3.18. it means that which is said with grace and charm. Salsus is, as a rule, applied only to what is laughable: but this is not its natural application, although whatever is laughable should have the salt of wit in it. For Cicero, when he says that whatever has the salt of wit is Attic, does not say this because persons of the Attic school are specially given to laughter; and again when Catullus says—In all her body not a grain of salt!he does not mean that there is nothing in her body to give cause for laughter.
3.18. in consuetudine pro ridiculo tantum accipimus; natura non utique hoc est, quanquam et ridicula oporteat esse salsa. et Cicero omne, quod salsum sit, ait esse Atticorum, non quia sunt maxime ad risum compositi; et Catullus, cum dicit, est in corpore mica salis, non hoc dicit, nihil in corpore eius esse ridiculum.
3.19. When, therefore, we speak of the salt of wit, we refer to wit about which there is nothing insipid, wit, that is to say, which serves as a simple seasoning of language, a condiment which is silently appreciated by our judgment, as food is appreciated by the palate, with the result that it stimulates our taste and saves a speech from becoming tedious. But just as salt, if sprinkled freely over food, gives a special relish of its own, so long as it is not used to excess, so in the case of those who have the salt of wit there is something about their language which arouses in us a thirst to hear. Again, I do not regard the epithet facelus as applicable solely to that which raises a laugh.
3.19. igitur erit, quod non erit insulsum, velut quoddam simplex orationis condimentum, quod sentitur latente iudicio velut palato, excitatque et a taedio defendit orationem. enim, ut ille in cibis paulo liberalius aspersus, si tamen non sit immodicus, adfert aliquid propriae voluptatis, ita hi quoque in dicendo habent quiddam, quod nobis faciat audiendi sitim. quoque non tantum circa ridicula opinor consistere.
3.20. If that were so Horace would never have said that nature had granted Vergil the gift of being facetus in song. I think that the term is rather applied to a certain grace and polished elegance. This is the meaning which it bears in Cicero's letters, where he quotes the words of Brutus, “In truth her feet are graceful and soft as she goes delicately on her way.” This meaning suits the passage in Horace, to which I have already made reference, “To Vergil gave a soft and graceful wit.”
3.20. enim diceret Horatius, facetum carminis genus natura concessum esse Vergilio. hanc magis et excultae cuiusdam elegantiae appellationem puto. in epistolis Cicero haec Bruti refert verba: illi sunt pedes faceti ac delicatius ingredienti molles. convenit cum illo Horatiano, molle atque facetum Vergilio locum vero accipimus, quod est contrarium serio.
3.21. locus is usually taken to mean the opposite of seriousness. This view is, however, somewhat too narrow. For to feign, to terrify, or to promise, are all at times forms of jesting. Dicacitas is no doubt derived from dico, and is therefore common to all forms of wit, but is specially applied to the language of banter, which is a humorous form of attack. Therefore, while the critics allow that Demosthenes was urbanus, they deny that he was dicax.
3.21. sed hoc nimis angustum, nam et fingere et terrere et promittere interim iocus est. sine dubio a dicendo, quod est omni generi commune, ducta est, proprie tamen significat sermonem cum risu aliquos incessentem. Demosthenen urbanum fuisse dicunt, dicacem negant.
3.22. The essence, however, of the subject which we are now discussing is the excitement of laughter, and consequently the whole of this topic is entitled περὶ γελοίου by the Greeks. It has the same primary division as other departments of oratory, that is to say, it is concerned with things and words.
3.22. autem materiae, de qua nunc loquimur, est ridiculum, ideoque haec tota disputatio a Graecis περὶ γελοίου inscribitur. prima divisio traditur eadem, quae est omnis orationis, ut sit positum in rebus aut in verbis.
3.23. The application of humour to oratory may be divided into three heads: for there are three things out of which we may seek to raise a laugh, to wit, others, ourselves, or things intermediate. In the first case we either reprove or refute or make light of or retort or deride the arguments of others. In the second we speak of things which concern ourselves in a humorous manner and, to quote the words of Cicero, say things which have a suggestion of absurdity. For there are certain sayings which are regarded as folly if they slip from us unawares, but as witty if uttered ironically.
3.23. autem maxime triplex; aut enim ex aliis risum petimus aut ex nobis aut ex rebus mediis. aut reprehendimus aut refutamus aut elevamus aut repercutimus aut eludimus. Nostra ridicule indicamus et, ut verbo Ciceronis utar, dicimus aliqua subabsurda. quaedam, quae, si imprudentibus excidant, stulta sunt, si simulamus, venusta creduntur.
3.24. The third kind consists, as Cicero also tells us, in cheating expectations, in taking words in a different sense from what was intended, and in other things which affect neither party to the suit, and which I have, therefore, styled intermediate.
3.24. est genus, ut idem dicit, in decipiendis exspectationibus, dictis aliter accipiendis ceterisque, quae neutram personam contingunt ideoque a me media dicuntur.
3.25. Further, things designed to raise a laugh may either be said or done. In the latter case laughter is sometimes caused by an act possessing a certain element of seriousness as well, as in the case of Marcus Caelius the praetor, who, when the consul Isauricus broke his curule chair, had another put in its place, the seat of which was made of leather thongs, by way of allusion to the story that the consul had once been scourged by his father: sometimes, again, it is aroused by an act which passes the grounds of decency, as in the case of Caelius' box, a jest which was not fit for an orator or any respectable man to make.
3.25. ridicula aut facimus aut dicimus. risus conciliatur interim admixta gravitate: ut M. Caelius praetor, cum sellam eius curulem consul Isauricus fregisset, alteram posuit loris intentam; dicebatur autem consul a patre flagris aliquando caesus; interim sine respectu pudoris, ut in illa pyxide Caeliana, quod neque oratori neque ulli viro gravi conveniat.
3.26. On the other hand the joke may lie in some remark about a ridiculous look or gesture; such jests are very attractive, more especially when delivered with every appearance of seriousness; for there are no jests so insipid as those which parade the fact that they are intended to be witty. Still, although the gravity with which a jest is uttered increases its attraction, and the mere fact that the speaker does not laugh himself makes his words laughable, there is also such a thing as a humorous look, manner or gesture, provided always that they observe the happy mean. Further, a jest will either be free and lively, like the majority of those uttered by Aulus Galba, or abusive, like those with which Junius Bassus recently made us familiar, or bitter, like those of Cassius Severus, or gentle, like those of Domitius Afer.
3.26. autem de vultu gestuque ridiculo dictum sit; in quibus est quidem summa gratia, sed maior, cum captare risum non videntur; nihil enim est iis, quae sicut salsa dicuntur, insulsius. autem gratiae plurimum dicentis severitas adfert, fitque ridiculum id ipsum, quod qui dicit illa non ridet, est tamen interim et aspectus et habitus oris et gestus non inurbanus, cum iis modus contingit. porro, quod dicitur, aut est lascivum et hilare, qualia A. Galbae pleraque, aut contumeliosum, qualia nuper Iuni Bassi, aut asperum, qualia Cassii Severi, aut lene, qualia Domitii Afri.
3.28. Much depends on the occasion on which a jest is uttered. For in social gatherings and the intercourse of every day a certain freedom is not unseemly in persons of humble rank, while liveliness is becoming to all. Our jests should never be designed to wound, and we should never make it our ideal to lose a friend sooner than lose a jest. Where the battles of the courts are concerned I am always better pleased when it is possible to indulge in gentle raillery, although it is, of course, permissible to be abusive or bitter in the words we use against our opponents, just as it is permissible to accuse them openly of crime, and to demand the last penalty of the law. But in the courts as elsewhere it is regarded as inhuman to hit a man when he is down, either because he is the innocent victim of misfortune or because such attacks may recoil on those who make them. Consequently, the first points to be taken into consideration are who the speaker is, what is the nature of the case, who is the judge, who is the victim, and what is the character of the remarks that are made.
3.28. , his ubi quis utatur. in convictibus et cotidiano sermone lasciva humilibus, hilaria omnibus convenient. nunquam velimus, longeque absit propositum illud potius amicum quam dictum perdendi. hac quidem pugna forensi malim mihi lenibus uti licere; quanquam et contumeliose et aspere dicere in adversarios permissum est, cum accusare etiam palam et caput alterius iuste petere concessum sit. hic quoque tamen inhumana videri solet fortunae insectatio, vel quod culpa caret vel quod recidere etiam in ipsos, qui obiecerunt, potest. itaque considerandum est, et quis et in qua causa et apud quem et in quem et quid dicat.
3.29. It is most unbecoming for an orator to distort his features or use uncouth gestures, tricks that arouse such merriment in farce. No less unbecoming are ribald jests, and such as are employed upon the stage. As for obscenity, it should not merely be banished from his language, but should not even be suggested. For even if our opponent has rendered himself liable to such a charge, our denunciation should not take the form of a jest.
3.29. minime convenit distortus vultus gestusque, quae in mimis rideri solent. etiam scurrilis et scenica huic personae alienissima est. vero non a verbis tantum abesse debet, sed etiam a significatione. si quando obiici potest, non in ioco exprobranda est.
3.30. Further, although I want my orator to speak with wit, he must not give the impression of striving after it. Consequently lie must not display his wit on every possible occasion, but must sacrifice a jest sooner than sacrifice his dignity.
3.30. praeterea ut dicere urbane volo, ita videri adfectare id plane nolo. ne dicet quidem salse, quotiens poterit, et dictum potius aliquando perdet quam minuet auctoritatem.
3.31. Again, no one will endure an accuser who employs jests to season a really horrible case, nor an advocate for the defence who makes merry over one that calls for pity. Moreover, there is a type of judge whose temperament is too serious to allow him to tolerate laughter.
3.31. accusatorem autem atroci in causa nec patronum in miserabili iocantem feret quisquam. etiam iudices quidam tristiores quam ut risum libenter patiantur.
3.32. It may also happen that a jest directed against an opponent may apply to the judge or to our own client, although there are some orators who do not refrain even from jests that may recoil upon themselves. This was the case with Sulpicius Longus, who, despite the fact that he was himself surpassingly hideous, asserted of a man against whom he was appearing in a case involving his status as a free man, that even his face was the face of a slave. To this Domitius Afer replied, “Is it your profound conviction, Longus, that an ugly man must be a slave?”
3.32. interim accidere, ut id quod in adversarium dicimus aut in iudicem conveniat aut in nostrum quoque litigatorem; quanquam aliqui reperiuntur, qui ne id quidem, quod in ipsos recidere possit, evitent. fecit Longus Sulpicius, qui, cum ipse foedissimus esset, ait eum, contra quem iudicio liberali aderat, ne faciem quidem habere liberi hominis; cui respondens Domitius Afer, tui, inquit, animi sententia, Longe, qui malam faciem habet, liber non est?
3.33. Insolence and arrogance are likewise to be avoided, nor must our jests seem unsuitable to the time or place, or give the appearance of studied premeditation, or smell of the lamp, while those directed against the unfortunate are, as I have already said, inhuman. Again, some advocates are men of such established authority and such known respectability, that any insolence shown them would only hurt the assailant. As regards the way in which we should deal with friends I have already given instructions.
3.33. etiam, ne petulans, ne superbum, ne loco, ne tempore alienum, ne praeparatum et domo adlatum videatur quod dicimus. adversus miseros, sicut supra dixeram, inhumanus est iocus. quidam ita sunt receptae auctoritatis ac notae verecundiae, ut nocitura sit in eos dicendi petulantia. de amicis iam praeceptum est.
3.34. It is the duty not merely of an orator, but of any reasonable human being, when attacking one whom it is dangerous to offend to take care that his remarks do not end in exciting serious enmity, or the necessity for a grovelling apology. Sarcasm that applies to a number of persons is injudicious: I refer to cases where it is directed against whole nations or classes of society, or against rank and pursuits which are common to many.
3.34. non ad oratoris consilium sed ad hominis pertinet; lacessat hoc modo quem laedere sit periculosum, ne aut inimicitiae graves insequantur aut turpis satisfactio. etiam dicitur, quod in plures conuenit, si aut nationes totae incessantur aut ordines aut condicio aut studia multorum.
3.35. A good man will see that everything he says is consistent with his dignity and the respectability of his character; for we pay too dear for the laugh we raise if it is at the cost of our own integrity. It is, however, a difficult task to indicate the sources from which laughter may be legitimately derived or the topics where it may be naturally employed. To attempt to deal exhaustively with the subject would be an interminable task and a waste of labour.
3.35. quae dicet vir bonus omnia salva dignitate ac verecundia dicet. enim risus pretium est, si probitatis impendio constat. autem concilietur risus et quibus ex locis peti soleat, difficillimum dicere. si species omnes persequi velimus, nec modum reperiemus et frustra laborabimus.
3.36. For the topics suitable to jests are no less numerous than those from which we may derive reflexions, as they are called, and are, moreover, identical with the latter. The powers of invention and expression come into play no less where jests are concerned, while as regards expression its force will depend in part on the choice of words, in part on the figures employed.
3.36. enim minus numerosi sunt loci, ex quibus haec dicta, quam illi, ex quibus eae, quas sententias vocamus, ducuntur, neque alii. hic quoque est inventio et elocutio, atque ipsius elocutionis vis alia in verbis, alia in figuris.
3.37. Laughter then will be derived either from the physical appearance of our opponent or from his character as revealed in his words and actions, or from external sources; for all forms of raillery come under one or other of these heads; if the raillery is serious, we style it as severe; if, on the other hand, it is of a lighter character, we regard it as humorous. These themes for jest may be pointed out to the eye or described in words or indicated by some mot.
3.37. igitur oriuntur aut ex corpore eius, in quem dicimus, aut ex animo, qui factis ab eo dictisque colligitur, aut ex iis, quae sunt extra posita. haec enim est omnis vituperatio; quae si gravius posita sit, severa est, si levius, ridicula. aut ostenduntur aut narrantur aut dicto notantur.
3.38. It is only on rare occasions that it is possible to make them visible to the eye, as Gaius Julius did when Helvius Mancia kept clamouring against him. “I will show you what you're like!” he cried, and then, as Mancia persisted in asking him to do so, pointed with his finger at the picture of a Gaul painted on a Cimbric shield, a figure to which Mancia bore a striking resemblance. There were shops round the forum and the shield had been hung up over one of them by way of a sign.
3.38. est, ut oculis subiicere contingat, ut fecit C. Iulius; qui, cum Helvio Manciae saepius obstrepenti sibi diceret, ostendam, qualis sis. isque plane instaret interrogatione, qualem se ostensurus esset, digito demonstravit imaginem Galli in scuto Cimbrico pictam, cui Mancia tum simillimus est visus. autem erant circa forum, ac scutum illud signi gratia positum., quae salsa sint, inprimis est subtile et oratorium, ut Cicero pro Cluentio narrat de Caepasio atque Fabricio aut M.
3.39. The narration of a humorous story may often be used with clever effect and is a device eminently becoming to an orator. Good examples are the story told of Caepasius and Fabricius, which Cicero tells in the pro Cluentio, or the story told by Caelius of the dispute between Decimus Laelius and his colleague when they were both in a hurry to reach their province first. But in all such cases the whole narrative must possess elegance and charm, while the orator's own contribution to the story should be the most humorous element. Take for instance the way in which Cicero gives a special relish to the flight of Fabricius.
3.39. Caelius de illa D. Laelii collegaeque eius in provinciam festinantium contentione. in his omnibus cum elegans et venusta exigitur tota expositio, tum id festivissimum est quod adiicit orator. et a Cicerone sic est Fabricii fuga illa condita:
3.40. “And so, just at the moment when he thought his speech was showing him at his best and he had uttered the following solemn words, words designed to prove a master-stroke of art, 'Look at the fortunes of mankind, gentlemen, look at the aged form of Gaius Fabricius,' just at that very moment, I say, when he had repeated the word 'look' several times by way of making his words all the more impressive, he looked himself, and found that Fabricius had slunk out of court with his head hanging down.” I will not quote the rest of the passage, for it is well known. But he develops the theme still further although the plain facts amount simply to this, that Fabricius had left the court.
3.40. cum callidissime se putaret dicere, et cum illa vera gravissima ex intimo artificio deprompsisset, Respicite, iudices, hominum fortunas, respicite C. Fabricii senectutem, cum hoc, Respicite, ornandae orationis causa saepe dixisset, respexit ipse; at Fabricius a subselliis demisso capite discesserat, et cetera, quae adiecit (nam est notus locus), cum in re hoc solum esset, Fabricium a iudicio recessisse.
3.41. The whole of the story told by Caelius is full of wit and invention, but the gem of the passage is its conclusion. “He followed him, but how he crossed the straits, whether it was in a ship or a fisherman's boat, no one knew; but the Sicilians, being of a lively turn of wit, said that he rode on a dolphin and effected his crossing like a second Arion.” Cicero thinks that humour belongs to narrative and wit to sallies against the speaker's antagonist.
3.41. Caelius cum omnia venustissime finxit, tum illud ultimum, subsecutus quomodo transient, utrum rate an piscatorio navigio, nemo sciebat, Siculi quidem, ut sunt lascivi et dicaces, aiebant in delphino sedisse et sic tanquam Ariona transvectum.
3.42. Domitius Afer showed remarkable finish in this department; for, while narratives of the kind I have described are frequent in his speeches, several books have been published of his witticisms as well.
3.42. narrando autem Cicero consistere facetias putat, dicacitatem in iaciendo. fuit in hoc genere venustus Afer Domitius, cuius orationibus complures huiusmodi narrationes insertae reperiuntur, sed dictorum quoque ab eodem urbane sunt editi libri.
3.43. This latter form of wit lies not merely in sallies and brief displays of wit, but may be developed at greater length, witness the story told by Cicero in the second book of his de Oratore, in which Lucius Crassus dealt with Brutus, against whom he was appearing in court.
3.43. quoque genus est positum non in hac veluti iaculatione dictorum et inclusa breviter urbanitate sed in quodam longiore actu, quod de L. Crasso contra Brutum Cicero in secundo de Oratore libro et allis quibusdam locis narrat.
3.44. Brutus was prosecuting Cnaeus Plancus and had produced two readers to show that Lucius Crassus, who was counsel for the defence, in the speech which he delivered on the subject of the colony of Narbo had advocated measures contrary to those which he recommended in speaking of the Servilian law. Crassus, in reply, called for three readers and gave them the dialogues of Brutus' father to read out. One of these dialogues was represented as taking place on his estate at Privernum, the second on his estate at Alba, and the third on his estate at Tibur. Crassus then asked where these estates were. Now Brutus had sold them all, and in those days it was considered somewhat discreditable to sell one's paternal acres. Similar attractive effects of narrative may be produced by the narration of fables or at times even of historical anecdotes.
3.44. , cum Brutus in accusatione C. Planci ex duobus lectoribus ostendisset, contraria L. Crassum patronum eius in oratione, quam de Colonia Narbonensi habuerat, suasisse iis, quae de lege Servilia dixerat, tris excitavit et ipse lectores, hisque patris eius dialogos dedit legendos; quorum cum in Privernati unus, alter in Albano, tertius in Tiburti sermonem habitum complecteretur, requirebat, ubi essent eae possessiones. autem illas Brutus vendiderat; et tum paterna emancupare praedia turpius habebatur. in apologis quoque et quibusdam interim etiam historiis exponendi gratia consequi solet.
3.45. On the other hand brevity in wit gives greater point and speed. It may be employed in two ways, according as we are the aggressors, or are replying to our opponents; the method, however, in both cases is to some extent the same. For there is nothing that can be said in attack that cannot be used in riposte.
3.45. acutior est illa atque velocior in urbanitate brevitas. quidem duplex forma est dicendi ac respondendi, sed ratio communis in partem; nihil enim quod in lacessendo dici potest, non etiam in repercutiendo.
3.46. But there are certain points which are peculiar to reply. For remarks designed for attack are usually brought ready-made into court, after long thought at home, whereas those made in reply are usually improvised during a dispute or the cross-examination of witnesses. But though there are many topics on which we may draw for our jests, I must repeat that not all these topics are becoming to orators:
3.46. quaedam propria sunt respondentium; illa etiam atque etiam cogitata adferri solent, haec plerumque in altercatione aut in rogandis testibus reperiuntur. Cum sint autem loci plures, ex quibus dicta ridicula ducantur, repetendum est mihi non omnes eos oratoribus convenire; in primis ex amphibolia neque illa obscena, quae Atellani e more captant, nec qualia vulgo iactantur a vilissimo quoque, conversa in maledictum fere ambiguitate;
3.47. above all doubles entendres and obscenity, such as is dear to the Atellan farce, are to be avoided, as also are those coarse jibes so common on the lips of the rabble, where the ambiguity of words is turned to the service of abuse. I cannot even approve of a similar from of jest, that sometimes slipped out even from Cicero, though not when he was pleading in the courts: for example, once when a candidate, alleged to be the son of a cook, solicited someone else's vote in his presence, he said, Ego quoque tibi favebo.
3.47. ne illa quidem, quae Ciceroni aliquando sed non in agendo exciderunt, ut dixit, cum is candidatus, qui coqui filius habebatur, coram eo suffragium ab alio peteret: quoque tibi favebo.
3.48. I say this not because I object absolutely to all play on words capable of two different meanings, but because such jests are rarely effective, unless they are helped out by actual facts as well as similarity of sound. For example, I regard the jest which Cicero levelled against that same Isauricus, whom I mentioned above, as being little less than sheer buffoonery. “I wonder,” he said, “why your father, the steadiest of men, left behind him such a stripy gentleman as yourself.”
3.48. quia excludenda sint omnino verba duos sensus significantia, sed quia raro belle respondeant, nisi cum prorsus rebus ipsis adiuvantur. [non hoc modo] paene et ipsum scurrile Ciceronis est in eundem, de quo supra dixi, Isauricum:, quid sit, quod pater tuus, homo constantissimus, te nobis varium reliquit.
3.49. On the other hand, the following instance of the same type of wit is quite admirable: when Milo's accuser, by way of proving that he had lain in wait for Clodius, alleged that he had put up at Bovillae before the ninth hour in order to wait until Clodius left his villa, and kept repeating the question, “When was Clodius killed?”, Cicero replied, “Late!” a retort which in itself justifies us in refusing to exclude this type of wit altogether. Sometimes, too, the same word may be used not merely in several senses, but in absolutely opposite senses.
3.49. illud ex eodem genere praeclarum; cum obiiceret Miloni accusator in argumentum factarum Clodio insidiarum, quod Bovillas ante horam nonam devertisset, ut exspectaret, dum Clodius a villa sua exiret, et identidem interrogaret, quo tempore Clodius occisus esset, respondit,; quod vel solum sufficit, ut hoc genus non totum repudietur.
3.50. For example, Nero said of a dishonest slave, “No one was more trusted in my house: there was nothing closed or sealed to him.”
3.50. plura modo significari solent, sed etiam diversa, ut Nero de servo pessimo dixit nulli plus apud se fidei haberi, nihil ei neque occlusum neque signatum esse.
3.51. Such ambiguity may even go so far as to present all the appearance of a riddle, witness the jest that Cicero made at the expense of Pletorius, the accuser of Fonteius: “His mother,” he said, “kept a school while she lived and masters after she was dead.” The explanation is that in her lifetime women of infamous character used to frequent her house, while after her death her property was sold. (I may note however that ludus, is used metaphorically in the sense of school, while magisiri is used ambiguously.)
3.51. res usque ad aenigma, quale est Ciceronis in Plaetorium Fonteii accusatorem, cuius matrem, dixit, dum vixisset, ludum, postquam mortua esset, magistros habuisse. autem, dum vixit, infames feminae convenire ad eam solitae; post mortem bona eius venierant. hic ludus per translationem dictus est, magistri per ambiguitatem.
3.52. A similar form of jest may be made by use of the figure known as metalepsis, as when Fabius Maximus complained of the meagreness of the gifts made by Augustus to his friends, and said that his congiaria were heminaria: for congiarium implies at once liberality and a particular measure, and Fabius put a slight on the liberality of Augustus by a reference to the measure.
3.52. metalempsin quoque cadit eadem ratio dictorum, ut Fabius Maximus, incusans Augusti congiariorum, quae amicis dabantur, exiguitatem, heminaria esse dixit; nam congiarium commune liberalitatis atque mensurae, a mensura ducta imminutio rerum.
3.53. This form of jest is as poor as is the invention of punning names by the addition, subtraction or change of letters: I find, for instance, a case where a certain Acisculus was called Pacisculus because of some “compact” which he had made, while one Placidus was nicknamed Acidus because of his “sour” temper, and one Tullius was dubbed Tollius because he was a thief.
3.53. tam frigida quam est nominum fictio adiectis, detractis, mutatis litteris, ut Acisculum, quia esset pactus, Pacisculum, et Placidum nomine, quod is acerbus natura esset, Acidum, et Tullium, cum fur esset, Tollium dictos invenio.
3.54. Such puns are more successful with things than names. It was, for example, a neat hit of Afer's when he said that Manlius Sura, who kept rushing to and fro while he was pleading, waving his hands, letting his toga fall and replacing it, was not merely pleading, but giving himself a lot of needless trouble. For there is a spice of wit about the word satagere in itself, even if there were no resemblance to any other word.
3.54. haec eadem genera commodius in rebus quam in nominibus respondent. Afer enim venuste Manlium Suram, multum in agendo discursantem, salientem, manus iactantem, togam deiicientem et reponentem, non agere, dixit, sed satagere. enim dictum per se urbanum satagere etiamsi nulla subsit alterius verbi similitudo.
3.55. Similar jests may be produced by the addition or removal of the aspirate, or by splitting up a word or joining it to another: the effect is generally poor, but the practice is occasionally permissible. Jests drawn from names are of the same type. Cicero introduces a number of such jests against Verres, but always as quotations from others. On one occasion he says that he would sweep everything away, for his name was Verres; on another, that he had given more trouble to Hercules, whose temple he had pillaged, than was given by the Erymanthine “boar”; on another, that he was a bad “priest” who had left so worthless a pig behind him. For Verres' predecessor was named Sacerdos.
3.55. et adiecta et detracta aspiratione et divisis coniunctisque verbis similiter saepius frigida, aliquando tamen recipienda. condicio est in iis, quae a nominibus trahuntur. ex hoc Cicero in Verrem, sed ut ab aliis dicta, modo futurum, ut omnia verreret, cum diceretur Verres, modo Herculi, quem expilaverat, molestiorem apro Erymanthio fuisse, modo malum sacerdotem, qui tam nequam verrem reliquisset, quia Sacerdoti Verres successerat.
3.56. Sometimes, however, a lucky chance may give us an opportunity of employing such jests with effect, as for instance when Cicero in the pro Caecina says of the witness Sextus Clodius Phormio, “He was not less black or less bold than the Phormio of Terence.”
3.56. tamen aliquando occasionem quaedam felicitas hoc quoque bene utendi: ut pro Caecina Cicero in testem Sex. Clodium Phormionem, minus niger, inquit, nec minus confidens quam est ille Terentianus Phormio.
3.57. We may note therefore that jests which turn on the meaning of things are at once more pointed and more elegant. In such cases resemblances between things produce the best effects, more especially if we refer to something of an inferior or more trivial nature, as in the jests of which our forefathers were so fond, when they called Lentulus Spinther and Scipio Serapio. But such jests may be drawn not merely from the names of men, but from animals as well; for example when I was a boy, Junius Bassus, one of the wittiest of men, was nicknamed the white ass.
3.57. igitur sunt et elegantiora, quae trahuntur ex vi rerum. his maxime valet similitudo, si tamen ad aliquid inferius leviusque referatur; quae iam veteres illi iocabantur, qui Lentulum Spintherem et Scipionem Serapionem esse dixerunt. ea non ab hominibus modo petitur verum etiam ab animalibus, ut nobis pueris Iunius Bassus, homo in primis dicax, asinus albus vocabatur;
3.58. And Sarmentus compared Messius Cicirrus to a wild horse. The comparison may also be drawn from inanimate objects: for example Publius Blessius called a certain Julius, who was dark, lean and bent, the iron buckle. This method of raising a laugh is much in vogue to-day.
3.58. et Sarmentus Messium Cicirrum equo fero comparavit. et ab inanimis sicut P. Blaesius Iulium, hominem nigrum et macrum et pandum, fibulam ferream dixit. nunc risus petendi genus frequentissimum est.
3.59. Such resemblances may be put to the service of wit either openly or allusively. Of the latter type is the remark of Augustus, made to a soldier who showed signs of timidity in presenting a petition, “Don't hold it out as if you were giving a penny to an elephant.”
3.59. Adhibetur autem similitudo interim palam, interim inseri solet parabolae; cuius est generis illud Augusti, qui militi libellum timide porrigenti,, inquit, tanquam assem elephanto des.
3.60. Some of these jests turn on similarity of meaning. Of this kind was the witticism uttered by Vatinius when he was prosecuted by Calvus. Vatinius was wiping his forehead with a white handkerchief, and his accuser called attention to the unseemliness of the act. Whereupon Vatinius replied, “Though I am on my trial, I go on eating white bread all the same.”
3.60. quaedam vi similia; unde Vatinius dixit hoc dictum, cum reus, agente in eum Calvo, frontem candido sudario tergeret, idque ipsum accusator in invidiam vocaret, reus sum, inquit, et panem item candidum edo.
3.61. Still more ingenious is the application of one thing to another on the ground of some resemblance, that is to say the adaptation to one thing of a circumstance which usually applies to something else, a type of jest which we may regard as being an ingenious form of fiction. For example, when ivory models of captured towns were carried in Caesar's triumphal procession, and a few days later wooden models of the same kind were carried at the triumph of Fabius Maximus, Chrysippus remarked that the latter were the cases for Caesar's ivory towns. And Pedo said of a heavy-armed gladiator who was pursuing another armed with a net and failed to strike him, “He wants to catch him alive.”
3.61. est subtilior illa ex simili translatio, cum, quod in alia re fieri solet, in aliam mutuamur. dicatur sane fictio: ut Chrysippus, cum in triumpho Caesaris eborea oppida essent translata, et post dies paucos Fabii Maximi lignea, thecas esse oppidorum Caesaris dixit. Pedo de mirmillone, qui retiarium consequebatur nec feriebat,, inquit, capere vult.
3.62. Resemblance and ambiguity may be used in conjunction: Galba for example said to a man who stood very much at his ease when playing ball, “You stand as if you were one of Caesar's candidates.” The ambiguity lies in the word stand, while the indifference shewn by the player supplies the resemblance.
3.62. iungitur amphiboliae similitudo, ut a Galba, qui pilam negligenter petenti,, inquit, petis, tamquam Caesaris candidatus. Nam illud petis ambiguum est, securitas similis Quod hactenus ostendisse satis est.
3.63. I need say no more on this form of humour. But the practice of combining different types of jest is very common, and those are best which are of this composite character. A like use may be made of dissimilarity. Thus a Roman knight was once drinking at tile games, and Augustus sent him the following message, “If I want to dine, I go home.” To which the other replied, “Yes, but you are not afraid of losing your seat ” Contraries give rise to more than one kind of jest. For instance the following jests made by Augustus and Galba differ in form. Augustus was engaged in dismissing an officer with dishonour from his service: the officer kept interrupting him with entreaties and said, “What shall I say to my father?” Augustus replied, “Tell him that I fell under your displeasure.” Galba, when a friend asked him for the loan of a cloak, said, “I cannot lend it you, as I am going to stay at home,” the point being that the rain was pouring through the roof of his garret at the time. I will add a third example, although out of respect to its author I withhold his name: “You are more lustful than a eunuch,” where we are surprised by the appearance of a word which is the very opposite of what we should have expected. Under the same heading, although it is quite different from any of the preceding, we must place the remark made by Marcus Vestinus when it was reported to him that a certain man was dead. “Some day then he will cease to stink,” was his reply.
3.63. frequentissima aliorum generum cum aliis mixtura est, eaque optima, quae ex pluribus constat. dissimilium ratio est. eques Romanus, ad quem in spectaculis bibentem cum misisset Augustus, qui ei diceret, si prandere volo, domum eo: Tu enim, inquit, non times, ne locum perdas. contrario non una species. enim eodem modo dixit Augustus praefecto, quem cum ignominia mittebat, subinde interponenti precibus, respondebo patri meo?, me tibi displicuisse; quo Galba penulam roganti: possum commodare, domi maneo, cum cenaculum eius perplueret. adhuc illud: (nisi quod, ut ne auctorem ponam, verecundia ipsius facit) es quam ullus spado; quo sine dubio et opinio decipitur sed ex contrario. hoc ex eodem loco est sed nulli priorum simile, quod dixit M. Vestinus, cum ei nuntiatum esset … necatum esse, aliquando desinet putere.
3.65. But I shall overload this book with illustrations and turn it into a common jest-book, if I continue to quote each jest that was made by our forefathers. All forms of argument afford equal opportunity for jests. Augustus for example employed definition when he said of two ballet-dancers who were engaged in a contest, turn and turn about, as to who could make tile most exquisite gestures, that one was a dancer and the other merely interrupted the dancing.
3.65. librum exemplis similemque iis, qui risus gratia componuntur, efficiam, si persequi voluero singula veterum. omnibus argumentorum locis eadem occasio est. et finitione usus est Augustus de pantomimis duobus, qui alternis gestibus contendebant, cum eorum alterum saltatorem dixit alterum interpellatorem;
3.66. Galba on the other hand made use of partition when he replied to a friend who asked him for a cloak, “It is not raining and you don't need it; if it does rain, I shall wear it myself.” Similar material for jests is supplied by genus, species, property, difference, conjugates, adjuncts, antecedents, consequents, contraries, causes, effects, and comparisons of things greater, equal, or less, as it is also by all forms of trope.
3.66. et partitione Galba, cum paenulam roganti respondit, pluit, non opus est tibi; si pluit, ipse utar. genere, specie, propriis, differentibus, iugatis, adiunctis, consequentibus, antecedentibus, repugnantibus, causis, effectis, comparatione parium, maiorum, minorum similis materia praebetur; sicut in tropos quoque omnes cadit.
3.67. Are not a large number of jests made by means of hyperbole? Take for instance Cicero's remark about a man who was remarkable for his height, “He bumped his head against the Fabian arch,” or the remark made by Publius Oppius about the family of the Lentuli to the effect, that since the children were always smaller than their parents, the race would “perish by propagation.” Again, what of irony?
3.67. non plurima per hyperbolen dicuntur? quale refert Cicero de homine praelongo, caput eum ad fornicem Fabium offendisse; et quod P. Oppius dixit de genere Lentulorum, cum assidue minores parentibus liberi essent, nascendo interiturum.
3.68. Is not even the most severe form of irony a kind of jest? Afer made a witty use of it when he replied to Didius Callus, who, after making the utmost efforts to secure a provincial government, complained on receiving the appointment that he had been forced into accepting, “Well, then, do something for your country's sake.” Cicero also employed metaphor to serve his jest, when on receiving a report of uncertain authorship to the effect that Vatinius was dead, he remarked, “Well, for the meantime I shall make use of the interest.”
3.68. ironia? nonne etiam quae severissime fit, ioci prope genus est? urbane usus est Afer, cum Didio Gallo, qui provinciam ambitiosissime petierat, deinde, impetrata ea, tanquam coactus querebatur,, inquit, aliquid et rei publicae causa. quoque Cicero lusit, cum, Vatinii morte nuntiata, cuius parum certus dicebatur auctor,, inquit, usura fruar.
3.69. He also employed allegory in the witticism that he was fond of making about Marcus Caelius, who was better at bringing charges than at defending his client against them, to the effect that he had a good right hand, but a weak left. As an example of the use of emphasis I may quote the jest of Aulus Villius, that Tuccius was killed by his sword falling upon him.
3.69. per allegorian M. Caelium, melius obiicientem crimina quam defendentem, bonam dextram, malam sinistram habere dicebat. A. Villius dixit, ferrum in Tuccium incidisse.
3.70. Figures of thought, which the Greeks call σχήματα διανοίας, may be similarly employed, and some writers have classified jests under their various headings. For we ask questions, express doubts, make assertions, threaten, wish and speak in pity or in anger. And everything is laughable that is obviously a pretence.
3.70. quoque mentis, quae σχήματα διανοίας dicuntur, res eadem recipit omnes, in quas nonnulli diviserunt species dictorum. et interrogamus et dubitamus et adfirmamus et minamur et optamus, quaedam ut miserantes, quaedam ut irascentes dicimus. est autem omne, quod aperte fingitur.
3.71. It is easy to make fun of folly, for folly is laughable in itself; but we may improve such jests by adding something of our own. Titius Maximus put a foolish question to Campatius, who was leaving the theatre, when he asked him if he had been watching the play. “No,” replied Campatius, “I was playing ball in the stalls,” whereby lie made the question seem even more foolish than it actually was.
3.71. reprehendere facillimum est, nam per se sunt ridicula; sed rem urbanam facit aliqua ex nobis adiectio. interrogaverat exeuntem de theatro Campatium Titius Maximus, an spectasset? fecit Campatius dubitationem eius stultiorem dicendo,, sed in orchestra pila lusi.
3.72. Refutation consists in denying, rebutting, defending or making light of a charge, and each of these affords scope for humour. Manius Curius, for example, showed humour in the way in which he denied a charge that had been brought against him. His accuser had produced a canvas, in every scene of which he was depicted either as naked and in prison or as being restored to freedom by his friends paying off his gambling debts. His only comment was, “Did I never win, then?”
3.72. cum sit in negando, redarguendo, defendendo, elevando, ridicule negavit Manius Curius; nam, cum eius accusator in sipario omnibus locis aut nudum eum in nervo aut ab amicis redemptum ex alea pinxisset:
3.73. Sometimes we rebut a charge openly, as Cicero did when he refuted the extravagant lies of Vibius Curius about his age: “Well, then,” he remarked, “in the days when you and I used to practise declamation together, you were not even born.” At other times we may rebut it by pretending to agree. Cicero, for example, when Fabia the wife of Dolabella asserted that her age was thirty, remarked, “That is true, for I have heard it for the last twenty years.”
3.73. ego, inquit, nunquam vici? Redarguimus interim aperte, ut Cicero Vibium Curium multum de annis aetatis suae mentientem, ergo, cum una declamabamus, non eras natus; interim et simulata assensione, ut idem Fabia Dolabellae dicente triginta se annos habere, est, inquit; nam hoc illam iam viginti annis audio.
3.74. Sometimes too it is effective to add something more biting in place of the charge which is denied, as was done by Junius Bassus when Domitia the wife of Passienus complained that by way of accusing her of meanness he had alleged that she even sold old shoes. “No,” he replied, “I never said anything of the sort. I said you bought them.” A witty travesty of defence was once produced by a Roman knight who was charged by Augustus with having squandered his patrimony. “I thought it was my own,” he answered.
3.74. interim subiicitur pro eo, quod neges, aliud mordacius: ut Iunius Bassus, querente Domitia Passieni, quod incusans eius sordes calceos eam veteres diceret vendere solere, mehercules, inquit, hoc unquam dixi; sed dixi emere te solere. imitatus est eques Romanus, qui obiicienti Augusto, quod patrimonium comedisset,, inquit, putavi.
3.75. As regards making light of a charge, there are two ways in which this may be done. We may throw cold water on the excessive boasted of our opponent, as was done by Gaius Caesar, when Pomponius displayed a wound in his face which he had received in the rebellion of Sulpicius and which he boasted he had received while fighting for Caesar: “You should never look round,” he retorted, “when you are running away.” Or we may do the same with some charge that is brought against us, as was done by Cicero when he remarked to those who reproached him for marrying Publilia, a young unwedded girl, when he was already over sixty, “Well, she will be a woman to-morrow.”
3.75. ratio est duplex, ut aut nimiam quis iactantiam minuat: quemadmodum C. Caesar Pomponio ostendenti vulnus ore exceptum in seditione Sulpiciana, quod is se passum pro Caesare pugnantem gloriabatur, fugiens respexeris, inquit; aut crimen obiectum, ut Cicero obiurgantibus, quod sexagenarius Publiliam virginem duxisset, mulier erit, inquit.
3.76. Some style this type of jest consequent and, on the ground that both jests seem to follow so naturally and inevitably, class it with the jest which Cicero levelled against Curio, who always began his speeches by asking indulgence for his youth: “You will find your exordium easier every day,” he said.
3.76. genus dicti consequens vocant quidam, atque illi simile, quod Cicero Curionem, semper ab excusatione aetatis incipientem, facilius cotidie prooemium habere dixit, quia ista natura sequi et cohaerere videantur.
3.77. Another method of making light of a statement is to suggest a reason. Cicero employed this method against Vatinius. The latter was lame and, wishing to make it seem that his health was improved, said that he could now walk as much as two miles. “Yes,” said Cicero, “for the days are longer.” Again Augustus, when the inhabitants of Tarraco reported that a palm had sprung up on the altar dedicated to him, replied, “That shows how often you kindle fire upon it.”
3.77. elevandi genus est etiam causarum relatio, qua Cicero est usus in Vatinium. pedibus aeger, cum vellet videri commodioris valetudinis factus et diceret, se iam bina milia passuum ambulare, enim, inquit, longiores sunt. Augustus nuntiantibus Tarraconensibus palmam in ara eius enatam,, inquit, quam saepe accendatis.
3.78. Cassius Severus showed his wit by transferring a charge made against himself to a different quarter. For when lie was reproached by the praetor on the ground that his advocates had insulted Lucius Varus, an Epicurean and a friend of Caesar, he replied, “I do not know who they were who insulted him, I suppose they were Stoics.” Of retorts there are a number of forms, the wittiest being that which is helped out by a certain verbal similarity, as in the retort made by Trachalus to Suelius. The latter had said, “If that is the case, you go into exile”: to which Trachalus replied, “And if it is not the case, you go back into exile.”
3.78. crimen Cassius Severus. cum obiurgaretur a praetore, quod advocati eius L. Varo Epicureo, Caesaris amico, convicium fecissent,, inquit. qui conviciati sint, et puto Stoicos fuisse. multa sunt genera, venustissimum, quod etiam similitudine aliqua verbi adiuvatur: ut Trachalus dicenti Suelio, hoc ita est, is in exilium, non est ita, redis, inquit.
3.79. Cassius Severus baffled an opponent who reproached him with the fact that Proculeius had forbidden him to enter his house by replying, “Do I ever go there?” But one jest may also be defeated by another: for example, Augustus of blessed memory, when the Gauls gave him a golden necklet weighing a hundred pounds, and Dolabella, speaking in jest but with an eye to the success of his jest, said, “General, give me your necklet,” replied, “I had rather give you the crown of oak leaves.”
3.79. Cassius Severus obiiciente quodam, quod ei domo sua Proculeius interdixisset, respondendo, ergo illuc accedo? eluditur et ridiculum ridiculo: ut divus Augustus, cum ei Galli torquem aureum centum pondo dedissent, et Dolabella per iocum, temptans tamen ioci sui eventum, dixisset,, torque me dona,, inquit, te civica donare:
3.80. So, too, one lie may be defeated by another: Galba, for instance, when someone told him that he once bought a lamprey five feet long for half a denarius in Sicily, replied, “There is nothing extraordinary in that: for they grow to such a length in those seas that the fishermen tie them round their waists in lieu of ropes!” Then there is the opposite of denial, namely a feigned confession, which likewise may show no small wit.
3.80. mendacium quoque mendacio, ut Galba, dicente quodam, victoriato se uno in Sicilia quinque pedes longam murenam emisse:, inquit, mirum; nam ibi tam longae nascuntur, ut iis piscatores pro restibus cingantur.
3.81. Thus Afer, when pleading against a freedman of Claudius Caesar and when another freedman called out from the opposite side of the court, “You are always speaking against Caesar's freedmen,” replied, “Yes, but I make precious little headway.” A similar trick is not to deny a charge, though it is obviously false and affords good opportunity for an excellent reply. For example, when Philippus said to Catulus, “Why do you bark so?” the latter replied, “I see a thief.”
3.81. est neganti confessionis simulatio, sed ipsa quoque multum habet urbanitatis. Afer, cum ageret contra libertum Claudii Caesaris, et ex diverso quidam condicionis eiusdem, cuius erat litigator, exclamasset, tu semper in libertos Caesaris dicis, mehercule, inquit, quicquam proficio. vicinum est non negare quod obiicitur, cum et id palam falsum est et inde materia bene respondendi datur: ut Catulus dicenti Philippo, latras? video, inquit.
3.82. To make jokes against oneself is scarcely fit for any save professed buffoons and is strongly to be disapproved in an orator. This form of jest has precisely the same varieties as those which we make against others and therefore I pass it by, although it is not infrequently employed.
3.82. se dicere non fere est nisi scurrarum et in oratore utique minime probabile, quod fieri totidem modis quot in alios potest. hoc, quamvis frequens sit, transeo.
3.83. On the other hand scurrilous or brutal jests, although they may raise a laugh, are quite unworthy of a gentleman. I remember a jest of this kind being made by a certain man against an inferior who had spoken with some freedom against him: “I will smack your head, and bring an action against you for having such a hard skull!” In such cases it is difficult to say whether the audience should laugh or be angry.
3.83. vero, etiamsi ridiculum est, indignum tamen est homine liberali, quod aut turpiter aut potenter dicitur; quod fecisse quendam scio, qui humiliori libere adversus se loquenti,, inquit, tibi ducam et formulam scribam, quod caput durum habeas. enim dubium est, utrum ridere audientes an indignari debuerint.