No More Learning

Parrhasius was the first won reputation by adding symmetry to picture; he
added subtlety to the countenance, elegancy to the hair, love-lines to
the face, and by the public voice of all artificers, deserved honour in
the outer lines. Eupompus gave it splendour by numbers and other
elegancies. From the optics it drew reasons, by which it considered how
things placed at distance and afar off should appear less; how above or
beneath the head should deceive the eye, &c. So from thence it took
shadows, recessor, light, and heightnings. From moral philosophy it took
the soul, the expression of senses, perturbations, manners, when they
would paint an angry person, a proud, an inconstant, an ambitious, a
brave, a magnanimous, a just, a merciful, a compassionate, an humble, a
dejected, a base, and the like; they made all heightnings bright, all
shadows dark, all swellings from a plane, all solids from breaking. See
where he complains of their painting Chimaeras {94} (by the vulgar unaptly
called grotesque) saying that men who were born truly to study and
emulate Nature did nothing but make monsters against Nature, which Horace
so laughed at. {95} The art plastic was moulding in clay, or potter's
earth anciently. This is the parent of statuary, sculpture, graving, and
picture; cutting in brass and marble, all serve under her. Socrates
taught Parrhasius and Clito (two noble statuaries) first to express
manners by their looks in imagery. Polygnotus and Aglaophon were
ancienter. After them Zeuxis, who was the lawgiver to all painters;
after, Parrhasius. They were contemporaries, and lived both about
Philip's time, the father of Alexander the Great. There lived in this
latter age six famous painters in Italy, who were excellent and emulous
of the ancients--Raphael de Urbino, Michael Angelo Buonarotti, Titian,
Antony of Correggio, Sebastian of Venice, Julio Romano, and Andrea
Sartorio.

_Parasiti ad mensam_. --These are flatterers for their bread, that praise
all my oraculous lord does or says, be it true or false; invent tales
that shall please; make baits for his lordship's ears; and if they be not
received in what they offer at, they shift a point of the compass, and
turn their tale, presently tack about, deny what they confessed, and
confess what they denied; fit their discourse to the persons and
occasions.
What they snatch up and devour at one table, utter at
another; and grow suspected of the master, hated of the servants, while
they inquire, and reprehend, and compound, and dilate business of the
house they have nothing to do with. They praise my lord's wine and the
sauce he likes; observe the cook and bottle-man; while they stand in my
lord's favour, speak for a pension for them, but pound them to dust upon
my lord's least distaste, or change of his palate.

How much better is it to be silent, or at least to speak sparingly! for
it is not enough to speak good, but timely things. If a man be asked a
question, to answer; but to repeat the question before he answer is well,
that he be sure to understand it, to avoid absurdity; for it is less
dishonour to hear imperfectly than to speak imperfectly. The ears are
excused, the understanding is not. And in things unknown to a man, not
to give his opinion, lest by the affectation of knowing too much he lose
the credit he hath, by speaking or knowing the wrong way what he utters.
Nor seek to get his patron's favour by embarking himself in the factions
of the family, to inquire after domestic simulties, their sports or
affections. They are an odious and vile kind of creatures, that fly
about the house all day, and picking up the filth of the house like pies
or swallows, carry it to their nest (the lord's ears), and oftentimes
report the lies they have feigned for what they have seen and heard.

_Imo serviles_. --These are called instruments of grace and power with
great persons, but they are indeed the organs of their impotency, and
marks of weakness. For sufficient lords are able to make these
discoveries themselves. Neither will an honourable person inquire who
eats and drinks together, what that man plays, whom this man loves, with
whom such a one walks, what discourse they hold, who sleeps with whom.
They are base and servile natures that busy themselves about these
disquisitions. How often have I seen (and worthily) these censors of the
family undertaken by some honest rustic and cudgelled thriftily! These
are commonly the off-scouring and dregs of men that do these things, or
calumniate others; yet I know not truly which is worse--he that maligns
all, or that praises all.