraordinary to the celebrated abbot
Du Bos, that, not being able to contradict the authorities which
establish the truth of it, he was tempted to consider the art of
dancing in those times as something wholly different from what
is at present understood by dancing.

The chevalier Ramsay places it also among the lost arts. Both,
no doubt, grounding their opinion on that deficiency of
execution on the modern theatres, compared to what is
incontestably transmitted to us, by history, of the excellence
of the antient pantomimes.

But none have more contributed to establish the opinion of the
pantomime art being an art totally different from that of
dancing, and not merely an improvement of it, as was certainly
the case, than some of the professors of the art themselves, who
even exclaimed against M. Cahusac, for his attempts to give
juster notions, and to recommend the revival of it.

We are too apt to pronounce upon possibilities from our own
measure of knowledge, or of capacity. Nothing is more common
than to hear men of a profession declare loudly against any
practice attempted to be established for the improvement of
their art, and peremptorily to aver such a practice being
impossible, for no other reason than that their own study and
efforts had not been able to procure them the attainment of it.
In this too they are seconded by that croud of superficial
people who frequent the theatres, and who can believe nothing
beyond what themselves have seen: any thing above the reach of
what they are accustomed or habituated to admire, always seems
to them a chimera.

The reproach of incredulity is commonly made to men of the
greatest knowledge, because they are not over-apt to admit any
proposition without proof: but this reproach may, with more
justice, be oftenest made to the ignorant, who generally reject,
without discussion, every thing bey