called "troubadours." In these minstrels or jougleurs,
though sometimes strolling independently, being often attached to great
households, we find an element of the domestic, or as he is called,
court fool, and we find another in their performances being of that
primitive character, which appeals chiefly to the perception of the
senses. For although the "jocular" part, originally subordinate, had
been increased, it took so rude a form that the ludicrous was not always
easily distinguished from the humorous. The Fool was a strange mixture
of both, varying from a mere idiot and butt to a man of genius, far
superior to his masters. He made shrewd remarks, and performed senseless
antics, the city fool, on Lord Mayor's day, was to jump clothes and all
into a large bowl of custard. To a certain extent he generally
corresponded with his name in having some mental weakness or
eccentricity, and it was a recommendation if he were dwarfish or
deformed. He wore a "motley" suit of discordant colours to make him
ridiculous, and correspond with the incongruity of his mind and
actions--a dress similar to the hundred patched _paniculus centunculus_
of the Roman mimes. Sometimes he wore a petticoat or calf-skin to
resemble an idiot. Finally, he had his head shaved and wore a cowl to
make him like a monk, as his buffooneries would thus have a stranger
character, and the nobles had no great affection for the church.[50] The
domestic fool was common in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries up to
the time of Louis XIV.; but it is said that there were such men at the
Court of Louis le Debonnaire. Giraldus Cambrenses writes that when he
was preaching for the Crusades in South Wales, one John Spang "who by
simulating fatuity, and having a quick tongue was wont to be a great
comfort to the court," said to Resus, the king: "You should be greatly
indebted to your relative the Archdeacon for sending a hundred of your
men to day to follow Christ, and if he had spoken Welsh I do not believe
that one of all your people would remain to you." This was towards the
end of the twelfth century, but it does not seem clear that John Spang
was a court jester. We may fairly consider that the institution of the
domestic fools, the employment of men, who professed jocularity as a
branch of art distinct from music and legerdemain increased mental
activity, and a growing desire for humour. But the men who made jesting
their profession were generally regarded with c