So that there may be fitly said to be a longanimity, which is commonly also ascribed to God as a magnanimity. So further deserved it to be considered by Aristotle, “That there is a disposition in conversation (supposing it in things which do in no sort touch or concern a man’s self) to soothe and please, and a disposition contrary to contradict and cross;” and deserveth it not much better to be considered. “That there is a disposition, not in conversation or talk, but in matter of more serious nature (and supposing it still in things merely indifferent), to take pleasure in the good of another; and a disposition contrariwise, to take distaste at the good of another?” which is that properly which we call good nature or ill nature, benignity or malignity; and, therefore, I cannot sufficiently marvel that this part of knowledge, touching the several characters of natures and dispositions, should be omitted both in morality and policy, considering it is of so great ministry and suppeditation to them both. A man shall find in the traditions of astrology some pretty and apt divisions of men’s natures, according to the predominances of the planets: lovers of quiet, lovers of action, lovers of victory, lovers of honour, lovers of pleasure, lovers of arts, lovers of change, and so forth. A man shall find in the wisest sort of these relations which the Italians make touching conclaves, the natures of the several cardinals handsomely and lively painted forth. A man shall meet with in every day’s conference the denominations of sensitive, dry, formal, real, humorous, certain, _huomo di prima impressione_, _huomo di ultima impressione_, and the like; and yet, nevertheless, this kind of observations wandereth in words, but is not fixed in inquiry. For the distinctions are found (many of them), but we conclude no precepts upon them: wherein our fault is the greater, because both history, poesy, and daily experience are as goodly fields where these observations grow; whereof we make a few posies to hold in our hands, but no man bringeth them to the confectionary that receipts might be made of them for use of life.
(5) Of much like kind are those impressions of Nature, which are imposed upon the mind by the sex, by the age, by the region, by health and sickness, by beauty and deformity, and the like, which are inherent and not extern; and again, those which are caused by extern fortune, as sovereignty, nobility, obscure birth, riches, want, magistracy, privateness, prosperity, adversity, constant fortune, variable fortune, rising _per saltum_, _per gradus_, and the like. And, therefore, we see that Plautus maketh it a wonder to see an old man beneficent, _benignitas hujis ut adolescentuli est_. Saint Paul concludeth that severity of discipline was to be used to the Cretans, _increpa eos dure_, upon the disposition of their country, _Cretensus semper mendaces_, _malæ bestiæ_, _ventres_. Sallust noteth that it is usual with kings to desire contradictories: _Sed plerumque regiæ voluntates_, _ut vehementes sunt_, _sic mobiles_, _sæpeque ipsæ sibi advers_. Tacitus observeth how rarely raising of the fortune mendeth the disposition: _solus Vespasianus mutatus in melius_. Pindarus maketh an observation, that great and sudden fortune for the most part defeateth men _qui magnam felicitatem concoquere non possunt_. So the Psalm showeth it is more easy to keep a measure in the enjoying of fortune, than in the increase of fortune; _Divitiæ si affluant_, _nolite cor apponere_. These observations and the like I deny not but are touched a little by Aristotle as in passage in his Rhetorics, and are handled in some scattered discourses; but they were never incorporate into moral philosophy, to which they do essentially appertain; as the knowledge of this diversity of grounds and moulds doth to agriculture, and the knowledge of the diversity of complexions and constitutions doth to the physician, except we mean to follow the indiscretion of empirics, which minister the same medicines to all patients.