astrologer, and a soldier found enough flour to make one little cake. Since they were all very hungry, and the cake would not be enough for all three, they decided it was better for one of them to have it alone; but, after they had agreed upon this, they still disputed who should be the fortunate one. The philosopher said the cake should be given to him, because, inasmuch as he knew all nature, his was the noblest of the arts. But the astrologer replied that, if nobleness consisted in knowledge, the cake ought to be his, because, while the philosopher was acquainted with everything beneath the moon, by nature mutable, his own knowledge transcended the heavens and included eternity. Then the soldier, not wishing to be outdone, maintained that without the protection of the sword against evil persons the arts could not exist, and therefore he ought to have the cake, quanto il conservare avanza tutto quello, che senza il conservare se ne' andrebbe in nulla. At this pass, since there was no prospect of settling the contest, the soldier, who had a keen mind, proposed that they should put the cake in the fire to bake, and, since it was late, they should retire; and the cake should go to him whom Heaven granted the most beautiful dream. The other two smiled at this idea, convinced they could invent a finer dream than his. In the morning the philosopher said he dreamed he saw the Master of Nature reduce the chaos of uncreated things to perfect order, giving each its place and quality, uniting amicably the four hostile bodies, i.e., fire, air, water, and earth; endowing his creations with life and motion and intelligence according to their degree, from the lowest form of nature to man, who was granted the power to act with the light of reason only a little less than divine. When the soldier heard this and all the other marvels the philosopher related, he said, "Your dream is certainly a splendid one; it seems that while you slept, Nature herself appeared to you and revealed all her secrets." The astrologer said he thought his dream was superior to that, as the things of heaven, which are eternal and immutable, are grander and nobler than the things of earth, which are by nature corruptible. He dreamed that he ascended from earth through the spheres of water, of air, and of fire, to the circle of the moon, and on to the heaven of Mercury, of Venus, and at length to the sphere of the Sun, heart of heaven; that on the way he passed the twelve great signs, the seats of Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, and finally rose into the all-embracing primum mobile, where the mysteries of the universe were revealed, — the intermovements of sun, moon, stars, and spheres, the altitude of heaven, the vanity of human endeavor, and many other marvellous matters. When the astronomer was silent, the soldier, who had frequently smiled to himself while listening to these fictions, said he was ill-fitted to contend with such masters of wisdom as his two friends, and ought to yield them the prize at once; but, inasmuch as they had made the covenant, he would narrate his dream, how this land was so beset with enemies that he was obliged to fight, and how, when he was returning home victorious and joyful, a tearful dishevelled maiden appeared before him, beseeching him to protect her against a lover, who, because she would not yield to him, had falsely accused her before the magistrate, and saying she was condemned to die unless some knight would defend her; how he fought, and after a great struggle overcame, the false accuser; how he was himself wrongly accused because he had undertaken the defence of the maiden; and how, wearied and distraught, he went to the little cake, and, to keep up his strength, ate it. "Such was my dream," said the soldier, "which I relate not so much to compare with yours as to show that I am the loser. And now I leave you to decide which of you shall enjoy the cake." But the philosopher and the astronomer, though they argued at great length, could come to no agreement, and finally said they would divide it equally between them. They went, accordingly, to the hearth, and found the ashes undisturbed. One of them took a stick and poked in the ashes, and, not discovering the cake, called out to the other that it was not there. Then they summoned the soldier, and accused him of having eaten it. "It would not be strange," said he, "if, while you were giving free rein to fancy, wherein there is no eating and drinking, I, remaining on the earth, had devoted my attention to terrestrial matters; and while your subtle imaginings led you to the enjoyment of spiritual viands, I had given myself the pleasure of such food as the body needs; and since you have appeased the hunger of your minds at this rich board, so I have had from these ashes such solid and material food as is fitting for my hunger." The two saw that they had been mocked, and that without the knowledge of books he had in this case been wiser than they. But because he was armed and was strengthened by the food he had taken, and they were weak with hunger, they could only vent their anger on him, and recognize that in this world one must turn one's mind to practical matters. For they who give themselves over to contemplation alone may be called wise, but never prudent. Giraldi's style is awkward and heavy, but it is evident from this rough summary that he possessed considerable narrative skill. The vision of the philosopher and the wonder-journey of the astrologer are well conceived, even if not well executed; and the humor of the soldier's story, in the manner of the late decadent and extravagant romances, with its anticlimactic conclusion, is cleverly managed. The way in which the soldier comments on the first two dreams is suggestive of the Jew in the Persian-Arabic version; but we cannot suppose that Giraldi knew any other than the familiar version of the tale as Petrus told it. This method of attaining a little verisimilitude, as well as the idea of giving the third member of the company a separate narrative, must be set down to the credit of Giraldi. For the most part, the whole story exists for its unexpected turn at the end. Giraldi has made of the philosopher and the astrologer two fairly good types, and the soldier is almost an individual character. After this single excursion into the higher circles of narrative fiction, "The Three Dreams" descended to the category of the brief anecdote whose chief use was To point a moral and adorn a tale. It was included in the "Facetie de Barlacchia," which was many VOL. XXX. NO. 117.-26 times reprinted under various titles from about 1580 onwards: "& il Barlacchia disse molte picevolezze, & intra l'altre a certo proposito questa nouelletta. Che furono tre uiandanti, quali facendo un lungo, e pericoloso viaggio, si trouarono in grandissime boscoglie, perche haueuano consumate tutte le cose da mangiare portate con loro, eccetto un pane solo, erano in gran pensiero della loro uita" The party sit down on the grass beside a fountain, and a little later the two who looked upon their companion as a simpleton are astonished at his cleverness, and admit they have been taken in; "e per quel giorno, se uollano mangiare, furono costretti procacciarsi dell' herba.”1 LeGrand d'Aussy cites the same tale in "Facéties et mots subtils en françois et en italien," fol. 24. Gabriel Chappuys practically translated the Barlacchia version in his “Les Facétieuses Journées, contenans cent certaines & agréables Nouuelles: la plus part aduenues de nostre temps, les autres receuillés & choisis de tous les plus excellents autheurs estrangers qui en ont escrit" (Paris, 1584), Journée V, nouuelle vii (fol. 151a-152b). Carlo Casalicchio relates the usual story in the sixth chapter of the fifth decade of the second century of his "Utile col Dolce," first printed in 1671 and many times reprinted. The only variation of interest is that the hero is not a rustic, but a city man.2 Count d'Ouville, about 1640, adapted the story to the tradition of Gascon wit and astuteness, and incidentally brought it back to one of its early forms before Petrus introduced it into Europe. Or perhaps d'Ouville simply wrote down a version that was already current among the people. A Spaniard and a Gascon met at a French inn. The hostess had only a piece of mutton and a partridge, and both guests wanted the partridge. To prevent their quarrelling, the hostess persuaded them to try the mutton and a salad, and to award the partridge next morning to whichever had had the finer dream. While the Spaniard passed the night in excogitation, the Gascon arose and ate the partridge. The next day the Spaniard told how he had dreamed the heavens opened and angels bore him aloft with splendid music. The Gascon replied, "Cap de bious ie vous ay bien veu aller en Paradis, i'ay creu que vous n'en reuiendriez point. Ce qui fait que i'ay mangé la perdrix." s The same version is told in slightly different language in "Nouveaux contes à rire et aventures plaisantes de ce tems, ou récréations françoises" (Nouvelle édition, augmentée & corrigée, Cologne, 1709), “Un Espagnol & un Gascon en dispute pour une Perdrix." 1 Scelte di Facetie, Motti, Burle, e Buffonerie Del Piouano Arlotto & altri Autori. Di nuouo racconcie, e messe insieme. Venetia, 1599. Facetie de Barlacchia, fol. 59a-60b. G. Marchesi, Per la storia della novella italiana nel secolo 17 (Roma, 1897), p. 182. Les Contes aux Heures Perdues du Sieur D'Ouville (Paris, 1655), 1: 365. On d'Ouville cf. Ristelhuber, Elite des Contes du Sieur d'Ouville (Paris, 1876), Introduction. P. 312. Oesterley, referring probably to an earlier edition, gives the page as 273. Toward the end of the eighteenth century Barthélemi Imbert honored the more usual version with a rendering in irregular metre, entitled "Les deux bourgeois et le villain." Since he follows the "Disciplina" story in the main outline, and since he has used the same title, he presumably drew from the Old French translation printed by Labouderie or from the modern version by LeGrand D'Aussy. He modernized the details, however, and in having the first bourgeois taken to hell by two angels, and the second to paradise by two cherubim, he departed from his source. The last stanza will illustrate Imbert's manner. Le Villageois les entend à merveille; Mais il feint de dormir. Les deux amis s'en vont Droit à son lit; on le réveille; Et lui, comme sortant d'un sommeil très profond, -Oh! j'en ai fait un singulier, Répond le villageois; et j'ose parier Lorsque je vous ai vus, par des chemins divers, Vous retiendroient: dans ce malheur nouveau And finally, in the nineteenth century, with the title "Der angenehmste Traum," our story was taken into the Nasreddin tradition by a German poet writing under the name of Murad Efendi.? Einmal, 's war auf einer Reise, Die zur Fahrt sich an ihn schlossen. Winkt dem Popen, doch der Rabbi Seine Hand darauf der Pope. 1 Barthélemi Imbert, Choix de Fabliaux, mis en vers (Genève et Paris, 1788) 1: 290. Nassreddin Chodja, Ein osmanischer Eulenspiegel, von Murad Efendi, 2d ed., Oldenburg (preface dated Konstantinopel, 1877), pp. 82-85 (No. 23). For a transcript of this version I am indebted to Professor Taylor, who used a copy very courteously lent him from the John G. White Collection of the Cleveland Public Library. On Nasreddin see the excellent edition by A. Wesselski, Weimar, 1911 (reviewed in Národpisný Vestnik Ceskoslovenskoy, 7-8, Aug.-Sept. 1912; and by R. Basset in Revue des Traditions Populaires, 27 [1912]: 540). The collection of Murad Efendi was mentioned by R. Köhler, Klein. Schriften, I: 481 et seq. The Chodja Nasreddin put an end to the lively dispute of the priest and the rabbi by suggesting that they buy a "honey-cake" with the money at the next inn. But when they came to divide the cake, another quarrel arose. Hei! War das ein Schelten, Fluchen Des Beschnitt'nen und Getauften! Wenn in einer Mordspelunke Trunkene Matrosen rauften, Wär's nicht toller; ja, schon streiften Ihre Bärte an's Zerzausen. Again Nasreddin quieted the contestants by proposing to decide the ownership by the dream test. The two then soon fell asleep, but Nur dem Chodja fiel kein Mohnkern Auf das Bett von grünen Blättern, The rabbi dreamed that Abraham led him to a great hall where all the treasures of the world were spread out, and invited him to take whatever he wished. The priest dreamed he was in heaven among the Elect, and saw also the torments of the damned. Nasreddin stroked his beard, and a satisfied smile played about his lips; This lively version strongly suggests the story of the Moslem, the Jew, and the Christian, related above. It is chiefly in narrative technic that the two differ. The three persons are the same, and finding of the coin and the purchase of the honey-cake (halwa) are identical. The protagonist, however, is not the Jew, but Nasreddin, the Mohammedan, and therefore the "dreams" are re-adjusted to suit the change of emphasis. Whether Murad Efendi's source was the Persian "Mesnewi" or the Arabic "Nozhat el Odaba," I do not know. It is more likely that the story circulates orally among the Mohammedans, perhaps associated with Nasreddin; or it may be that Murad Efendi was the first to adapt it to the tradition of the famous humorist. The story of the "Three Dreams" is found also in "Almanach pittoresque" (1848, pp. 186-188; 1876, pp. 232–236) and in Charles Simond, "Les vieux fabliaux français" (No. 104 of Nouvelle bib. pop. à 10 c., 1888), pp. 29-30; and in "Marmite," 1894, No. 20 |