The Book of the Courtier

by Baldassare Castiglione

  Then Cesare Gonzaga remarked: ‘It goes without saying that that monkey must have been a very learned member of its tribe, with great authority; and I think that the Republic of Indian Monkeys must have sent it to Portugal to win fame in a foreign land.’

  At this everyone laughed both at the lie that had been told and the way in which Cesare Gonzaga had added to it.

  The discussion continuing, Bernardo said:

  ‘You have now heard all I have to say about those jokes which rely on a continuous narration; so now we should talk of those which consist in a single remark, and whose sharp wit is concentrated in a brief sentence or word. And just as with the first kind of amusing anecdote one must, when telling the story or indulging in mimicry, avoid resembling clowns and parasites and those who make others laugh by their own foolishness, so in these terse comments the courtier should guard against appearing malicious or spiteful, or repeating witticisms and quips merely to tease and wound. Because such men often have their whole body deservedly chastised for the sins of their tongue.

  ‘Now, of the spontaneous jokes that consist in a brief remark, those which arise from some ambiguity are the most effective, although they do not always arouse mirth, since they are more usually praised for their ingenuity than for their humour. For example, a few days ago our Annibale Paleotto was talking to someone who was recommending him a tutor to teach his sons grammar and who, after commending the teacher for his learning, when he came to the question of his salary said that as well as money he wanted to have a room furnished for living and sleeping, because he lacked a bed. Annibale immediately retorted: “Then how can he be learned, if he hasn’t read?”* You see how well he exploited the ambiguous meaning of non aver letto. But since these puns are very subtle, in that someone employs words in a sense quite different from what is given them by everyone else, it appears that, as I have said, they inspire wonder more often than laughter, except when they are accompanied by something more. The kind of witticism that customarily arouses laughter occurs when we expect to hear one thing and the one who is talking says something different, and this is called the “unexpected retort”; and if there is also some double meaning, then the witticism becomes extremely rich, as happened the other day when there was a discussion about making a fine brick floor for the Duchess’s room, and after a lot had been said you, Gian Cristoforo, remarked: “If we could get the Bishop of Potenza and lay him flat it would suit the purpose well, since he is the biggest born fool I ever saw.” Everyone laughed out loud, for you made a pun by splitting the word mattonato into two; and then in addition your saying that a bishop should be laid flat and used for the floor of a room was a totally unexpected notion, and so the joke was very pointed and very funny.*

  ‘However, there are many different kinds of pun; and so one must be cautious in their use, hunting carefully for the right words, and avoiding those that cause the joke to fall flat and seem too laboured, or, as we have said, that are too wounding. For example, once when several companions met at the house of one of their friends, who happened to be blind, after the host had asked them to stay for dinner, they all left except one, who remarked: “Well, I’ll stay, since I see you’ve got an empty place.” And he pointed his finger at the man’s empty socket. This of course is too cruel and discourteous, for it wounded the blind man’s feelings to no purpose and without provocation; moreover, the jibe could have been at the expense of all those who are blind, and sweeping insults of this kind give no pleasure, because they appear to be premeditated. Of this sort was the remark made to a man who had lost his nose, namely: “Where, then, do you rest your spectacles?” or “How do you smell the roses every year?”

  ‘Among other witticisms, however, those are very elegant which depend on turning someone’s own sarcastic remarks against him, using the very same words as he does, and hoisting him with his own petard. For example, there was the litigant who, in the presence of the judge, was asked by his adversary: “What are you barking for?” And he retorted: “Because I see a thief.” The same kind of joke was when Galeotto Marzi was on his way through Siena and stopped in the street to ask the way to the inn; and when a Sienese noticed how corpulent he was, he laughed and said: “Others bring their baggage along behind but this fellow carries his in front.” And Galeotto retorted: “That’s what you have to do in a land of robbers.”

  ‘There is another kind still, which we call playing on words, and this relies on changing a word by adding or taking away a letter or a syllable; as when someone said: “You must be more experienced in the literature of the latrines [Latins] than of the Greeks.” And to you, madam, a letter was addressed: “To signora Emilia impia.”

  ‘It is also amusing to quote a verse or two, putting it to a use other than what the author intended, or some other common saying, perhaps to the same purpose, but with a word altered. Thus a gentleman who had an ugly and shrewish wife, being asked how he was, replied: “Just you imagine, seeing that Furiarum maxima iuxta me cubat.”*

  ‘And Girolamo Donato,15 when in company with many other gentlemen he was making the Stations in Rome during Lent, encountered a group of beautiful Roman ladies; and when one of the gentlemen said: “Quot coelum stellas, tot habet tua Roma puellas,” he immediately added: “Pascua quotque haedos, tot habet tua Roma cinaedos,”† pointing out a group of young men who were coming from the other direction.

  ‘Then there is the way in which Marc’Antonio dalla Torre spoke to the Bishop of Padua. For there was a nunnery in Padua in charge of a cleric who was thought to be extremely devout and learned, and who used to go the familiar rounds of the convent, often hearing the nuns’ confessions. And then five of the mothers, and there were no more than as many again, became pregnant, and the father was seized by the Bishop after he had tried unsuccessfully to run away. He immediately confessed that because of the temptation of the devil he had got those five nuns pregnant, and consequently my Lord Bishop was resolved to chastise him very severely. However, the culprit was a very learned man and so he had very many friends, all of whom made efforts to help him; and along with the others Marc’Antonio also went to the Bishop to plead with him to be lenient. After they had been very insistent, recommending the culprit and pleading in extenuation the easy opportunities he had been given, the frailty of human nature and various other factors, the Bishop said at length: “I will do nothing for him, because I have to render my account to God.” They still insisted, however; and then the Bishop added: “What shall I answer when on the Day of Judgement the Almighty says to me: ‘Redde rationem villicationis tuae?’” To which Marc’Antonio swiftly replied: “My Lord, in the words of the Evangelist: Domine, quinque talenta tradidisti mihi; ecce alia quinque; superlucratus sum.”* At this the Bishop could not stop from laughing and he greatly mitigated both his anger and the punishment he had designed for the wrongdoer.

  ‘It is also amusing to guess the meaning of names and to invent explanation for why someone is called what he is, or why some particular thing is done. Thus a few days ago when Proto da Lucca, who as you know is very entertaining, asked for the bishopric of Cagli, the Pope replied: “Don’t you know that in Spanish caglio means, I keep quiet? Well, you are a chatterbox, and it would never do for a bishop never to be able to mention his title without telling a lie. So now, all I can say to you is: cagli… be quiet.” Then Proto made a reply which, though not of the same kind, was just as beautifully to the purpose; for having repeated his request several times, and seeing that it was no use, at length he said: “Holy Father, if your Holiness gives me this bishopric, it will not be for nothing. For I shall bequeath you two offices.” The Pope asked: “And what offices do you have to bequeath?” Proto retorted: “I shall bequeath the full office, and the Office of the Madonna.” And the Pope, though a very stern man, could not help laughing.

  ‘Another man, also at Padua, once said that Calfurnio was so named because he used to stoke ovens.* And one day when I asked Fedra why it was that although on Good Friday the Church p
rayed not only for Christians but also for pagans and Jews there was no mention of cardinals, or of bishops and other prelates, he answered that the cardinals were included in that prayer which goes: Oremus pro haereticis et scismaticis.† And once our Count Lodovico alleged that I reproached a lady for using a cosmetic that was very shiny because when her face was made up I could see myself as in the mirror, and, being very ugly, I would rather not. Camillo Palleotto made the same kind of joke to Antonio Porcaro who, when speaking of a friend of his who told the priest at confession that he fasted very readily, went to mass and all the holy offices, and did all the good in the world, commented: “Instead of accusing himself, he praises himself.” And then Camillo replied: “No, he confesses these things because he thinks it’s a great shame to do them.”‡ And do you not recall how cleverly the Prefect spoke the other day? Giovantomaso Galeotto was astonished that someone was asking two hundred ducats for a horse; and when he remarked that the beast wasn’t worth a penny and among its other defects so fled the sound of weapons that it couldn’t be brought near them, the Prefect, meaning to reproach him for cowardice, commented: “If that horse has the habit of fleeing from weapons, I’m astonished he doesn’t ask a thousand ducats.”

  ‘Sometimes, as well, the same word is used, but in an unusual sense. Thus when the Duke was about to cross a very rapid river he said to a trumpeter: “Cross now.” And the trumpeter turned with his hat in his hand and answered very respectfully: “After your Lordship.”* It is also entertaining when someone accepts what is said literally and not for what is meant, as when earlier this year in Rome a certain German one day ran into our Filippo Beroaldo, whose pupil he was, and said: “Domine magister, Deus det vobis bonum sero,” and Beroaldo at once replied: “Tibi malum cito.”† Similarly, when Diego de Quinoñes was once at table with the Great Captain, another Spaniard who was present, meaning to ask for drink, called out: “Vino” ‡ And Diego replied: “Y no lo conocistes”, attacking him as an unbeliever. Then Iacopo Sadoleto16 once said to Beroaldo, who was insisting on going to Bologna: “What makes you want to leave Rome, where it is so enjoyable, to go to Bologna where everything is in turmoil?” Beroalda replied: “I’ve got to go there on three counts…” And he had already raised three fingers of his left hand to list the three reasons for his going, when Iacopo suddenly interrupted him by saying: “These three counts making you go to Bologna are, first, Count Ludovico da San Bonfacio, next Count Ercole Rangone and third the Count of Pepoli.” Then everyone laughed, since these Counts had been pupils of Beroaldo, and were very handsome youths who were then studying at Bologna. This kind of witticism makes us laugh a good deal because it involves the unexpected answer that strikes us as very funny when we see how we have been taken in.

  ‘As well as this, attractive figures and modes of speech belonging to grave and serious discussions can nearly always be used in games and pleasantries as well. When words are set off against each other, with one sentence in antithesis to another, the result is extremely agreeable; and this way of speaking can be very witty. For example, a Genoese, who was a great spendthrift, was being reproached by a very miserly moneylender, who said to him: “And when will you ever stop throwing your wealth away?” And he retorted: “When you stop stealing other people’s.” And then, since, as we have already said, the same situations which give rise to sharp witticisms can also inspire serious words of praise, in either case it is very diverting and sophisticated to confirm or agree to what someone else is saying, but to take it in a sense other than what is meant. For example, not so long ago, when a village priest was saying mass for his parishioners, after he had given out the feast days for the week, he started the general confession in the people’s name, saying: “I have sinned in doing evil, in speaking evil, in thinking evil…”, and continuing with the rest he mentioned all the mortal sins. Then one of his cronies, for a joke, said to the bystanders: “Now all of you bear witness to what he has confessed with his own lips; for I intend to inform the bishop.” The same trick was used by Sallaza dalla Pedrada to pay a tribute to a lady with whom he was conversing when, after he had praised her for her beauty as well as her virtuous character, she had replied that she did not merit such praise, seeing how old she was. To this, he answered: “Madam, your age serves merely to make you like the angels, who are the first and oldest of all the creatures God ever made.”

  ‘Well-turned metaphors are also very useful for humorous sarcasm as they are for serious praise, and especially if employed in repartee and if the one who replies carries on with the same metaphor used by the other. Of this kind was the answer given to Palla Strozzi, who being banished from Florence sent one of his sons back on some business and said to him, with a threatening expression: “Tell Cosimo de’ Medici from me that the hen is broody.” The messenger did the errand as he had been ordered, and completely off-the-cuff Cosimo retorted: “And you tell Palla from me that hens can’t brood outside the nest.”* Camillo Porcaro also used a metaphor very gracefully to praise signor Marc’Antonio Colonna17 on the occasion when, having heard that Camillo in one of his orations had celebrated various Italian gentlemen who were famous in war and had given him an honourable mention among the rest, Marc’Antonio thanked him and said: “You, Camillo, have dealt with your friends as merchants sometimes do with their money, who when they discover a bad coin in order to pass it off put it in with the good ones when it goes unnoticed; so to do me honour, despite my inadequacies, you have put me in the company of men who are so able and outstanding that their merits cover up for my defects.” And then Camillo replied: “Those who counterfeit ducats are in the habit of gilding them so well that they seem to the eye far more beautiful than the good ones. So if there were counterfeit men as there are counterfeit ducats, one might rightly suspect that you were one of them, seeing that you are made of finer and brighter metal than any of the others.” You see that both kinds of witticism shared the same basis, as do many others of which any number of examples could be given, especially as regards remarks that are meant very seriously. For example, there was the occasion when the Great Captain18 was seated at table, and all the other places were taken, and he noticed that some Italian gentlemen who had done good service in the war remained on their feet; so immediately he got up himself, making all the others stand as well, to find them a place, and he said: “Let these two gentlemen sit down and eat, for were it not for them none of us would have anything to eat.” On another occasion he said to Diego Garcia, who was urging him to retire from a danger spot which was under bombardment: “Since God has not put any fear into your soul, do not put any in mine.” Then there was the time when King Louis, now King of France, was told soon after he came to the throne that he should now punish his enemies, who had done him so much wrong when he was Duke of Orleans; and he replied that it was not the concern of the King of France to avenge the injuries done to the Duke of Orleans.

  ‘One can also often be facetious rather than funny in making cutting remarks in a serious tone, as when Djem Othman, the brother of the Grand Turk, being a prisoner in Rome, gave it as his opinion that jousting, as we practise it in Italy, was too much if done in play and too little if done in earnest. And he added, on being told that King Ferdinand the Younger was very skilled and agile in running, jumping, vaulting and the like, that in his country the slaves indulged in such sport but gentlemen from their childhood were taught how to behave nobly, and it was for that they were praised. Almost the same kind of witticism, but somewhat more amusing, was what the Archbishop of Florence said to the Cardinal of Alexandria, namely, that all that men possess is their property, their body and their soul, and that their property is fought over by lawyers, their body by doctors and their soul by theologians.’

  Then the Magnifico Giuliano remarked: ‘We could add to this what Nicoletto used to say, namely, that rarely do we find a lawyer indulging in litigation, a doctor taking medicine or a theologian being a good Christian.’

  Bernardo laughed at this, and then he add
ed: ‘There are countless examples of this kind of witticism, attributable to great lords and very grave men. But we also laugh at comparisons, such as the one our Pistoia wrote to Serafino: “Send back the big portmanteau that looks like you,” for, if you remember, Serafino did very much resemble a portmanteau. And then there are some who like to compare men and women to horses, dogs, birds and even chests, chairs, wagons and chandeliers; and the result is sometimes very felicitous, though occasionally the joke falls flat. In this regard one must pay attention to place, time and persons and all the other circumstances we have so often mentioned.’

  Then signor Gaspare Pallavicino added: ‘It was an agreeable comparison that our signor Giovanni Gonzaga19 made between Alexander the Great and his own son, signor Alessandro.’

  ‘I do not know that one,’ replied Bernardo.

  ‘Well,’ said signor Gaspare, ‘Giovanni was playing at three dice and, as was usual for him, had lost many ducats and was still losing, and his son, signor Alessandro, who though still a child plays no less eagerly than his father, stood watching him very attentively, and seemed very downcast. Then the Count of Pianella, who was there with many other gentlemen, remarked: “Look, sir, how disconsolate signor Alessandro is because of your losing, and how he is fretting for you to win so that he can have something from the winnings. So let him out of his misery and before you lose the rest of your money give him at least a ducat so that he, too, can go and play with his friends.” Then signor Giovanni replied: “You are deceiving yourself, for Alessandro is not thinking of anything so trifling. On the contrary, just as we read that when Alexander the Great heard, as a child, that his father, Philip, had won a great battle and taken a certain kingdom, he started to cry because, he explained, he feared his father would conquer so many countries that there would be none left for him, so now my son, Alessandro, is sad and tearful at seeing his father losing, because he fears I may lose so much that there will be nothing left for him to lose.”’