<GetPassage xmlns:tei="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xmlns="http://chs.harvard.edu/xmlns/cts">
            <request>
                <requestName>GetPassage</requestName>
                <requestUrn>urn:cts:latinLit:phi1002.phi001.perseus-eng2:6.3.76-6.3.90</requestUrn>
            </request>
            <reply>
                <urn>urn:cts:latinLit:phi1002.phi001.perseus-eng2:6.3.76-6.3.90</urn>
                <passage>
                    <TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0"><text xml:lang="eng"><body><div n="urn:cts:latinLit:phi1002.phi001.perseus-eng2" type="translation" xml:lang="eng"><div n="6" type="textpart" subtype="book"><div n="3" type="textpart" subtype="chapter"><div n="76" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> Some style this type of jest <hi rend="italic">consequent</hi> and, on
                            the ground that both <pb n="v4-6 p.481"/> 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: <quote>You will find your exordium easier every day,</quote>
                            he said. </p></div><div n="77" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> 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. <quote>Yes,</quote> said Cicero,
                                <quote>for the days are longer.</quote> Again Augustus, when the
                            inhabitants of Tarraco reported that a palm had sprung up on the altar
                            dedicated to him, replied, <quote>That shows how often you kindle fire
                                upon it.</quote>
                     </p></div><div n="78" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> 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, <quote>I do not know who
                                they were who insulted him, I suppose they were Stoics.</quote> 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, <quote>If that is the case,
                                you go into exile</quote> : to which Trachalus replied, <quote>And
                                if it is not the case, you go back into exile.</quote>
                        <note anchored="true" place="unspecified"> The point is obscure; we have
                                no key to the circumstances of the jest. </note>
                     </p></div><div n="79" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> Cassius Severus baffled an opponent who reproached him with the fact
                            that Proculeius had forbidden him to enter his house by replying,
                                <quote>Do I ever go there?</quote> 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 <pb n="v4-6 p.483"/> eye to the success of his jest,
                            said, <quote>General, give me your necklet,</quote> replied, <quote>I
                                had rather give you the crown of oak leaves.</quote>
                        <note anchored="true" place="unspecified"> The civic crown of oak leaves
                                was given as a reward for saving the life of a fellow-citizen in
                                war. The <hi rend="italic">torquis</hi> was often given as a reward
                                for valour, and Augustus pretends to believe that Dolabella had
                                asked for a military decoration. The point lies in the contrast
                                between the intrinsic value and weight of the two decorations.
                                Further, Augustus was very parsimonious in bestowing military
                                decorations and had himself received the crown of oak leaves from
                                the senate as the saviour of Rome, a fact which must have rendered
                                its bestowal on others rare, if not non-existent. </note>
                     </p></div><div n="80" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> 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, <quote> 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! </quote>
                            Then there is the opposite of denial, </p></div><div n="81" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> namely a feigned confession, which likewise may show no small wit. Thus
                            Afer, when pleading against a freedman of Claudius Caesar and when
                            another freedman called out from the opposite side of the court,
                                <quote>You are always speaking against Caesar's freedmen,</quote>
                            replied, <quote>Yes, but I make precious little headway.</quote> 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, <quote>Why do you bark so?</quote> the latter
                            replied, <note anchored="true" place="unspecified"><hi rend="italic">cp.</hi> Cic. <hi rend="italic">de Or.</hi> II. liv. 220.
                                </note>
                        <quote>I see a thief.</quote>
                     </p></div><div n="82" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> 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. </p></div><div n="83" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> 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 <pb n="v4-6 p.485"/> a certain man against an inferior who
                            had spoken with some freedom against him: <quote>I will smack your head,
                                and bring an action against you for having such a hard
                                skull!</quote> In such cases it is difficult to say whether the
                            audience should laugh or be angry. </p></div><div n="84" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> There remains the prettiest of all forms of humour, namely the jest
                            which depends for success on deceiving anticipations <note anchored="true" place="unspecified">See IX. ii. 22.</note> or taking
                            another's words in a sense other than he intended. The unexpected
                            element may be employed by the attacking party, as in the example cited
                            by Cicero, <note anchored="true" place="unspecified"><hi rend="italic">de Or.</hi> II. lxx. 281. </note>
                        <quote>What does this man lack
                                save wealth and—virtue?</quote> or in the remark of Afer, <quote>For
                                pleading causes he is most admirably—dressed.</quote> Or it may be
                            employed to meet a statement made by another, as it was by Cicero <note anchored="true" place="unspecified"><hi rend="italic">cp.</hi> § 68.
                            </note> on hearing a false report of Vatinius' death: he had met one of
                            the latter's freedmen and asked him, <quote>Is all well?</quote> The
                            freedman answered, <quote>All is well.</quote> To which Cicero replied,
                                <quote>Is he dead, then?</quote>
                     </p></div><div n="85" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> But the loudest laughter of all is produced by simulation and
                            dissimulation, proceedings which differ but little and are almost
                            identical; but whereas simulation implies the pretence of having a
                            certain opinion of one's own, dissimulation consists in feigning that
                            one does not understand someone else's meaning. Afer employed
                            simulation, when his opponents in a certain case kept saying that
                            Celsina (who was an influential lady) knew all about the facts, and he,
                            pretending to believe that she was a man, said, <quote>Who is
                                he?</quote>
                     </p></div><div n="86" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> Cicero on the other hand employed dissimulation when Sextus Annalis gave
                            evidence damaging to the client whom lie was defending, and the accuser
                            kept pressing him with the question, <quote>Tell me, Marcus Tullius,
                                what have you to say about Sextus Annalis?</quote>
                        <pb n="v4-6 p.487"/> To which he replied by beginning to recite the Sixth book of the
                            Annals of Ennius, which commences with the line, <quote rend="blockquote"><cit><quote><l part="N">Who may the causes vast of war
                                        unfold?</l></quote><bibl default="false"> Enn. 174 <note anchored="true" place="unspecified"> (with <hi rend="italic">oras</hi>
                                            for <hi rend="italic">causas</hi> ).The question ( <hi rend="italic">numquid,</hi> etc.) is treated by
                                            Cicero as meaning <quote>Can you quote anything from the
                                                sixth book of the Annals?</quote>
                                    <hi rend="italic">ingentis</hi> is ace. plural. </note>
                              </bibl></cit></quote> This kind of jest finds its most frequent opportunity
                            in ambiguity, </p></div><div n="87" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> as for example, when Cascellius, <note anchored="true" place="unspecified"> A famous lawyer mentioned by Horace, <hi rend="italic">A.P.</hi> 371. Cascellius pretends to take <hi rend="italic">dividere</hi> literally ( <hi rend="italic">i.e.</hi> cut in two); his client had meant <quote>to sell half
                                    his ship,</quote>
                           <hi rend="italic">i.e.</hi> take a partner in
                                the venture. </note> on being consulted by a client who said,
                                <quote>I wish to divide my ship,</quote> replied, <quote>You will
                                lose it then.</quote> But there are also other ways of distorting
                            the meaning; we may for instance give a serious statement a
                            comparatively trivial sense, like the man who, when asked what he
                            thought of a man who had been caught in the act of adultery, replied
                            that he had been too slow in his movements. <note anchored="true" place="unspecified"><hi rend="italic">de Or.</hi> II. lxviii. 275.
                            </note>
                     </p></div><div n="88" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> Of a similar nature are jests whose point lies in insinuation. Such was
                            the reply which Cicero <note anchored="true" place="unspecified"><hi rend="italic">ib.</hi> lxix. 278. </note> quotes as given to the
                            man who complained that his wife had hung herself on a fig-tree.
                                <quote>I wish,</quote> said someone, <quote>you would give me a slip
                                of that tree to plant.</quote> For there the meaning is obvious,
                            though it is not expressed in so many words. </p></div><div n="89" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> Indeed the essence of all wit lies in the distortion of the true and
                            natural meaning of words: a perfect instance of this is when we
                            misrepresent our own or another's opinions or assert some impossibility.
                        </p></div><div n="90" type="textpart" subtype="section"><p> Juba misrepresented another man's opinion, when he replied to one who
                            complained of being bespattered by his horse, <quote>What, do you think
                                I am a Centaur?</quote>
                        <note anchored="true" place="unspecified">
                                The point of the jest, such as it is, is that Juba disclaims forming
                                part of his horse. The reference is to Juba, historian and king of
                                Mauretania, captured by Julius Caesar and restored by Augustus.
                            </note> Gaius Cassius misrepresented his own, when he said to a soldier
                            whom he <pb n="v4-6 p.489"/> saw hurrying into battle without his sword,
                                <quote>Shew yourself a handy man with your fists, comrade.</quote>
                            So too did Galba, when served with some fish that had been partially
                            eaten the day before and had been placed on the table with the uneaten
                            sides turned uppermost: <quote>We must lose no time,</quote> he said,
                                <quote>for there are people under the table at work on the other
                                side.</quote> Lastly there is the jibe that Cicero made against
                            Curius, which I have already cited; <note anchored="true" place="unspecified">§73.</note> for it was clearly impossible that
                            he should be still unborn at a time when he was already declaiming. </p></div></div></div></div></body></text></TEI>
                </passage>
            </reply>
            </GetPassage>