In this conference, Assagioli recommends that we never attack our opponents, but rather use judo: “the method of judo is to never attack, to wait for the opponent to attack, and then elegantly overturn him.”
By Roberto Assagioli, 1972, Originally Two documents From the Assagioli Archive – Florence, Translated from Italian by Jan Kuniholm & Amanda Mattiussi. Original Title: CONVEGNO DEI MEDICI
Editor’s Note: […] indicates a passage missing in the original transcript.
INTRODUCTION BY DR. ASSAGIOLI
Morning of November 4, 1972
Dear friends:
First of all I give you my happy and cordial welcome. I have used the word “friends” not in the generic and usual sense, but in the authentic and original sense of true friendship.
Friendship, which at present in our competitive and extroverted civilization is little felt and poorly manifested, is actually one of the highest expressions of the human soul. It is the basis of mutual understanding, and of all understanding and cooperation in common work. Now, with the rise of humanistic psychology, there are signs of a reappraisal of friendship. A recent issue of the fine journal Humanitas is devoted entirely to friendship, and contains valuable contributions that I would like to discuss, and have the Institute discuss later.
Friendship implies concord, in its etymological sense of union of hearts. It does not imply any mental uniformity or conformism: it allows for differences in conceptions, opinions, methods and types of activity: it is a unity in diversity. Every diversity can be useful and enrich the common work if it is based on this internal harmony (I remember the saying, Concordia parvae res crescunt, discordia maximae dilabuntur[1]). Therefore, I believe it is opportune that we all assume this inner attitude of concord and friendship more and more. This implies refraining from competition and from any tendency towards supremacy and self-assertion. Instead, there can be constructive emulation, i.e., each one tries to do the best he can in his own field, and then brings it to the attention of others and makes it available to the common work. This implies refraining from judgments, criticisms and useless arguments, and is expressed in the beautiful verse by Tommaso Campanella: “In God we shall see who did and said it best.” This would be a radical solution to many, and perhaps to all, conflicts; but I believe it applies specifically to us who seek to represent, express and implement the spirit of synthesis. We have the honor and the burden of leading by example in this regard.
After this introduction, I would like to ask Attorney Pratesi, a member of the Institute’s Board of Directors, to take the chair at our meeting.
[1] Latin: “As concord makes small things grow, discord brings the greatest to ruin.”* * *
Before beginning our work, we would like to address our thoughts and hearts, in a few minutes of silence, to Gabriello Cirinei [2] who has left this plane of life, and we remember with deep appreciation and gratitude the active and intelligent work he carried out here with full dedication. His daughter, Prof. Maria Luisa Cirinei, who is here with us, to whom we express all our sympathy and participation in her sorrow, intends to publish a more extensive diary left by her father, and we hope that a collection of his main writings may also be published. We gather in silence.
[2] Author of Psychosynthesis: The Way to Inner Freedom, and other works, and teacher at the Istituto di psicosintesi for many years.* * *
We now share the letters of friends and collaborators who could not be present here today. Dr. D’Attoma of Ostuni; Dr. Peresson of Pordenone; Dr. Pontalti of Bolzano; and I read the telegram sent by the Mayor of Capolona, who was also unable to attend.
* * *
In a moment I will ask the representatives of the various Psychosynthesis Centers and Groups to present the work they have done during this year, and the program of what they propose to do from now on. But first I think it appropriate to recall the principles and general direction of our work. (As you know, repetition is one of the techniques of psychosynthesis…as it is of advertising). I believe that our most important and central task is that of our personal training, both individually and in small groups. This means experimenting on ourselves with the various techniques, and adopting those that turn out to be useful. Another important task is the training — individually and in small groups — of other collaborators: the “training of workers.” This is urgent since psychosynthesis is spreading widely and there is a great demand for collaborators, both in existing Centers and Groups, and in others that will be formed.
Another fundamental point to keep in mind is that of the different fields of development and application of psychosynthesis. There are:
- The therapeutic field, with its many possibilities. This, however, cannot be included in the direct activities of the Institute of Psychosynthesis which, being a non-profit organization, is of a cultural nature and must abstain from any activity that might have professional characteristics.
- The educational field in the broad sense, in which many activities have already been carried out with good prospects for development.
- The field of self-education and self-realization of people or groups who have existential problems and who feel the need or aspiration to integrate their personalities and to realize their latent transpersonal potentialities.
- The field of interpersonal, group and social psychosynthesis is of unlimited vastness. It ranges from the psychosynthesis of the couple (such a current and urgent problem) to the psychosynthesis of ever larger groups, up to the psychosynthesis of nations and the whole of humanity.
These fields should not be considered rigidly separate, indeed there may be some overlapping; however, they are and should be kept distinct. Some Centers or some collaborators can deal with only one of them. For example, in England there is the Psychosynthesis and Education Trust, which deals exclusively with educational applications. In the Bleu-Léman International Women’s Institute in Villeneuve, Switzerland, psychosynthesis is the subject of teaching and exercises. The same is done at the Centre Recherche et Rencontres in Paris. In Bologna, the Psychosynthesis Center affiliated with our Institute carries out its activity in the educational field; while in the same city, Dr. Aleandri carries out therapeutic activity in a specialized psychosynthesis practice, and has founded a Biopsychosynthesis Association to carry out the work of diffusion in a wider field, and also to deal with topics that do not fall within the framework of psychosynthesis.
On the other hand, doctors or psychotherapists, and clinical psychologists can set up groups dedicated exclusively or predominantly to psychosynthetic therapy. These groups will have to be autonomous; that is, not “formally” connected to the Institute, but of course they can receive encouragement and help from it. As for their formal structure, I believe it is opportune to wait for the expected recognition of psychotherapy as a teaching subject in universities. This will greatly facilitate the activity of psychotherapy groups inspired by the principles and methods of psychosynthesis.
With regard to future work, it seems to me that it may consist first of all in the extensive and intensive development of what has been carried out so far: more communication between the various Centers and Groups, with periodic communication about what is being done, and collaboration in the sense of circulation of speakers from one Center to another.
In addition, there can be participation in Congresses and Meetings of various kinds, especially in meetings of Societies with similar orientations, for example the Italian Society of Psychosomatic Medicine, etc. and extensive dissemination through articles and lectures to new audiences; articles and reviews in various journals. More specifically, psychosynthesis can be introduced into existing areas, organizations, and movements, such as schools, teacher training, new therapeutic centers, etc. Also, lectures can be recorded, and especially exercises on tape or cassettes (e.g., Disidentification Exercise, Evocation of Serenity, Blossoming of the Rose, etc.) and distributed to be read and commented on in other Centers.
Finally, two coincidences are significant and very encouraging for us. In these very days, and here in Florence, two great events are taking place that are imbued with a synthetic spirit and that constitute psychosynthetic implementations on a large scale, even if they do not use the term “psychosynthesis.”
The first is the International Montessori Congress. Anyone who is familiar with Maria Montessori’s books and the animating spirit of her method will easily see how similar, one might even say in part identical, it is to the principles and methods of psychosynthetic education. The Montessori Congress is currently being attended by our friend Prof. Leo Magnino, who is part of the Committee of the Psychosynthesis Center of Rome.
The other event is that of Mani Tese[3], which has organized a week of world education, to contribute toward the preparation of a generation of open-minded and conscious people of universal brotherhood: the “Citizens of the World.” The work done by Mani Tese is a serious undertaking, that over the years has resulted in the implementation of five hundred small and large projects spread across all continents by tens of thousands of young people who have raised more than two billion lire. This is an effective beginning for psychosynthesis, which is implemented by the “bottom-up push” of the new generation of young people, while the governments of the various nations are slowly and laboriously trying to create agreements and cooperation between nations and groups of nations. Our Institute has limited financial resources, which are insufficient to take advantage of the various opportunities to extend the work; nevertheless, I will propose to the Board of Directors to offer Mani Tese a second symbolic contribution of ten thousand lire (the first was given last year) as a sign of our support and appreciation for their work of worldwide psychosynthesis.
[3] Mani Tese is an Italian non-profit organization which works internationally with volunteers for global citizenship education, equity, justice, non-violence, environmental sustainability, etc. —Ed.
Morning of November 5, 1972
Dr. Assagioli – Before I talk about inter-individual psychosynthesis, I’ll add a few things about techniques. I don’t know whether I spoke yesterday about breaking vicious cycles — No? Well, this is a very important technique, in all fields, because without realizing it we create vicious cycles, and we develop symptoms or fixations in the psychological sense rather than in the psychiatric sense. It is easy: for example, someone feels depressed. Feeling and realizing that he is depressed, however, depresses him even more, and thus adds a further depressive charge to the one already present. The realization that he is depressed because of the fact that he is depressed, then adds a third charge, and so we can go on… However, the three charges already have the effect of establishing depression, and so one identifies with depression to such an extent that it becomes difficult to fight it.
Another very obvious example is that of irritation: one feels irritated, and then becomes irritated with oneself for the foolishness of being irritated; but then one becomes even more irritated with oneself for the fact of being irritated over being irritated. Now, this applies in many fields, both in therapy, in education and in self-education, and therefore it becomes fundamental to discover one’s own vicious cycles, to notice them and break them, or even better to neutralize them with opposing virtuous cycles, which I would call them for contrast. That is, if one feels happy, or if one succeeds in arousing joy within oneself, feeling happy to be happy, over the fact of having succeeded in being happy. And so then be glad to have succeeded in feeling glad for the fact of being glad. And the same can be done for example for serenity, or for all other positive qualities. It sounds like Columbus’ egg,[4] but it isn’t. And many times, even though we know it, we don’t notice it, so much so that we get used to these vicious cycles. So I highly recommend this technique.
Another very important point is what to do with the combative energies. We all have them more than we think we do, both conscious and unconscious; and then the collective unconscious of humanity is so pervaded by combativeness and aggressiveness that we absorb them from the environment, and we have to be careful about that too. Many things are not our own, but are waves that reach us, either by external suggestion from newspapers, films or television, or telepathically by psychic sensitivity from outside. So combativeness and aggressiveness are the expression of the most fundamental instinct, of self-preservation, that is in all living beings, which then develops into self-assertion.
For oneself, as long as it does not find obstacles, this does not arouse aggression; but if, instead, it finds obstacles in the self-assertion of others, or in external situations, then aggression is immediately triggered, even towards oneself, or towards elements of oneself. So here, too, beware of aggression in all its overt, and especially subtle, forms. Then pay attention to aggression in our personal environment, between us and our various activities. It is inevitable; it is important to be aware of it and to keep it at bay, without being surprised or scandalized to discover it in ourselves or in others; it is one of the fundamental existential problems.
So, what to do about aggression? Transmute it, sublimate it and use it. It is not something to be condemned, but it is a natural force, and therefore it is a matter of mastering it. So, as a sublimation, I would say that it is a matter of raising its level, that is, transmuting it into indignation: there are many things that can make us indignant, both in the social field and in the educational one. So a “healthy combativeness” — never personal, but of principles and methods — is a good way to use our fighting energies.
Then in this we can and should make a unified front toward what is anti-psychosynthetic, but never attack. I don’t know if you read that American article: one thing that was particularly appreciated was that it didn’t attack any other method, any other technique, any other thing, whereas usually the representatives of the various techniques squabble among themselves. This was very much appreciated. Let’s try to do it here in Italy as well, and let it be appreciated here as well. So never attack first, and expect attacks instead: these are a good sign, it means they are considering us. Up to now there has been a conspiracy of silence — not really a conspiracy, but let’s say that we have been ignored as a negligible quantity; but now that psychosynthesis is establishing itself, of course they will attack it. And this is a very good sign!
Now the method. I am not familiar with judo, but I believe that the method of judo is to never attack, to wait for the opponent to attack, and then elegantly overturn him. I therefore recommend the judo method: never attack, wait for the aggressiveness of others and then elegantly, excuse the word, “flip the omelette:” turn the situation around at the right moment, when the opponent has fired his bullets, when he has exhausted his strength and takes a breath — then! In spite of this, our answers — however good-natured but realistic, highlighting the deficiencies of others — will certainly increase their aggressiveness, because they will feel defeated in a certain sense; however, this is inevitable. So never attack, but make an objective defense by highlighting the differences, and implicitly show the superiority of the universalist synthetic position over any other particularistic position. It is not the merit of psychosynthesis per se, but it is the fact that psychosynthesis adopts a reality whereby the world is one, humanity is one. In short, it adopts the holistic and integral concept. If they will sleep on our answers, they will be able to refer to that French saying: “This animal is very bad, when you attack it, it defends itself”. Defense is permissible, and it is not malicious. It would be stupid not to defend oneself in this sense. But always do it impersonally, without ever descending to the level of personality.
There would be much, very much to say personally about the various movements as well, but that’s not the case, it’s not up to us. What I can say in general, without naming anyone, is that practically in all the founders of the psychotherapeutic schools there were neurotic components present. This fact has now been brought out by more or less benign critics. But this is an entirely natural fact, and it was this which gave them the impetus, which compelled them to deal with certain matters for personal reasons. The discovery of neurotic elements or symptoms in them is not for us to point out, but it is nevertheless good to see clearly, and to see in what way this has conditioned their movements, their doctrines and their theories. One of the basic principles is that no one is 100% healthy, and no one is 100% sick. The greatest people have had neurotic symptoms. I will give an example outside of our field. Alessandro Manzoni[5] had strong neurotic symptoms: he had a phobia of puddles of water, he could not cross them, and he had other neurotic symptoms. Then also there were numerous saints.
But the fact of discovering these limitations does not justify using them in counterattacks. Rather, let us try not to put anyone first on a pedestal, and then — when it turns out that the idol has a foot of clay — to be indignant about it. This, too, comes from that American article. It is the polypsychism or plurality of subpersonalities in us that make for jarring, and I would say surprising, contrasts in everyone. Here too there are illustrious examples: in Dante, despite all our admiration for his genius, we must recognize that he had a personality with characteristics […] Another typical example is Balzac, who on the one hand wrote two works of very high transpersonal spirituality. One is […] and the other is […], in which the reality of the androgyne as the ultimate goal is proposed perhaps better than in any other. Well, Balzac himself wrote also […], which are rather clearly pornographic works. From the same hand came out completely opposite things. So: great understanding and tolerance, to avoid any personalism. Excuse me for saying these things based on my more than semi-secular experience, but […].
Then always have faith in changes and transformations. Two transformations that I would never have expected have happened to me recently. Two of the leaders of Esalen Institute came to me, and they were focusing everything on sensations, sexuality, and the uncontrolled discharge of inner emotions. I didn’t say a word against that, I just talked about psychosynthesis. I said: psychology is a building: there are sewers, cellars, and low floors; but in addition to the low and middle floors there are also upper floors; and above all, don’t put roofs but terraces, where you can sunbathe and contemplate the stars in the evening. Obvious symbolism. Well! This was accepted in full, and then I continued: of course the terrace and the high floors cannot stand in mid-air, they need foundations, the earth, etc..
So this integral or integralist attitude did […] Since they had arrived quite dissatisfied with what they had done in themselves and in their work, they accepted the idea of “the upper floors” very well, and now back at Esalen they have spread this transpersonal aspect of psychosynthesis, adding it to what they were already doing, and they continue to do this, without denying it at all. Then just this morning I learned of a transformation that I would not have expected, of an orthodox psychoanalyst who has treated his wife and daughter with psychosynthesis. I won’t mention any names, but even with my optimism, of which I am accused, I certainly wouldn’t have expected this.
Well, now let’s move on to inter-individual psychosynthesis. You say something too. We are in a New Age, and this is the most delicate, difficult and in a certain sense most urgent field in the contemporary crisis of the family, the school, politics and even the economy.
The first challenge is that of psychosynthesis of the couple. You know how many couples break up, but there is a general principle. The causes of the greatest difficulties and problems are: one, that I have already mentioned, is individual, group, and collective aggression, etc.; the other is unrealistic idealism. There may in fact be people having the best of intentions to achieve the psychosynthesis of the couple, but who make it an unattainable ideal or idealized model. The psychosynthesis of the couple is a delicate, arduous, gradual and above all always relative work, which in a sense must be redone every day. And then there can be a satisfactory psychosynthesis of the couple that is only partial: two spouses may very well agree to “let each other off the hook” in certain areas, but understand each other and cooperate in others. Never look for uniformity; as the British say, “agree to disagree” on various points.
This point that applies to the couple also applies to all interpersonal and group relationships. Turning now precisely to humanity, of course the ideal of a world government is magnificent, and we hope that in a not distant future it can be realized. But for now it is impossible, and any attempt in this sense can only fail. In order to make a world government we need world citizens, and they don’t exist. So first it is necessary to create world citizens — patiently, individually, in small and large groups; and when there are a sufficient number of such world citizens, then by degrees it will be possible to arrive at world political and social organizations.
And just as there are no world citizens, there are also no people of sufficient psycho-spiritual caliber to be world leaders. In fact, let’s suppose that one wanted to set up a world government: who would it be composed of? Without, of course, wishing to be political, I really don’t see anyone on the political, economic and social scene who has the caliber to be a world leader; and we would need many of them. So you see that we need to be able to distinguish; it has been said that politics is the art of the possible, that is, to distinguish what is possible. So: gradualness and relativity.
The same applies to complete pacifism. If people are armed against each other with weapons, material disarmament does not resolve the situation. So, here too, realism: human nature must be modified gradually, and only then can the structures be adequate and functional. So: the ability to relativize, and patience, with extended cycles. Observe the pacifist movements: they have often done more harm than good, precisely because of their intransigent idealist attitude of all or nothing, rejection of weapons; but they are not […] Maybe, but humanity is not yet mature enough for this.
All this is only in general terms, then everyone can apply it in all fields: to the couple and the family group, relationships between parents and children, social groups, classes, unions, professional groups and so on. And so to the nations. I would say that idealists and pacifists would even deny the existence of nations, but nations are psychological realities that are charged with emotion — charged with energies that are not only combative, but also emotive in other ways. Here, too, one must work on sublimation and elevation, but not repress what is called “patriotism,” that is, a certain attachment to one’s own nation. The same principle then applies at all levels; and if we keep it well in mind, we will avoid other counterproductive situations, and of tilting against windmills like Don Quixote.
So always propose constructive methods and techniques, without attacking anyone else. In this case, I did not attack pacifists, but I attacked the unrealistic pacifist idealism. But among these idealists there are some of the best representatives of humanity — some are my friends whom I appreciate very much and who are worth much more than the narrow realism and the easy criticism of conservatives and profiteers. So personally they are above me, but their methods do not work. As usual, I wanted to give a general overview. Now it is up to you to apply it in all fields, including psychosynthesis groups. I hope that those who are silent will agree.
Dr. Fer. – I have too much aggression to speak. I didn’t get the second circular, so I ended up going to Capolona.
Dr. Assagioli – I am very sorry, but it was recorded, so you will be able to hear it. As you heard, we did a tune-up this morning.
Dr. Ale. – One of the most interesting aspects of the experience that you had with Stuart Miller [of Esalen Institute], lies in the fact that you pointed out the difference between synthesis criteria and eclectic criteria. Between eclecticism and actual synthesis.
Dr. Assagioli – Exactly, one must not forget that psychosynthesis is not eclectic. Recall the two analogies we often use, for example that of the building: the building is not eclectic, it is unitary, the floors are distinct from each other; and the other of the orchestra, there is no eclecticism in playing a symphony, only strict unity with distinction of functions between instruments and various groups of instruments. So we reject any charge of eclecticism.
Dr. Ale. – So in Miller’s case he had a range of knowledge that was all placed at the same level, both gestalt psychology and the different techniques. They employed techniques, and the techniques placed side by side do not constitute a hierarchical functional structure, as happens in synthesis, in the structure leading to synthesis. What […] seen from the criterion of approach of a North American, the points of view brought here are very interesting.
Dr. Assagioli – Stuart Miller’s points of view were also transformative for me.
Dr. Ale. – Yes, I saw that. The necessary criteria of structure of dynamics, evolutionary dynamics, functional dynamics, without which one cannot think in terms of synthesis, come out. The attitude: it takes a certain mentality for the synthesis, a mentality that must necessarily be developed, because the way thought works is such that if it starts from the synthesis, it must open up in the analysis, and then return to the synthesis.
Dr. Assagioli – Like the digestion of food.
Dr. Ale. – Protein synthesis: turning animal protein into human protein is quite a job of analysis and resynthesis.
Dr. Assagioli – Splitting peptones and then rebuilding.
Dr. Rac. – In the face of the aggression that each of us faces, there is also an aggression present in each of us. What is the attitude we need to have in the face of our own aggression? First of all, make yourself aware of it.
Dr. Assagioli – It’s the same thing: transmute it, sublimate it and direct it towards constructive goals.
Dr. Rac. – But this is a work that each of us must do on ourselves. That is, each of us is in turn both a patient and a doctor.
Dr. Assagioli – Precisely. There is an important concept that you have given me the opportunity to recall: that of the right balance — very difficult to achieve — between static structure and dynamic development. In general we tend to overestimate things; therefore we pass from chaos to eclecticism, from eclecticism to static structures, and from static structures we pass to the dynamic flow of life. Now here too biology gives us a clear example: the growth of the fetus, or from infant to adult, is an increasing and creative functional development, but within a structure of the human body that essentially does not change. It is wonderful how, let’s call it nature, or even better, life, is able to make a body grow proportionally in all its aspects without fundamentally changing its structure. It’s a miracle, and they don’t understand it.
Dr. Rac. – Isn’t there a finalism, a biological purpose?
Dr. Assagioli – Certainly.
Dr. Bar. – It becomes collective. If it is not individually variable as it becomes collective.
Dr. Rac. – But there is a biological purposefulness behind it. As the divine Master said. From the fertilized egg, which reaches the fetus, and then to the human being who emerges from the confinement of the maternal womb, there is a law that is universal with respect to that given manifestation.
Dr. Assagioli – The same occurs at the other octaves. At the psychological octave all evolutionary psychology is based on that; Maria Montessori especially highlighted this miracle of the child building the egg into itself, often in spite of parents and school. This is really the concept of dynamic growth of a structure. And there is this psychological finalism or purposefulness. At the third octave there is transpersonal or spiritual purposefulness. And also that one follows the same law.
So three purposes that integrate into the immense teleology of the Cosmos. Looking also to inorganic life, it is the great principle of syntropy, as opposed to entropy — which has dominated and still dominates the minds of many materialists. But now the concepts of syntropy and synergy are becoming more and more affirmed by Teilhard de Chardin, Maslow and others. As you can see, we are in good company.
Dr. Rac. – But after all, biological laws, psychological laws and what we call spiritual laws, or even the laws of Heaven, are analogous, they are not different. They are perfectly analogous, only the dimension changes.
Dr. Assagioli – They are analogous, but they operate in different ways.
Dr. Rac. – The dimensions change, but they are analogous, therefore, as Hermes Trismegistus said: “as above, so below.”
Dr. Assagioli – What I have called for many years the hierarchy of laws; and which Maslow, independently, took up with the hierarchy of needs… It is good to see this independent convergence of various researchers. Another point, another principle of inter-individual psychosynthesis, etc., is that of the balancing of opposites: that is, that any synthesis, any balancing, must take place at a higher level than that at which the opposites adjust or oscillate. This is presented in my booklet, that you know. Like all of these things that we said yesterday and today, they also integrate and combine with each other.
Miss Ida Palombi – They are asking to come back to the problem of the Self with a scientific discourse.
Dr. Assagioli – I was afraid it would come to this. At present I can say very little. First of all let us say that there is no problem of the Self at all. Instead, there is a living reality of which we can have an existential experience. So it is not a matter of talking about the Self, of discussing the Self, of wondering what it is and what it is not, whether it exists or does not exist. It is a question of using methods to experience it. When you have experienced it, you shut up, as the Buddha did, because the Self by its nature is ineffable.
The Self is beyond any mental description, even any simple intuition: it is a full and integral experience, which “cannot be understood by those who do not experience it.” So the answer is: use the techniques to realize the Self. And I conclude with the cordial wish that you do realize it.
Now implement it, put it into practice.
And I end with a motto of the Benedictine Order:
In necessariis unitas
in dubiis libertas
in omnibus caritas.
(Unity in what is necessary,
freedom in what is doubtful,
charity in all things).
Then if there are special agreements, something you can do among yourselves, even in writing, make proposals. This is but one session, to be followed by others. I hope that in the spring we will be able to have a meeting at Villa Ilario, above Capolona; you will be notified in time by registered mail.
Miss Ida Palombi – I do not understand how Dr. Ferioli did not receive it.
Dr. Assagioli – I understand everything with the Italian postal service. So these two days were just a catching up. Now it is up to you to work, and in the spring report what you have done. We will take stock and make a new round of working agreements. Say — I have to go, not to rest, but I have some private conversations for business reasons, but if you want you can stay in happy conversations.
[4] “Columbus’ Egg” refers to a brilliant idea or discovery that seems simple or easy after the fact. The story told by Girolamo Benzoni in his Historia del Mondo Nuovo of 1565 was that at a meal several of Columbus’s detractors began to comment that any number of other people could have found their way to the New World and that Columbus’s feat was unremarkable because of its simplicity. Columbus replied that it was only easy now that he had demonstrated how it was done, and by way of an example, he challenged anyone present to stand an egg on its end. After all those attempting the feat had admitted defeat Columbus demonstrated the simplicity of the challenge by crushing one end of the egg against the table which allowed it to remain upright. — Ed.
[5] Italian poet, novelist and philosopher (1785-1873). He is famous for the novel The Betrothed (orig. Italian: I promessi sposi) (1827), generally ranked among the masterpieces of world literature. The novel is also a symbol of the Italian Risorgimento, both for its patriotic message and because it was a fundamental milestone in the development of the modern, unified Italian language. — Ed.
Leave a Reply