Sterne says: "The wheel turns round once more; Absalom is cast down, and David returns in peace. Shimei suits his behavior to the occasion, and is the first man also who hastens to greet him; and had the wheel turned round a hundred times, Shimei, I dare say, in every period of its rotation would have been uppermost." Then he adds: "O Shimei, would to heaven when thou wast slain, that all thy family had been slain with thee and not one of thy resemblance left. But ye have multiplied exceedingly and replenished the earth; and if I prophesy rightly, ye will in the end subdue it. Go where you will, in every quarter, in every profession, you see a Shimei following the wheels of the fortunate through thick mire and clay." It is not claimed that the writers of the Bible drew these portraits for the purpose of making ludicrous those whom they painted, but the features were in the originals, and they who wrote were simply faithful to nature. They portrayed what they saw. They did not blind themselves to facts; and now worthless usurper, weak-willed giant, churlish country squire of Palestine, grumbling prophet, scheming demagogue and oily sycophant live forever on their canvas. "Now, by two-headed Janus, Nature _hath_ framed strange fellows in her time;" and some of those "strange fellows" lived in Judea thousands of years ago. III. "TOUCHES OF NATURE." "The ludicrous has its place in the Universe; it is not a human invention, but one of the Divine ideas, illustrated in the practical jokes of kittens and monkeys, long before Aristophanes or Shakespeare."--HOLMES. "TOUCHES OF NATURE." "To explain the nature of laughter and tears is to account for the condition of human life; for it is in a manner compounded of these two. It is tragedy or comedy, sad or merry, as it happens."--HAZLITT. "One touch of nature," says Shakespeare, "makes the whole world kin;" but the great dramatist did not define exactly what he meant by "touch of nature," and the critics of many generations have been at war over the question. Perhaps he could not have told us, even if he had tried,--any more than the critics can tell us. When Democritus was asked his definition of a man, his only reply was, "A man is that which we all see and know." Further than this the philosopher could not proceed. But while Shakespeare has not given us a definition, he has given us an illustration: "One touch of nature makes the whole world kin,-- That all, with one consent, praise new-born gauds, Tho' they are made and moulded of things past; And give to dust that is a little gilt More laud than gilt o'erdusted."