Chapter IX (1)

But _Love_, that moulds _one Man_ up out of _two_, Makes me forget, and injure you. I took _You_ for _Myself_, sure when I thought That You in any thing were to be taught. Correct my Error with thy Pen, And if any ask me then, What thing right _Wit_, and Height of _Genius_ is, I'll only shew your _Lines_, and say, _'Tis this_.

The _Spirit_ and _Wit_ of this _Ode_ are excellent; and yet it is evident, through the whole, that Mr. _Cowley_ had no clear Idea of _Wit_, though at the same time it _shines_ in most of these Lines: There is little Merit in saying what WIT _is not_, which is the chief Part of this _Ode_. Towards the End, he indeed attempts to describe what _it is_, but is quite vague and perplex'd in his Description; and at last, instead of collecting his scatter'd Rays into a _Focus_, and exhibiting succinctly the clear Essence and Power of WIT, he drops the whole with a trite Compliment.

The learned Dr. _Barrow_, in his _Sermon against foolish Talking and Jesting_, gives the following profuse Description of WIT.

But first it may be demanded, What the Thing we speak of is? Or
what the Facetiousness (or _Wit_ as he calls it before) doth
import? To which Questions I might reply, as _Democritus_ did to
him that asked the Definition of a Man, _'Tis that we all see and
know._ Any one better apprehends what it is by Acquaintance,
than I can inform him by Description. It is indeed a Thing so
versatile and multiform, appearing in so many Shapes, so many
Postures, so many Garbs, so variously apprehended by several
Eyes and Judgments, that it seemeth no less hard to settle a
clear and certain Notion thereof, than to make a Portrait of
_Proteus_, or to define the Figure of the fleeting Air. Sometimes
it lieth in pat Allusion to a known Story, or in seasonable
Application of a trivial Saying, or in forging an apposite Tale:
Sometimes it playeth in Words and Phrases, taking Advantage from
the Ambiguity of their Sense, or the Affinity of their Sound:
Sometimes it is wrapp'd in a Dress of humorous Expression:
Sometimes it lurketh under an odd Similitude: Sometimes it
is lodged in a sly Question, in a smart Answer, in a quirkish
Reason, in a shrewd Intimation, in cunningly diverting, or
cleverly retorting an Objection: Sometimes it is couched in a
bold Scheme of Speech, in a tart Irony, in a lusty Hyperbole,
in a startling Metaphor, in a plausible Reconciling of
Contradictions, or in acute Nonsense; Sometimes a scenical
Representation of Persons or Things, a counterfeit Speech, a
mimical Look or Gesture passeth for it. Sometimes an affected
Simplicity, sometimes a presumptuous Bluntness giveth it Being.
Sometimes it riseth from a lucky Hitting upon what is Strange;
sometimes from a crafty wresting obvious Matter to the Purpose.
Often it' consisteth in one knows not what, and springeth
up one can hardly tell how. Its ways are unaccountable, and
inexplicable, being answerable to the numberless Rovings of
Fancy, and Windings of Language. It is, in short, a Manner
of Speaking out of the simple and plain Way (such as Reason
teacheth, and proveth Things by) which by a pretty, surprizing
Uncouthness in Conceit or Expression, doth affect and amuse the
Fancy, stirring in it some Wonder, and breeding some Delight
thereto. It raiseth Admiration, as signifying a nimble Sagacity
of Apprehension, a special Felicity of Invention, a Vivacity of
Spirit, and Reach of Wit, more than vulgar; it seeming to argue a
rare Quickness of Parts, that one can fetch in remote Conceits
applicable; a notable Skill that he can dextrously accommodate
them to the Purpose before him; together with a lively Briskness
of Humour, not apt to damp those Sportful Flashes of Imagination.
(Whence in _Aristotle_ such Persons are termed "epidexioi",
dexterous Men, and "eutropoi", Men of facile or versatile
Manners, who can easily turn themselves to all Things, or
turn all Things to themselves.) It also procureth Delight,
by gratifying Curiosity with its Rareness, or Semblance of
Difficulty. (As Monsters, not for their Beauty, but their
Rarity; as juggling Tricks, not for their Use, but their
Abstruseness, are beheld with Pleasure;) by diverting the Mind
from its Road of serious Thoughts, by instilling Gaiety, and
Airiness of Spirit; by provoking to such Disposition of Spirit
in Way of Emulation, or Complaisance; and by seasoning Matters
otherwise distasteful or insipid, with an unusual and thence
grateful Tange.

This Description, it is easy to perceive, must have cost the Author of it a great deal of Labour. It is a very full Specimen of that Talent of entirely _exhausting_ a Subject, for which Dr. _Barrow_ was remarkable; and if the _Point_ was, to exhibit all the various Forms and Appearances, not of WIT only, but of _Raillery_, _Satire_, _Sarcasms_, and of every Kind of _Poignancy_ and _Pleasantry_ of Sentiment, and Expression, he seems to have perfectly succeeded; there being perhaps no Variety, in all the Extent of these Subjects, which he has not presented to View in this Description.--But he does not pretend to give any _Definition_ of WIT, intimating rather that it is quite impossible to be given: And indeed from his Description of it, as a _Proteus_, appearing in numberless various Colours, and Forms; and from his mistaking, and presenting for WIT, other different Mixtures and Substances, it is evident that his Idea of it was quite confused and uncertain: It is true, he has discovered a vast Scope of Fertility of Genius, and an uncommon Power of collecting together a Multitude of Objects upon any Occasion, but he has here absolutely mistaken his work; for instead of exhibiting the Properties of WIT in a clearer Light, and confuting the _false Claims_ which are made to it, he has made it his whole Business to perplex it the more, by introducing, from all Corners, a monstrous Troop of new unexpected _Pretenders_.

_Dryden_, in the Preface to his _Opera_, entitled, _The State of
Innocence_, or _Fall of Man_, gives the following _Decree_ upon WIT.
The _Definition of WIT_, (which has been so often attempted, and
ever unsuccessfully by many Poets) is only this: That it is _a
Propriety of Thoughts and Words; or in other Terms, Thoughts and
Words elegantly adapted to the Subject_.

If Mr. _Dryden_ imagined, that he had succeeded _himself_ in this _Definition_, he was extremely mistaken; for nothing can be more distant from the Properties of WIT, than those he describes. He discovers no Idea of the _Surprize_, and _Brilliancy_ of WIT, or of the sudden _Light_ thrown upon a Subject. Instead of once pointing at these, he only describes the Properties of clear _Reasoning_, which are _a Propriety of Thoughts and Words_;--Whereas WIT, in its sudden _Flashes_, makes no Pretension to _Reasoning_; but is perceived in the pleasant _Surprize_ which it starts, and in the _Light_ darted upon a Subject, which instantly vanishes again, without abiding a strict Examination.

The other Definition he gives, which is, _Thoughts and Words elegantly adapted to the Subject_, is very different from the former, but equally unhappy.

For _Propriety_, in _Thoughts_ and _Words_, consists in exhibiting _clear, pertinent Ideas_, in _precise_ and _perspicuous Words_.

Whereas ELEGANCE consists in the _compt_, _well pruned_ and _succinct Turn_ of a Subject.

The Object of the _First_, is to be _clear_, and _perspicuous_; whence it often appears in pursuit of these, not _compt_ or _succinct_: Whereas the _Essence_ of ELEGANCE is to be _compt_ and _succinct_, for the Sake of which Ornaments it often neglect _Perspicuity_, and _Clearness_.--In short, a _Propriety_ of Thoughts and Words, may subsist without any _Elegance_; as an _Elegance_ of Thoughts and Words may appear without a perfect _Propriety_.

The last _Definition_, as it is thus very different from the former is also equally unhappy: For ELEGANCE is no _essential_ Property of WIT. _Pure_ WIT resulting solely from the _quick Elucidation_ of one Subject, by the sudden _Arrangement_, and _Comparison_ of it, with another Subject.--If the two Objects _arranged_ together are _elegant_, and _polite_, there will then be superadded to the WIT, an _Elegance_ and _Politeness_ of Sentiment, which will render the WIT more amiable. But if the Objects are _vulgar_, _obscene_, or _deformed_, provided the _first_ be _elucidated_, in a lively Manner, by, the sudden _Arrangement_ of it with the _second_, there will be equally WIT; though, the Indelicacy of Sentiment attending it, will render such WIT shocking and abominable.

It is with the highest Respect for the great Mr. _Locke_, that I deliver his Sentiments upon this Subject.

And hence, perhaps, may be given some Reason of that common
Observation, that Men who have a great deal of _Wit_, and prompt
Memories, have not always the clearest Judgment or deepest
Reason: For _Wit_ lying most in the Assemblage of _Ideas_, and
putting those together with Quickness and Variety, wherein can be
found any Assemblance or Congruity, thereby to make up pleasant
Pictures, and agreeable Visions in the Fancy. _Judgment_, on the
contrary, lies quite on the other side; in separating carefully
one from another, _Ideas_, wherein can be found the least
Difference, thereby to avoid being missed by Similitude, and
by Affinity to take one thing for another. This is a Way of
proceeding quite contrary to Metaphor and Allusion; wherein for
the most Part lies that Entertainment and Pleasantry of _Wit_,
which strikes so lively on the Fancy, and therefore is acceptable
to all People, because its Beauty appears at first Sight, and
there is required no Labour of Thoughts to examine what Truth,
or Reason, there is in it. The Mind, without looking any further,
rests satisfied with the Agreeableness of the Picture, and the
Gaiety of the Fancy. And it is a kind of an Affront to go about
to examine it by the severe Rules of Truth, and good Reason,
whereby it appears, that it conflicts in something that is not
perfectly conformable to them.

It is to be observed that Mr. _Locke_ has here only occasionally, and passantly, delivered his Sentiments upon this Subject; but yet he has very happily explained the chief Properties of WIT. It was _his_ Remark _First_, that it lies for the most _Part_ in _assembling_ together with _Quickness_ and _Variety_ Objects, which possess an _Affinity_, or _Congruity_, with each other; which was the _first_ just Information obtained by the literary World, upon this Subject.

As to what he adds, That the Intention, and Effects, of this _Assemblage_ of _similar_ Objects, is _to make up pleasant Pictures, and agreeable Visions in the Fancy_, it is, as I humbly apprehend, not quite perfect: For the Business of this _Assemblage_ is not merely to raise pleasant Pictures in the Fancy, but also to _enlighten_ thereby the _original_ Subject.--This is evident; because in such _Assemblages_, the only Foundation upon which the _new Subject_ is suddenly introduced, is the _Affinity_, and consequently the _Illustration_, it bears to the _first_ Subject.--The Introduction of pleasant Pictures and Visions, which present not a new _Illustration_, and _Light_, to the _original_ Subjects, being rather wild Sallies of _Vivacity_, than well-aimed, apposite Strokes of WIT.

It is Mr. _Locke_'s Conclusion, at last, That WIT _consists in something that is not perfectly conformable to Truth, and good Reason_.--This is a _Problem_ of some Curiosity; and I apprehend Mr. _Locke_'s Determination upon it to be right:--For the _Direction_ of WIT is absolutely different from the _Direction of_ TRUTH and GOOD REASON; It being the Aim of WIT to strike the _Imagination_; of TRUTH and GOOD REASON, to convince the _Judgment_: From thence they can never be perfectly coincident.

It is however true, that there may be Instances of WIT, wherein the _Agreement_ between the two Objects shall be absolutely _just_, and perceived to be such at the first Glance. Such Instances of WIT, will be then also _Self-evident_ TRUTHS. They will _both_ agree in their obvious, and quick _Perspicuity_; but will be still different in this, that the Effort of the _One_ is to strike the _Fancy_, whereas the _Other_ is wholly exerted in gratifying the _Judgment_.

The Sentiments of Mr. _Addison_ upon WIT, are professedly delivered in the _Spectator_ Nº. 62. annexed to the following _Essay_. He has there justly commended Mr. _Locke_'s Description of WIT; but what he adds, by Way of Explanation to it, that the _Assemblage_ of Ideas must be such as shall give _Delight_, and _Surprize_, is not true, in regard to the Former, _Delight_ being no _essential_ Property of WIT; for if the _original_ Subject be unpleasant, or deformed, the sudden unexpected _Arrangement_ of a _similar_ Object with it, may give us _Surprize_, and be indisputably WIT, and yet be far from creating any _Delight_.

This Gentleman has also given the following Example, in order to illustrate the Necessity there is, that _Surprize_ should be always an Attendant upon WIT.

"When a Poet tells us, the Bosom of his Mistress is as white as
Snow, there is no _Wit_ in the Comparison; but when he adds,
with a Sigh, that it as cold too, it then grows to Wit."

--To compare a Girl's _Bosom_ to _Snow_ for its _Whiteness_ I apprehend to be WIT, notwithstanding the Authority of so great a Writer to the contrary. For there is a _Lustre_ resulting from the _natural_ and _splendid Agreement_ between these Objects, which will _always_ produce WIT; such, as cannot be destroyed, though it will quickly be rendered _trite_, by frequent Repetition.

This _Problem_, _How far_ SURPRIZE _is, or is not, necessary to_ WIT, I humbly apprehend, may be thus solved.--In Subjects which have a _natural_ and _splendid Agreement_, there will always be WIT upon their _Arrangement_ together; though when it becomes _trite_, and not accompanied with _Surprize_, the _Lustre_ will be much faded;--But where the _Agreement_ is _forced_ and _strained_, _Novelty_ and _Surprize_ are absolutely necessary to usher it in; An unexpected _Assemblage_ of this Sort, striking our Fancy, and being gaily admitted at first to be WIT; which upon frequent Repetition, the _Judgment_ will have examined, and rise up against it wherever it appears;--So that in short, in Instances where the _Agreement_ is _strained_ and _defective_, which indeed are abundantly the most general, _Surprize_ is a necessary _Passport_ to WIT; but _Surprize_ is not necessary to WIT, where the _Agreement_ between the two Subjects is _natural_ and _splendid_; though in these Instances it greatly heightens the _Brillancy_.

The subsequent Remark of Mr. _Addison_, _That the Poet, after saying his Mistress's Bosom is as white as Snow, should add, with a Sigh, that it is as cold too, in order that it may grow to_ WIT, is I fear, very incorrect. For as to the _Sigh_, it avails not a Rush; and this Addition will be found to be only a _new_ Stroke of WIT, equally _trite_, and less perfect, and natural, than the former Comparison.

It may also be observed, That Mr. _Addison_ has omitted the _Elucidation_ of the _original_ Subject, which is the grand Excellence of WIT. Nor has he prescribed any _Limits_ to the Subjects, which are to be arranged together; without which the Result will be frequently the SUBLIME or BURLESQUE; In which, it is true, WIT often appears, but taking their whole Compositions together, they are different Substances, and usually ranked in different _Classes_.

All that Mr. _Congreve_ has delivered upon WIT, as far as I know, appears in his _Essay_ upon HUMOUR, annexed to this Treatise. He there says, To define HUMOUR, perhaps, were as difficult, as to define WIT; for, like that, it is of infinite Variety. --Again, he afterwards adds, But though we cannot certainly tell what WIT is, or what HUMOUR is, yet we may _go near_ to shew something, which is not WIT, or not HUMOUR, and yet often mistaken for both. --In this _Essay_, wherein he particularly considers HUMOUR, and the Difference between _this_, and WIT, he may be expected to have delivered his best Sentiments upon both: But these Words, which I have quoted, seem to be as important and precise, as any which he has offered upon the Subject of WIT. As such, I present them, without any Remarks, to my Reader, who, if he only _goes near_ to be _edified_ by them, will discover a great Share of _Sagacity_.

The Sentiments of these eminent Writers upon WIT, having thus been exhibited, I come next to the Subject of HUMOUR. This has been _defined_ by some, in the following Manner, with great _Perspicuity._ --HUMOUR is the genuine WIT of _Comedies_,--which has afforded vast Satisfaction to many _Connoissures_ in the _Belles Lettres_; especially as WIT has been supposed to be incapable of any _Definition._

This Subject has also been particularly considered by the _Spectatator_ Nº. 35. inserted at the End of the following _Essay_. Mr. _Addison_ therein _gravely_ remarks, that It is indeed much easier to describe what is not HUMOUR, than what it is; which, I humbly apprehend, is no very _important_ Piece of Information.--He adds, And very difficult to define it otherwise, than as _Cowly_ has done WIT, by Negatives. This Notion of _defining_ a Subject by _Negatives_, is a favourite _Crotchet_, and may perhaps be assumed upon other Occasions by future Writers: I hope therefore I shall be pardoned, if I offer a proper Explanation of so good a _Conceit_;--To declare then, _That a Subject is only to be_ DEFINED _by_ NEGATIVES, is to cloath it in a _respectable_ Dress of _Darkness_. And about as much as to say, That it is a _Knight_ of _tenebrose Virtues_; or a _serene Prince_, of the _Blood_ of _Occult Qualities_.

Mr. _Addison_ proceeds, Were I to give my own Notions of HUMOUR, I should deliver them after _Plato's_ Manner, in a Kind of Allegory; and by supposing HUMOUR to be a Person, deduce to him, all his Qualifications, according to the following Genealogy: TRUTH was the Founder of the Family, and the Father of GOOD SENSE; GOOD SENSE was the Father of WIT, who married a Lady of a collateral Line called MIRTH, by whom he had Issue HUMOUR. --It is very unfortunate for this _Allegorical_ Description, that there is not one Word of it just: For TRUTH, GOOD SENSE, WIT, and MIRTH, represented to be the immediate _Ancestors_ of HUMOUR; whereas HUMOUR is derived from the _Foibles_, and whimsical _Oddities_ of _Persons_ in real Life, which flow rather from their _Inconsistencies_, and _Weakness_, than from TRUTH and GOOD SENSE; Nor is WIT any _Ancestor_ of HUMOUR, but of a quite different _Family_; it being notorious that much HUMOUR may be drawn from the Manners of _Dutchmen_, and of the most formal and dull Persons, who are yet never guilty of WIT. Again, MIRTH is not so properly the _Parent_ of HUMOUR, as the _Offspring_.--In short, this whole _Genealogy_ is a _nubilous_ Piece of Conceit, instead of being any _Elucidation_ of HUMOUR. It is a formal Method of trifling, introduced under a deep Ostentation of Learning, which deserves the severest Rebuke.--But I restrain my Pen, recollecting the _Visions_ of MIRZA, and heartily profess my high Veneration for their admirable Author.

The _Essay_ upon HUMOUR, at the End of this Treatise, written by Mr. _Congreve_, is next to be considered. It appears, that at first he professes his absolute Uncertainty in regard to this Subject; and says, "_We cannot certainly tell what_ WIT _is, or what_ HUMOUR _is_." But yet, through his whole Piece, he neglects the Subject of HUMOUR in general, and only discourses upon the HUMOUR, by which he means barely the _Disposition_, of Persons: This may particularly appear from the following Words.

A Man may change his Opinion, but I believe he will find it a
Difficulty to part with his HUMOUR; and there is nothing more
provoking than the being made sensible of that Difficulty.
Sometimes we shall meet with those, who perhaps indifferently
enough, but at the same time impertinently, will ask the
Question, WHY ARE YOU NOT MERRY? WHY ARE YOU NOT GAY, PLEASANT,
AND CHEARFUL? Then instead of answering, could I ask such a
Person, WHY ARE YOU NOT HANDSOME? WHY HAVE YOU NOT BLACK EYES,
AND A BETTER COMPLEXION? Nature abhors to be forced.

The two famous Philosophers of _Ephesus_ and _Abdera_, have their
different Sects at this Day. Some weep, and others laugh at one
and the same Thing.

I don't doubt but you have observed several Men laugh when they
are angry; others, who are silent; some that are loud; yet I
cannot suppose that it is the Passion of ANGER, which is in
itself different, or more or less in one than t'other, but that
it is the HUMOUR of the Man that is predominant, and urges him to
express it in that Manner. Demonstrations of PLEASURE, are as
various: One Man has a HUMOUR of retiring from all Company, when
any thing has happened to please him beyond Expectation; he hugs
himself alone, and thinks it an Addition to the Pleasure to keep
it a Secret, &c.

All which, I apprehend, is no more than saying; That there are different _Dispositions_ in different _Persons_.

In another Place, he seems to understand by _Humour_, not only the _Disposition,_ but the _Tone_ of the _Nerves_, of a Person, thus,

"Suppose MOROSE to be a Man naturally splenetic, and melancholy;
is there any thing more offensive to one of such a DISPOSITION
(where he uses the Word instead of _Humour_) than Noise and
Clamour? Let any Man that has the Spleen (and there are enough in
England) be Judge. We see common Examples of this HUMOUR in
little every Day. 'Tis ten to one, but three Parts in four of the
Company you dine with, are discomposed, and started at the
cutting of a Cork, or scratching of a Plate with a Knife; it is
a Proportion of the same HUMOUR, that makes such, or any other
Noise, offensive to the Person that hears it; for there are
others who will not be disturbed at all by it.

At this Rate every _Weakness_ of _Nerves_, or _Particularity_ of _Constitution,_ is HUMOUR.

It is true, he justly points out in another Place the different Sentiments, which ought to be adapted to different _Characters_ in _Comedy_, according to their different _Dispositions_, or, as he phrases it, _Humours_: As for Instance, he very rightly observes, That a Character of a splenetic and peevish HUMOUR, Should have a satirical WIT. A jolly and sanguine HUMOUR should have a facetious WIT. --But still this is no Description of what is well felt, and known, by the general Name of HUMOUR.

However, as what I have already quoted, may appear to be only his looser Explanations, it will be necessary to deliver his more closed and collected Sentiments upon this Subject. These he gives in the following Words, I should be unwilling to venture, even in a bare _Description_ of _Humour_, much more to make a _Definition_ of it; but now my Hand is in, I will tell you what serves me instead of either. I take it to be, _A singular and unavoidable Manner of doing or saying any thing, peculiar and natural to one Man only, by which his Speech and Actions are distinguished from those of other Men." --This Description is very little applicable to HUMOUR, but tolerably well adapted to other Subjects.--Thus, a Person, who is happy in a particular _Grace_, which accompanies all his Actions, may be said to possess _a singular and unavoidable Manner of doing or saying any thing, peculiar and natural to him only, by which his Speech and Actions are distinguished from those of other Men_. And the same may be said of a Person of a peculiar _Vivacity_, _Heaviness_, or _Awkwardness_.--In short, this Description is suited to any _Particularity_ of a Person in general, instead of being adapted to the _Foibles_ and _whimsical Oddities_ of Persons, which alone constitute HUMOUR.

These are the only Pieces upon WIT, and HUMOUR, which have fallen within my Knowledge; I have here fairly delivered them at length; and from the Respect which is due to such eminent Writers, have distinctly and deliberately examined the Merit of each.--As to my own _Performance_, which is now submitted to the Public, I have to wish, that it may gain a candid and strict Examination. It has been my Endeavour to give _Definitions_ of the Subjects, upon which I have treated; A _Plan_ the most difficult of all others to be executed by an Author; But such an one, as I apprehend, deserves to be more generally introduced, and established. If once it was expected by the Public, that _Authors_ should strictly _define_ their Subjects, it would instantly checque an Inundation of Scribbling. The _desultory_ Manner of Writing would be absolutely exploded; and _Accuracy_ and _Precision_ would be necessarily introduced upon every Subject.

This is the _Method_ pursued in Subjects of _Philosophy_; Without clear and precise _Definitions_ such noble Advances could never have been made in those Sciences; And it is by the Assistance of _these_ only, that Subjects of _Polite Literature_, can ever be enlightened and embellished with just Ornaments. If _Definitions_ had been constantly exacted from Authors there would not have appeared _one hundreth_ Part of the present Books, and yet every Subject had been better ascertained.--Nor will this Method, as some may imagine, be encumbered with Stiffness; On the contrary, in _illustrating_ the Truth of _Definitions_ there is a full Scope of the utmost Genius, Imagination, and Spirit of a Writer; and a Work upon this _Plan_ is adorned with the highest Charms appearing with _Propriety_, _Clearness_, and _Conviction_, as well as Beauty.

It is true, that the Difficulties, which attend an able Execution of this _Method_, are not open to a careless Eye; And it is some Mortification to an _Author_ upon this _Plan_, that his greatest _Merit_ is likely to lie concealed; A _Definition,_ or _Distinction,_ which after much Attention and Time he has happily delivered with _Brevity_ and _Clearness_, appearing hereby quite obvious, to others, and what they cannot imagine could require Pains to discover.

As to the _Examples_, by which I have illustrated the _Definition_ of _Wit_, they are _common_ and _trite_; but are the best, which I could find upon deliberate Enquiry. Many Modern instances of _Wit_, which left very lively Impressions upon me, when I heard them, appearing upon Re-examination to be quite strained and defective. These, which I have given, as they are thus _trite_, are not designed in themselves for any Entertainment to the Reader; but being various, and distant from each other, they very properly serve to explain the Truth, and Extent of the _Definition_.

The Character of an HUMOURIST, I expect, will be strange to most of my Readers; and if no Gentleman is acquainted with a _Person_ of this _Cast_, it must pass for a _Monster_ of my own Creation;--As to the Character of Sir _John Falstaff_, it is chiefly extracted from _Shakespear_, in his 1st Part of King _Henry_ the _IVth_; But so far as _Sir John_ in _Shakspear's_ Description, sinks into a _Cheat_ or a _Scoundrel_, upon any Occasion, he is different from that _Falstaff_, who is designed in the following _Essay_, and is entirely an amiable Character.

It is obvious, that the Appearance, which _Falstaff_ makes, in the unfinished Play of _The Merry Wives of Windsor_, is in general greatly below his true Character. His Imprisonment and Death in the latter Part of King _Henry_ the _IVth_, seem also to have been written by _Shakespear_ in Compliance with the _Austerity_ of the Times; and in order to avoid the Imputation of encouraging _Idleness_ and mirthful _Riot_ by too amiable and happy an Example.

The Criticism, which I have made, upon _Horace_'s Narrative of his _Adventure_ with an _Impertinent Fellow_, I offer with Respect; And beg leave to observe that the chief Part which I object to, is the _Propriety_ of his introducing himself in so _ridiculous a Plight_; --Dum sudor ad imos Manaret Talos; And Demitto Auriculas, ut iniquæ mentis Acellus Cum gravius dorso subiit onus. And other Representations of the same sort, seem to place _Horace_ in a very mean and ludicrous Light; which it is probable he never apprehended in the full Course of exposing his Companion;--Besides, the Conduct of his Adversary is in several Places, excessively, and, as it may be construed, _designedly_, insolent and contemptuous; and as no Merit or Importance belongs to this Person, there appears no Reason why _Horace_ should endure such Treatment; or, if the other was too _powerful_ for him, it is not an _Adventure_ of _Honour_; or what _Horace_ should chuse to expose to the World in this manner, with all the Particulars of his own despicable Distress.

However, the _Mirth_ which results from this Narrative, as it now stands, is perhaps rather the stronger at first, by the full _Ridicule_ which lies against _Horace_, and his Adversary;--But, upon Reflection, there arises a Disgust, at the Impropriety of _Horace's_ exposing his own _Meanness_, as well as at the nauseous _Impudence_ of his Companion.

As to _uncommon_ Words, if any such appear in this _Introduction_, or in the following _Essay_, I hope they want neither _Propriety_, _Clearness_, nor _Strength_;--And if the _Length_of this Piece to an _Essay_ so _short_ shall happen at first to _disturb_ any _Critic_, I beg leave to inform him, that all, which can be fairly collected from it, is only, that it may have cost _me_ the more Trouble;--But upon mentioning the _Length_ of this Piece, what behoves me the most, is, to return my Thanks to two _Gentlemen_, who suffered me to read to them the whole, as it was gradually written; And by whose _judicious_ and _friendly Instructions_ in the Course of it, my own _Imagination_ was often prevented from running into _Riots_.

However, I am far from imagining, that I have always been reduced within just Bounds; And now feel a sufficient Share of _Concern_ and _Anxiety_, for the _Fate_ of this Work;--Yet, I humbly apprehend, that _this_ must freely be allowed me, that I have not been a _Plagiary_; But have constantly delivered my own _original_ Sentiments, without _purloining_ or _disfiguring_ the Thoughts of others; An _Honesty_, which, I hope, is laudable in an _Author_; And as I have not _stolen_, neither have I _concealed_, the _Merit_ of other Writers.

It will also be found, as I humbly apprehend, that I have never _shunned_ the Subject: I mention this particularly, because it is the Practice of many eminent Writers, after much _curvetting_ and _prauncing_, suddenly to wheel, and retire, when they are expected to make their most full Attack.--These Gentlemen, it is true, very happily avoid _Danger_, and advance and retreat in _excellent Order_: But, with their Leave, I must observe that they never do any _Execution_; For Subjects, which have not been surveyed, and laid open, are like _fortified Places_; and it is the Business of a _Writer_, as well as of a _Soldier_, to make an Attack;--This has been the Conduct I have held in the following _Essay_; and however I may be _shattered_ upon any Occasion, I hope it will appear (if I may be allowed the Expression) that I have fairly _charged_ the Subjects.

Having offered these Circumstances in my Favour, I must frankly acknowledge, that I am not able to plead any _Hurry_ or _Precipitancy_ in the publishing of this Work, in Excuse of its Errors; Though I clearly understand, that by making this Discovery, I absolutely deprive myself of the most _genteel_ and _fashionable Screen_ now used by Authors;--But I imagined, that it became me to spare no Labour or Attention upon a Work, which I should presume to offer to the World; Happening to esteem this _Care_ and _Concern_, a _Respect_ due to the _Public_, and the proper Species of _Humility_ and _Modesty_ in an _Author_.

* * * * *

An
ESSAY
on
Wit, Humour, Raillery, & c.

WIT is the LUSTRE resulting from the quick ELUCIDATION of one
Subject, by a _just_ and unexpected ARRANGEMENT of it with
another Subject.

This _Definition_ of WIT will more clearly appear by a short Explanation.

It is the Province of WIT to _elucidate_, or _enlighten_ a Subject, not by reasoning upon that Subject, but by a just and unexpected Introduction of another _similar_, or _opposite_ Subject; whereby, upon their _Arrangement_ together, the _original_ Subject may be _set off_, and more clearly _enlighten'd_, by their obvious Comparison.

It may be proper, for the sake of Distinction, to call the Subject, which is the Basis and Ground-work, the _original_ Subject; and that which is introduced, in order to _elucidate_ it, the _auxiliary_ Subject.

That there be always an apparent Chain or Connexion, or else an obvious Agreement or Contrast, between the two Subjects, is absolutely requir'd, in order that the _Auxiliary_ one may be _justly_ introduced; otherwise, instead of WIT, there will only appear a rambling _Vivacity_, in wild, unprovoked Sallies.

And yet _every just_ or _natural_ Introduction of an _auxiliary_ Subject will not produce WIT, unless a new _Lustre_ is reflected from thence upon the _original_ Subject.

It is further to be observed, that the Introduction of the _auxiliary_ Subject ought not only to be _just_, but also _unexpected_, which are entirely consistent together; For as every Subject bears various Relations and Oppositions to other Subjects, it is evident that each of these Relations and Oppositions upon being exhibited, will be _unexpected_ to the Persons, who did not perceive them before; and yet they are _just_ by Supposition.

It is upon such _unexpected_ Introductions of _auxiliary_ Subjects, that we are struck with a _Surprize_; from whence the high _Brilliancy_ and _Sparkling_ of WIT, result.

Whereas _Auxiliary_ Subjects, introduced upon such Occasions, as they have been frequently exhibited before, are apt to fall dull, and heavy upon the Fancy; and unless they possess great natural Spirit, will excite no sprightly Sensation.

It is also necessary to observe, that, in WIT, the Subjects concern'd must be _ordinary_ and _level_; By which are intended, not such as are _common_, but such as have no _extraordinarily exalted_, or _enlarged_, Qualities; and are not _unsizeable_ in the particular Circumstances in which they are compared to each other;--otherwise it is easy to perceive, that the Result of their _Arrangement_ will not be so properly WIT, as either the SUBLIME, or BURLESQUE.

To all this is to be added, that either _Gallantry, Raillery_, _Humour_, _Satire_, _Ridicule_, _Sarcasms_, or other Subjects, are generally blended with WIT; It has been for want of this Discovery, and of a proper Separation of these Subjects, that the Attempts which have hitherto been made to _define_ WIT, have been all involv'd and overwhelm'd in Perplexity; For the different Mixtures of these foreign Ingredients with WIT, have discover'd such various and opposite _Colours_ and _Substances_, as were impossible to be comprehended in one certain steady _Definition_;--Whereas _pure_ WIT alone, constantly appears in _one uniform_ Manner; which is, _In the _quick Elucidation_ of one Subject, by _unexpectedly_ exhibiting its _Agreement_ or _Contrast_ with another Subject_.

It is proper in this Place, to distinguish between WIT, SIMILES, and METAPHORS. SIMILES, though they _illustrate_ one Subject, by _arranging_ it with another Subject, are yet different from WIT, as they want its _sudden_ and _quick Elucidation_.

Again; In WIT, the _Elucidation_ is thrown only upon _one_ Point of a Subject; or if more Points be _elucidated_, they are so many different Strokes of WIT;--Whereas every SIMILE touches the Subject it _illustrates_ in _several Points_.

It is from hence, that the _Elucidation_, as before mention'd, arising from a SIMILE, is _slower_ than from WIT; But then is is generally more _accurate_ and _compleat_;--In short, WIT, from its _Quickness_, exhibits more _Brilliancy_, But SIMILES possess greater _Perfection_.

A METAPHOR, is the _Arrayment_ of one Subject, with the _Dress_,
or _Colour_, or any _Attributes_, of another Subject.

In WIT, the two Subjects are suddenly confronted with each other, and upon their joint View, the _original_ one is _elucidated_ by the obvious _Agreement_ or _Contrast_ of the _auxiliary_ Subject.

But METAPHOR goes further, and not content with _arranging_ the two Subjects together, and exhibiting from thence their _Agreement_ or _Contrast_, it actually snatches the Properties of the _auxiliary_ one, and fits them at once upon the _original_ Subject.

It is evident from hence, that there may be WIT without any METAPHOR; But in every just METAPHOR there is WIT; The _Agreement_ of the two Subjects being in a METAPHOR more strictly and sensibly presented.

There is also this Difference between WIT and METAPHOR, that in WIT the _original_ Subject is _enlighten'd_, without altering its _Dress_; whereas in METAPHOR the _original_ Subject is cloathed in a _new Dress_, and struts forwards at once with a different _Air_, and with strange _unexpected Ornaments_.

It is from hence, that by METAPHOR a more masculine Air and Vigour is given to a Subject, than by WIT; But it too often happens, that the METAPHOR is carried so far, as instead of _elucidating_, to obscure and disfigure, the _original_ Subject.

To exhibit some Examples of WIT.

1.

_Henry_ the IVth of _France_, intimating to the _Spanish_ Ambassador the Rapidity, with which he was able to over-run _Italy_, told him, that _if once he mounted on Horseback, he should breakfast at_ Milan, _and dine at_ Naples; To which the Ambassador added, _Since your Majesty travels at this rate, you may be at Vespers in_ Sicily.

The Introduction of the _Vespers_ at SICILY is here _natural_, and easy; as it seems only to be carrying on his Majesty's Journey at the same rate, and to compleat the Progress of the Day; But it ushers at once into View the _Destruction_ of the _French_ upon a _similar_ Occasion, when they formerly over-ran SICILY, and were all massacred there at the ringing of the Bell for _Vespers_;--The sudden Introduction and _Arrangement_ of this Catastrophe, with the Expedition then threaten'd, sets the Issue of such a Conquest in a new _Light_; And very happily exhibits and _elucidates_ the Result of such vain and restless Adventures.

It may be observed, that the _quick_ Introduction and _Arrangement_ of any former Conquest of _Italy_ by the _French_, with the Expedition then threaten'd, would have exhibited WIT; whatever the Issue had been of such former Conquest; But in this Instance, there sits couched under the WIT, a very _severe Rebuke_ upon the _French_ Monarch.

2.

_Alexander_ the VIth was very busily questioning the Ambassador of _Venice_, Of whom his Masters held their Customs and Prerogatives of the Sea? To which the Ambassador readily answer'd; _If your_ HOLINESS _will only please to examine your Charter of St._ PETER's _Patrimony, you will find upon the Back of it, the Grant made to the_ VENETIANS _of the_ ADRIATIC.

The Authority of the _Grant_ to the _Venetians_ is in this Instance the _original_ Subject, which is thus suddenly _elucidated_ to the _Pope_, by _arranging_, and connecting it with the holy _Charter_ of St. _Peter_'s Patrimony; There is a peculiar Happiness in the Address of this Answer to the _Pope_, as he was obliged to receive it as a satisfactory Account of the Truth of the _Grant_, and a clear _Elucidation_ of its sacred Authority.

In this Instance, besides the WIT which shines forth, the _Pope_ is severely expos'd to your _Raillery_, from the Scrape into which he has brought the _Charter_ of St. _Peter's_ Patrimony, by his Attack of the _Ambassador_; The _fictitious_ Existence of both the _Charter_ and _Grant_ being sarcastically pointed out, under this respectable Air of _Authenticity_.

3.

Upon the Restoration Mr. _Waller_ presented a congratulatory Copy of Verses to King _Charles_; His Majesty, after reading them, said,-- _Mr_. Waller, _these are very good, but not so fine as you made upon the_ PROTECTOR.--To which Mr. _Waller_ return'd,--_Your Majesty will please to recollect, that we Poets always write best upon_ FICTIONS.

The _original_ Subject in this Instance is _the superior Excellence of Mr_. WALLER's _Verses upon_ Cromwell; This he most happily excuses, by starting at once, and _arranging_ along with them, the Remark, that _Poets have always excell'd upon Fiction_; whereby he unexpectedly exhibits his _more excellent_ Verses to _Cromwell_, as a plain _Elucidation_ of the _fictitious_ Glory of the Protector; And intimates at the same time, that the _Inferiority_ of his present Performance was a natural _Illustration_ of his Majesty's _real_ Glory;--Never was a deep Reproach averted by a more happy Reply; which comprehends both the highest Compliment to his Majesty, and a very firm poetical Excuse of the different Performances.

4.

_Leonidas_ the _Spartan_ General, when he advanced near the _Persian_ Army, was told by one of his own Captains, that _their Enemies were so numerous, it was impossible to see the Sun for the Multitude of their Arrows_; To which he gallantly reply'd, _We shall then have the Pleasure of fighting in the Shade_.

The vast Cope of _Persian_ Arrows is here the _original_ Subject; which instead of being observed by _Leonidas_ with Terror, presents to his Fancy the pleasant Idea of a cool _Canopy_. There is an _Agreement_ and Affinity between the two Objects, in regard to the _Shelter from the Sun_, which is at once obvious, and _unexpected_; And the Cloud of the Enemies Arrows is thus gaily _elucidated_, by the _Arrangement_ and Comparison of it with so desirable an Object as _shady Covering_.

This Saying of the _Spartan_ General has been handed through many Ages to the present Time; But the chief Part of the Pleasure it gives us, results not so much from the WIT it contains, as from the _Gallantry_, and _chearful Spirit_, discover'd in Danger, by _Leonidas_.

5.

An Instance of WIT in the _Opposition_, I remember to have read somewhere in the _Spectators_; where Sir _Roger de Coverley_ intimating the Splendor which the perverse Widow should have appear'd in, if she had commenced Lady _Coverley_, says:

_That he would have given her a_ Coalpit _to have kept her in_ clean Linnen: _And that her Finger should have_ sparkled _with one hundred of his richest_ Acres.

The joint Introduction of these _opposite_ Objects, as a _Coalpit_ with _clean Linnen_, and _dirty Acres_ with the _Lustre_ of a _Jewel_, is _just_ in this Instance, as they really produce each other in their Consequences; The _natural Opposition_ between them, which is strongly _elucidated_ by their _Arrangement_ together, and at the same time their _unexpected Connexion_ in their Consequences, strike us with a _Surprize_, which exhibits the _Brilliancy_ and _Sparkling_ of WIT.

There is also in this Instance, besides the WIT, a Spirit of _Generosity_, and _Magnificence_, discover'd by Sir _Roger_, from the known Value of a _Coalpit_, and of so many rich _Acres_.

This Kind of WIT, resulting from the sudden _Arrangement_ together of two _opposite_ Objects, is rarer, than that which is obtained from two _similar_ Objects; It abounds with a high _Surprize_, and _Brilliancy_; and also strongly _elucidates_ the _original_ Object, from the _Contrast_ presented between _this_, and the _auxiliary_ one; In the same manner as _White_ is more clearly set _off_, by being arranged with _Black_.

It may be proper to observe, that WIT, besides being struck out by _just_, and _direct_ Introductions of _auxiliary_ Subjects, is also sometimes obtain'd by _Transitions_ from one Subject to another, by the Help of an _equivocal Word_; which like a _Bridge_, with two Roads meeting at the End of it, leads to two different Places. _Transitions_, thus made from the right Course, have indeed the Pretence of being _natural_; but they ought always to lead us to something _brilliant_ or poignant, in order to justify their _Deviation_; and not to end only at a ridiculous PUN, void of all Spirit and Poignancy.

The WIT, in such Instances, results, as in all others, from the quick _Arrangement_ together of two Subjects; But that, which was first intended for the _original_ one, is dropped; And a new _original_ Subject is started, through the _double Meaning_ of a Word, and suddenly _enlighten'd_.

To give a _trite_ Instance of this kind of WIT.

A PEER coming out of the House of Lords, and wanting his Servant, called out, _Where's my Fellow?_ To which another PEER, who stood by him, returned, _Faith, my Lord, not in_ England.

A Transition is here unexpededly made from the Sense intended in the Question to another Point, through the double Meaning of the word _Fellow_; it being obvious, that his Lordship's _Servant_ is the Sense of the Word in the Question; and what Person is _like_ to his Lordship, the Construction put upon it in the Answer: Thus a new _original_ Subject is started, and being suddenly _arranged_ with all that appear _similar_ to it, is _enlighten'd_ thereby, being found to have no _equal_ in _England_.

However, though WIT may be _thus_ struck out, and also appears in the _Contrast_ with great _Brilliancy_, yet the highest and most perfect Instances of it result from the sudden and _direct Arrangement_ together of two Objects, which hold a perspicuous and splendid _Agreement_ with each other; It is then adorn'd with the Charms of _Propriety_, _Clearness_ and _Illustration_; It dispels the Darkness around an Object, and presents it diftinctly and perfectly to our View; chearing us with its _Lustre_, and at the same time informing us with its _Light_.

Thus, a Gentleman was observing, that _there was_ somewhat _extremely pleasing in an excellent_ Understanding, _when it appeared in a beautiful_ Person; To which another returned, _It is like a fine_ Jewel _well set_; You are here pleased with the Happiness, Propriety, and Splendor of this _new_ Object, which finely _elucidates_ the original Sentiment;--In short, it is the Excellence of WIT, _to present the_ first Image _again to your mind, with new unexpected_ Clearness _and_ Advantage.

It is also proper to add, that there may be WIT in a _Picture_, _Landscape_, or in any _Prospect_, where a gay unexpected _Assemblage_ of _similar_, or _opposite_ Objects, is presented.

JUDGMENT, is the Faculty of discerning the various _Dimensions_,
and _Differences_, of Subjects.

INVENTION is the Faculty of finding out new _Assortments_, and
_Combinations_, of _Ideas_.

HUMOUR is any _whimsical Oddity_ or _Foible_, appearing in the
_Temper_ or _Conduct_ of a _Person_ in _real Life_.

This _whimsical Oddity_ of Conduct, which generally arises from the strange _Cast_, or _Turn_ of Mind of a _queer_ Person, may also result from _accidental_ Mistakes and Embarrassments between other Persons; who being misled by a wrong Information and Suspicion in regard to a Circumstance, shall act towards each other upon this Occasion, in the same _odd whimsical_ manner, as _queer_ Persons.

If a _Person_ in real Life, discovers any odd and remarkable _Features_ of Temper or Conduct, I call such a Person in the _Book_ of _Mankind_, a _Character_. So that the chief Subjects of HUMOUR are Persons in real Life, who are _Characters_.

It is easy to be perceived, that HUMOUR, and WIT are extremely different.

HUMOUR appears only in the _Foibles_ and _whimsical Conduct_ of _Persons_ in real Life; WIT appears in _Comparisons_, either between _Persons_ in real Life, or between _other Subjects_.

HUMOUR is the _whimsical Oddity_, or _Foible_, which fairly appears in its Subject, of itself; whereas WIT, is the _Lustre_ which is thrown upon _one_ Subject, by the _sudden Introduction_ of another Subject.

To constitute HUMOUR, there need be no more than _one_ Object concern'd, and this must be always some _Person_ in _real Life_;-- whereas to produce WIT, there must be always _two_ Objects _arranged_ together, and either or both of these may be _inanimate_.

However, though HUMOUR and WIT are thus absolutely different in themselves, yet we frequently see them blended together.

Thus if any _Foible_ of a _Character_ in real Life is _directly_ attacked, by pointing out the unexpected and ridiculous _Affinity_ it bears to some _inanimate_ Circumstances, this Foible is then ridiculed with WIT, from the _Comparison_ which is made.--At the same time, as the _whimsical Oddity_ of a _Character_ in real Life is the _Ground_ of the whole, there is also _Humour_ contain'd in the Attack.

If instead of referring the _Foible_ of a Person to any _inanimate_ Circumstance, the _Allusion_ had been made to any other ridiculous _Person_ in _real Life_; As a _conceited Fellow_, perpetually recommending his own Whims, to a _Quack-Doctor_;--This _Foible_ will then be ridiculed with HUMOUR; which is likewise the original _Ground_: At the same Time, from the _Comparison_ which is made, there is apparently WIT in the Description.

So that where-ever the _Foible_ of a _Character_ in real Life is concern'd, there HUMOUR comes in; and wherever a sprightly unexpected _Arrangement_ is presented of two _similar_, or _opposite_ Subjects, whether animate or inanimate, there WIT is exhibited.

HUMOUR and WIT, as they may thus both be united in the same Subject, may also separately appear without the least Mixture together; that is, there may be HUMOUR without WIT, and WIT without HUMOUR.

Thus, if in order to expose the _Foible_ of a _Character_, a _real Person_ is introduc'd, abounding in this _Foible_, gravely persisting in it, and valuing himself upon the Merit of it, with great Self- sufficiency, and Disdain of others; this _Foible_ is then solely ridiculed with HUMOUR.

Again, if a gay unexpected _Allusion_ is made from one _inanimate_ Object to another, or from one _Person_ in _real_ Life to another, without any Reference to their whimsical _Oddities_ or _Foibles_; there WIT only appears.--Various Instances of which, independent of HUMOUR, have been already exhibited.

A _Man_ of WIT is
he, who is happy in _elucidating_ any Subject, _by a just and
unexpected Arrangement_ and _Comparison_ of it with another
Subject.

It may be also proper to describe a _Man_ of HUMOUR, and an HUMOURIST, which are very different Persons.

A _Man_ of HUMOUR is
one, who can happily exhibit a weak and ridiculous _Character_
in real Life, either by assuming it himself, or representing
another in it, so naturally, that the _whimsical Oddities,_ and
_Foibles,_ of that _Character,_ shall be palpably expos'd.

Whereas an HUMOURIST
is a _Person_ in real Life, obstinately attached to sensible
peculiar _Oddities_ of his own genuine Growth, which appear in
his Temper and Conduct.

In short, a _Man_ of _Humour_ is one, who can happily exhibit and expose the Oddities and Foibles of an _Humourist_, or of other _Characters_.

The _Features_ of an HUMOURIST being very remarkable and singular, seem justly to deserve an explicit Description. It is then to be observ'd, that an _Humourist_, at the same time that he is guided in his Manners and Actions by his own genuine original Fancy and Temper, disdains all _Ostentation_; excepting that alone of his _Freedom_ and _Independency_, which he is forward of shewing upon every Occasion, without Ceremony; he is quite superior to the _Affectation_ of a Virtue or Accomplishment, which he thinks does not belong to him; scorns all _Imitation_ of others; and contemns the rest of the World for being servilely obedient to Forms and Customs; disclaiming all such Submission himself, and regulating his Conduct in general by his own _Conviction_,

The _Humourist_ is forward upon many Occasions to deliver his Opinion, in a peremptory Manner, and before he is desir'd; but he gives it sincerely, unbiass'd by _Fear_ or _Regard_, and then leaves it to the Persons concern'd to determine for themselves; For he is more pleas'd in the Bottom to find his Opinion _slighted_, and to see the Conduct of others agreeable to that System of Folly and Weakness, which he has established with himself, to be the Course of their Actions.--To view a rational Conduct, even in pursuance of his own Advice, would greatly disappoint him; and be a Contradiction to this _System_ he has laid down;--Besides it would deprive him of an Occasion of gratifying his Spleen, with the Contempt of that Folly, which he esteems to be natural to the rest of Mankind; For he considers himself in the World, like a _sober_ Person in the Company of Men, who are _drunken_ or _mad_; He may advise them to be calm, and to avoid hurting themselves, but he does not expect they will regard his Advice; On the contrary, he is more pleas'd with observing their _Freaks_ and _Extravagancies_.--It is from hence that he discourages and depreciates all who pretend to _Discretion_; Persons of this Temper not yielding him Sport or Diversion.

It is certain that the _Humourist_ is excessively _proud_, and yet without knowing or suspecting it. For from the Liberty which he frankly allows to others, of rejecting his Opinion, he is fully persuaded, that he is free from all _Pride_; But tho' he acts in this Circumstance without over-bearing, it has already appear'd, not to be the Effect of his _Humility_, but of a different Motive; a Pleasure which he takes in observing the Extravagancies of others, rather than their Discretion. But to demonstrate his _Pride_, besides the peremptory Manner in which he delivers his Opinion, and conducts himself upon every Occasion, without any Deference to others, there is this Circumstance against him; that he is the most stung by a Defeat, upon any Topic, of all Men living; And although he disregards Accusations of Roughness and Oddity, and rather esteems them to be meritorious; yet he will never admit, that he has been fairly overthrown in a Debate.