[77] Hazlitt defines the ridiculous as the highest degree of the laughable, which is “_a proper subject for satire_,” _loc. cit._ [78] Compare Ribot, _La Psychologie des sentiments_, p. 344. [79] M. Bergson has a glimpse of the co-operation of “child’s fun” in our laughter, _op. cit._, p. 69; but he fails to see the magnitude of this factor. [80] See _The Emotions and the Will_, “The Emotions,” chap. xiv., §§ 38–40. [81] _Cf._ Dugas, _op. cit._, p. 128 ff. [82] _Wit and Humour_, p. 7. [83] See p. 76, ff. [84] Prof. Groos does not, I think, bring out clearly enough the distinction here drawn, though he may be said to half-recognise it when he speaks of “joy in conquest” as the end of play combats (_Play of Animals_, pp. 291, 292). [85] This restriction sometimes takes on a look of a conative process of self-control, _e.g._, when an older cat, not used to play, is importunately challenged by a lively kitten. [86] On this “divided consciousness” in play see Groos, _Play of Animals_, p. 303 ff. [87] On the uses of animal play see Groos, _The Play of Man_, Part III., sect. 2, and Lloyd Morgan, _Animal Behaviour_, chap, vi., sect. 2. [88] Among previous writers on the subject M. Dugas seems to be the one who has had the clearest apprehension of the essentially playful character of laughter (_op. cit._, chap. vi., especially p. 115 _seq._). [89] Karl Groos connects both the tusslings and the tearings of young animals with the instinct of sex-competition (_Play of Animals_, p. 35 ff.). [90] _The Psychological Review_, 1899, p. 91. [91] _Descent of Man_, Part I., chap. iii. [92] _Animal Life and Intelligence_, p. 407. The author strikes me as almost excessively cautious in accepting these evidences of canine jocosity. [93] W. Preyer, _Die Seele des Kindes_, p. 197. [94] Quoted by Lloyd Morgan, _loc. cit._ [95] _Expression of Emotions_, p. 208; _cf._ p. 132 ff. [96] See Darwin, _The Descent of Man_, Part I., chap. iii. [97] So in _The Expression of the Emotions_, pp. 211, 212. In the notes contributed to _Mind_, vol. ii. (1877), p. 288, two infants are spoken of, one of which smiled when forty-five, the other when forty-six days old. [98] The references are to his work, _Die Seele des Kindes_, 4te Auflage. [99] Champneys and Sigismund are quoted by Preyer. Miss Shinn’s observations are given in her work, _Notes on the Development of a Child_, p. 238. Mrs. Moore’s are to be found in her Essay, _The Mental Development of a Child_, p. 37. Dr. L. Hill writes that he noted the first smile in his boy when he was three weeks old, and in his girl when she was some days older. [100] See especially what he says about an unusual expression, including “a strongly sparkling eye” which occurred in the eighth week, _op. cit._, p. 194. [101] I am indebted to Miss Shinn for a sight of her complete original notes; and some of my references are to these.