derision;" and Psalm xxxvii, 13, "The Lord shall laugh at him, for he
seeth that his day is coming."

Nothing can make it more certain than such expressions that the prophets
interpreted the intimations they received from above by clothing them
with their own mundane similitudes.

On the other hand, although David laughed at his enemies, he never seems
to have done so at anything else. He frequently mentions fools, but
always with detestation. To him the term did not convey any idea of
frivolity or eccentricity, but of crime and wickedness. All these
considerations tend to convince us that we can see in the writings of
David a fairly good reflection of the mirth common in his day. Add to
this that there is no trace in any contemporary work of an attempt
beyond the emotional phases of the ludicrous, and we do not at this time
read of any performance of Jewish plays, or of any kind of amusing
representations.

A more advanced, but less faithful age is represented by another man.
The soldier-king passed away to make room for one educated under milder
influences. He inherited not the piety or warlike virtues of his father,
but turned the same greatness of mind into a more luxurious and learned
channel. In his writings we find little that approaches the sublime, but
much that implies analytical depth and complexity of thought. His tone
bespeaks a settled and civilized period favourable to art and
philosophy, in which subtlety was appreciated, while the old feelings of
acerbity had become greatly softened.

In the intellectual and moral state at this date, there were many
conditions favourable to the development of humour. But we do not find