we may reply in the affirmative; they certainly
had severity, for his figure having been caricatured by the sculptors of
Chios, Bupalus and Anthermus, he repaid them so well in their own coin,
that they also duly hanged themselves. It must be admitted that the fact
of the same kind of death having been chosen by them, and by the objects
of Archilochus' derision, does not increase greatly the credibility of
the stories.

We now come to consider what we may call a serious source of humour.
Already we have noticed the tendency in ancient times to exercises of
ingenuity in answering hard questions. These led to deeper thought, to
the aphoristic wisdom of the seven wise men, and the speculations of
those who were in due time to raise laughter at the follies of mankind.

This introduces the era of the philosophers--a remarkable class of men,
who grew up in the mercurial atmosphere of Greece. One of the most
distinguished of them was Democritus, born 460 B.C. He came of
noble descent, and belonged to so wealthy a family of Abdera that his
father was able to entertain Xerxes on his return to Asia. The King left
some Chaldean Magi to instruct his son, who, early in life, evinced a
great desire for the acquisition of knowledge, and after studying under
Leucippus, travelled to Egypt, Persia, and Babylon. He almost seemed a
compound of two different characters, uniting the intellectual energy of
the sage with the social feelings of a man of the world. Living in ease
and opulence, he was not inclined to be censorious or morose; having
mingled much in society, he was not very emotional or sympathetic; not
tempted to think life a melancholy scene of suffering, but callous
enough to find amusement in the ills he could not prevent. He regarded
man, generally, as a curious study, as remarkable for not exercising the
intellect with which he was endowed--not so much from censurable causes
as from some obliquity in mental vision. Not that he regarded him as
unaccountable--a fool in the ordinary acceptation of the word, is always
a responsible being, and not synonymous with an idiot.

The humour of this laughing sage, grounded upon deep philosophy, was so
little understood in his day that none were able to join in his
merriment, nor did he expect that they should be; if he was humorous to
himself, he was not so, and did not aim at being so, to others. On the
contrary, he was thought to be mad, and Hippocrates was directed to
inquire into h