As _true Wit_ generally consists in this Resemblance and Congruity of Ideas, _false Wit_ chiefly consists in the Resemblance and Congruity sometimes of single Letters, as in Anagrams, Chronograms, Lipograms, and Acrosticks: Sometimes of Syllables, as in Ecchos and Doggerel Rhymes: Sometimes of Words, as in Punns and Quibbles; and sometimes of whole Sentences or Poems, cast into the Figures of _Eggs, Axes_, or _Altars_: Nay, some carry the Notion of Wit so far, as to ascribe it even to external Mimickry; and to look upon a Man as an ingenious Person, that can resemble the Tone, Posture, or Face of another. As _true Wit_ consists in the Resemblance of Ideas, and _false Wit_ in the Resemblance of Words, according to the foregoing Instances; there is another kind of Wit which consists partly in the Resemblance of Ideas, and partly in the Resemblance of Words; which for Distinction Sake I shall call _mixt Wit_. This kind of Wit is that which abounds in _Cowley_, more than in any Author that ever wrote. Mr. _Waller_ has likewise a great deal of it. Mr. _Dryden_ is very sparing in it. _Milton_ had a Genius much above it. _Spencer_ is in the same Class with _Milton_. The _Italians_, even in their Epic Poetry, are full of it. Monsieur _Boileau_, who formed himself upon the Ancient Poets, has every where rejected it with Scorn. If we look after mixt Wit among the _Greek_ Writers, we shall find it no where but in the Epigrammatists. There are indeed some Strokes of it in the little Poem ascribed to Musoeus, which by that, as well as many other Marks, betrays it self to be a modern Composition. If we look into the _Latin_ Writers, we find none of this mixt Wit in _Virgil, Lucretius_, or _Catullus_; very little in _Horace_, but a great deal of it in _Ovid_, and scarce any thing else in _Martial_.