Large allowances must be made for those unhappy men. They cannot reasonably be blamed for not taking it upon themselves to alter the established procedure of the Court in which they sat. Their position was always difficult, and it did not become easier as time went on. They had good reason to know that a vocal group of influential persons in Salamanca confidently expected them to condemn Luis de Leon; yet some of them, at least, were uncomfortably aware that the evidence before them would not warrant a conviction on the major charges. The most damaging witnesses—Medina, Castro, and Zúñiga—had been called at a very early stage of the proceedings. These heavy guns had been fired without destroying the adversary. There was nothing for it now but to hope for the worst from the reports of the official calificadores, Dr. Cáncer, Fray Nicolas Ramos, and Dr. Frechilla, who did their utmost to fulfil expectations.[156] Lest the pronouncements of this trio proved unconvincing, the precaution was taken of excluding evidence. At the beginning of the case, any sort of second-hand gossip was admitted as evidence on the chance that its cumulative effect might be damaging to the accused. At Murcia, on February 4, 1573, a hostile Augustinian, Fray Juan Ciguelo, a man of doubtful character, was permitted to retail idle chatter on the part of another Augustinian who averred that Luis de Leon was prone to saying Requiems too often, and was in the habit of reading Latin too quickly.[157] Ciguelo's testimony, though malignant, had done no harm; later on, it was thought more prudent to adopt the opposite policy and to prevent as many as possible of the witnesses for the defence from being heard. As late as July 7, 1576, no less than three interrogatories[158] by Luis de Leon were rejected on the ground that they were irrelevant (impertinentes).[159] It is difficult to reconcile these decisions, except on the hypothesis that the later ruling was thought to be more likely to damage Luis de Leon than the earlier one. In their despair, his adversaries trumped up an assertion which was easily disproved.[160]
Disorderly and incoherent as it is, the record of the case enables us to corroborate and, in one or two trifling particulars, to supplement the details reported by Francisco Pacheco who, in his youth, may easily have met Luis de Leon and must later have known many who had seen him. According to that painter's Libro de Descripcion de verdaderos Retratos de illustres y memorables varones, Luis de Leon was below the middle height; he had a large but shapely head, covered with thick and rather curly hair which grew densely on the crown; his brow was broad; his features were more blunt than aquiline; his complexion was darkish; his green eyes were bright; his aspect was grave; and, we may add, he was prone to walk quickly. Pacheco, indeed, regarded Luis de Leon as something of a universal genius: an expert in mathematics, in jurisprudence, in medicine—and, though self-taught as a painter—an artist of considerable skill. (This last was a compliment, coming as it did from the future father-in-law of Velazquez.) Evidently Pacheco was a whole-hearted admirer whose enthusiasm needs discounting. However, so far as we can check it, his account seems to be correct in the matter of direct observation. The fact that there is scarcely one flash of humour in the interminable record of the Valladolid trial confirms Pacheco's report of the prisoner's habitual gravity. No doubt the tragic circumstances in which he found himself were not conducive to displays of humour. When being tried for his life, the merriest of men does not dwell on the innate absurdity of things. Humour was, however, one of the few gifts which nature had denied to Luis de Leon. He was aware of this himself, to judge from his statement that he had nothing of the jester or scoffer in him.[161] But if Luis de Leon was relatively poor in humour, he had an abundant store of mordant sarcasm and a faculty for ironic banter, as Medina and Castro learned to their chagrin.[162] Pacheco's opinion of Luis de Leon's versatile talent is borne out by the scrap of evidence given at the trial by Francisco de Salinas—the sightless dedicatee of El aire se serena. Salinas bore witness that some of Luis de Leon's admirers were persuaded that he could carry any University chair against all competition.[163] Evidently to those who met him frequently Luis de Leon conveyed the impression of irresistible talent. Though students voted in professorial elections at Salamanca, and supported Luis de Leon loyally, he did nothing to conciliate them, and expressed his opinion of them with unquestionable candour. We gather that he was profoundly attached to the ancient order of things[164] and that, though accused of interpreting the Bible in a rabbinical sense, he had never read a rabbinical book.[165] We learn that among his teachers were Guevara, Mancio, Cipriano, and Melchor Cano;[166] of these he would seem most to have esteemed Cano.[167] With such masters, and being the man he was, Luis de Leon would naturally have got together a good theological library, and he was allowed to have some of his books in his prison-cell; it is but natural that most of his requests should be for theological works which would be of service in preparing his defence on technical points. Reading was his sole solace during his imprisonment, and it is noticeable that, whenever he asks for a book he speaks of it—not with the dry, meticulous precision of a bibliographer but—with all the caressing detail of a genuine book-lover. He indicates the sizes of the various works which he needs, describes their bindings, and mentions in what part of his monastery-cell they will be found. He wants a Vatable with gilt edges, bound in black; it should be found in a case for smaller volumes which lies on his writing-table. He asks for a Bible, printed by Plantin, bound in black leather and fastened with black silk ribbons. He demands a Biblical concordance which is in folio. This lies on a high shelf near the window.[168] He begs to have the works of St. Justin, which will be found in the shelves on the left as you enter his monastery-cell. But not all his requests are for theological works. A true son of the Renaissance, he finds entertainment or instruction in communing with the best of antiquity. When in this mood he asks for his Aristotle bound in sheep's-skin; it will be found in the shelves on the right as you enter the monastery-cell. He would like a Horace and a Virgil—of which there are a great many ('de que hay hartos'), so that he does not particularize. He wants his Homer (in Greek and Latin) bound in sheep's-skin, and with red edges; it will be found in the shelves where the works of St. Justin are.[169] Again, besides the works of St. Leo, bound in parchment, he asks for his Sophocles in black calf; for a Pindar (in Greek and Latin), bound partly in black leather, with gilt edges; and for Le prose dil Bembo, a volume in small quarto with a parchment binding.[170] This throws light on Luis de Leon's progress as a linguist. An imprisoned man who asks for an Italian book to becalm his fever may be safely presumed to know that language. In or about 1569 when Arias Montano read aloud the anonymous Italian work which disturbed Zúñiga's scrupulous conscience, Luis de Leon, though of course able to catch the author's drift, did not really know Italian at that time.[171] This deficiency had been made good, as he gives us to understand, previous to March 12, 1573—twenty eight months, or more, before Luis de Leon asked that his copy of Le prose dil Bembo should be given to him in prison.
The record of the Valladolid trial likewise reveals to us some of Luis de Leon's intellectual foibles. But these were extremely few. Towards the end of the proceedings at Valladolid the Inquisitionary judges there summoned before them Juan Galvan, a young theological student who lodged with Salinas, the blind musician. Galvan testified that for about two years he had discussed matters of theology, mathematics, and astrology with Luis de Leon.[172] It may astonish some that Luis de Leon toyed with the pseudo-science of astrology: it cannot have surprised his judges for, on April 18, 1572, while still bewildered as to the cause of his arrest, he had stated to them in writing that he had read a compilation on astrology which had been lent to him by a student named Poza, a licentiate in canon law. Poza seems to have doubted whether he ought to keep such a work, and consulted Luis de Leon on the question. Luis de Leon dipped into the book, and came finally to the conclusion that the whole thing was rubbish. But he found in the work some curious observations, and was tempted to make at least one experiment which involved the use of a pious formula. The owner of the book left Salamanca to avoid an epidemic which was then raging there. Luis de Leon had expected a visit from Poza that day, and had intended to burn the volume in Poza's presence. He carried out the main part of his intention by burning the work in the presence of Fray Bartolomé de Carranza, to whom he explained the meaning of this holocaust. No more was heard of Poza; yet it seems that Luis de Leon's curiosity as to the possibilities of astrology continued with but little abatement.[173] This half-belief in astrology as a kind of black art was widespread during the sixteenth century, and vestiges of this ingenuous credulity have survived in unexpected quarters till our own time. It was perhaps unwise of Luis de Leon thus to furnish his adversaries with ammunition which they might use against him; but could anything bespeak conscious innocence more strongly than his voluntary avowal?
Luis de Leon heaped one indiscretion on another. In his protestations of innocence, he went so far as to suggest to the Court what course it should take. He told the judges plainly that they ought to order Leon de Castro to be prosecuted for perjury.[174] Later on, he declared with vehemence that his detention was without a shadow of legality, that his imprisonment ought not to continue for a single day, and that he ought to be compensated for the injury done him.[175] These may have been truths; but they were decidedly unpalatable, and the expediency of making these assertions to a prejudiced bench is at least doubtful. But expediency was not an arm that Luis de Leon could bring himself to use. He complained again and again of delays, attributing this loss of time to official mismanagement and incidentally reflecting on the competency of the judges. As time went on, and as the prisoner's health grew weaker, he lost patience, making his complaints of delay more frequently and with increasing vehemence.[176] He impressed on his hearers the fundamental absurdity of certain charges against him, and, waxing indignant at the statement that he had thrown doubt on the coming of Christ, he objected to having so senseless a jest fathered on him. There was always the alternative that he might be supposed to have used in earnest the words imputed to him; in which case, even if the evidence on this point were far more decisive than it actually was, 'before believing it, it would be your duty to ascertain whether I had gone out of my mind at the time, or were drunk'.[177] It is, no doubt, difficult to meet a contention of this kind; but such a contention is not calculated to capture the sympathies of a wavering Court. Nor should it be overlooked that the judges were subjected to continual pressure from the attacking parties. The official calificadores took a serious view of Luis de Leon's opinions on the authority of the Vulgate; they showered reports upon the judges; naturally these reports did not always agree with one another, but they were unanimous in one respect; they declared against the teaching of Luis de Leon,[178] and this perhaps decided the tribunal in giving judgement. We may think that the court unconsciously allowed itself to be swayed by personal prejudice against a prisoner who was at no great pains to conceal his estimate of its capacity. However that may be, it must be admitted that the decision of the Court had behind it a great body of what may be called expert opinion. The question of the authority due to the Vulgate was skilfully kept in the foreground; and the report of even so liberal-minded a man as the Dominican Hernando del Castillo was not wholly favourable. Castillo, indeed, came to the conclusion that Luis de Leon had uttered nothing against faith; but while he acquitted the prisoner of teaching 'erroneous, temerarious or scandalous doctrine', he held that Luis de Leon was much to blame for dealing with the question when and where he did.[179] The opinion of other calificadores was still more hostile, though it is to be noted that their hostility diminished as time went on and the hour for the delivery of a decision drew near.[180]
That decision had at last to be given. It had been put off year after year. This series of postponements—ordered, despite the wishes of the prisoner and (as he contended) against his interests—had got on to Luis de Leon's nerves, had led to occasional moods of depression, and had betrayed him into a few irritable or intemperate outbursts. But these results were unintentional. The Valladolid judges were well aware from the outset that no time was to be lost. As early as July 29, 1572, they delegated a piece of work to one of their commissaries in Salamanca, and impressed on him the urgency of dispatch.[181] They secured from Benito Rodriguez, the commissary in question, greater speed than they attained themselves. This may have been due to accident, or to incompetence on their part. But the policy of continual adjournment could not be prolonged for ever. It had lasted too long for the patience of the Supreme Inquisition:[182]
On September 28, 1576, a vote was taken on Luis de Leon's case. Seven members at least were present: Francisco de Menchaca, Andrés de Álava, Luis Tello Maldonado, and Francisco de Albornoz voted that Luis de Leon should be put to the torture—a moderate amount of torture in view of his frail health—and, when this was done, the court should sit again and determine accordingly. Dr. Guijano de Mercado and Dr. Frechilla took a more lenient view, recommending that, in consideration of the more exculpatory reports recently given by the calificadores, in consideration also of the replies made by the prisoner and by Mancio, Luis de Leon should be reprimanded for dealing with so grave a matter (as the authority of the Vulgate) at an unsuitable time, before an unsuitable audience; that he should be called upon to renounce publicly certain views which seemed ambiguous; that he should be told by his bishop to occupy himself with matters of general interest; that he should cease lecturing altogether; and that his Song of Solomon, done into Spanish, should be seized. The Licentiate Pedro de Castro undertook to give his decision in writing.[183] It may not have been committed to paper: at any rate, it does not appear in the record. Even the milder judgement of Guijano and Frechilla seemed excessive to the Supreme Inquisition, which curtly ordered its deputies at Valladolid to acquit Luis de Leon, to reprimand him and warn him to be more careful in future, and to confiscate the manuscript copy of his Spanish version of the Song of Solomon.[184] These orders, dated at Madrid on December 7, 1576, were, of course, obeyed.[185] As the senior member of the Court, Dr. Guijano gave the reprimand to which Luis de Leon listened, standing up while it was pronounced.[186] The date is not stated, but it cannot have been later than December 15, 1576; for on this day Luis de Leon applied in writing for an official certificate of acquittal, and for an order on the accountant of Salamanca University instructing that officer to pay him arrears of salary from the date of his arrest till his chair was vacated owing to the lapse of his four years' tenure.[187] Both applications were granted. But the Ethiopian cannot change his skin, and it was not till August 13, 1577, that the petitioner received full satisfaction.[188]
Luis de Leon administered a fund left by the late Doña Ana Abarca de Sotomayor whose servant Almansa had been. Out of this fund a life-pension was paid to Almansa (Documentos inéditos, vol. XI, p. 333), of whom Luis de Leon formed a good opinion as appears from his request of December 20, 1572 (Documentos inéditos, vol. X, p. 248): 'Yo entiendo que con la mudanza de los priores estará trastornada toda mi celda, y en poco tiempo faltará lo mas della, porque conozco en esto la condicion de mi gente; y podrá ser tener yo necesidad para mi negocio de algunas cosas della; y tambien hay cosas agenas y que estan á mi cargo dar cuenta dellas si Dios fuere servido darme libertad algun dia. Suplico á V. md. por amor de Dios sea servido de enviar á mandar al maestro Francisco Sancho, ó á Francisco de Almansa, el familiar que vino conmigo, que la cierre y tome todas las llaves y las guarde. Y este Almansa lo hará muy bien, porque es hombre de mucha verdad y recaudo. Y suplico á V. md. no lo ponga en olvido.' Perhaps this recommendation was thought suspiciously warm; at any rate, the task was entrusted to Pedro de Almansa, Familiar of the Inquisition at Salamanca.
When taken into custody, Luis de Leon seems to have been in the company of Fray Alonso Siluente (Documentos inéditos, vol. XI, p. 188).
Documentos inéditos, vol. X, p. 176. Naturally enough Luis de Leon lost exact account of time during his imprisonment, and was not very sure as to when the order for his arrest was issued: 'Y despues á veinte tres, ó veinte cuatro del dicho mes [de marzo pasado], el dicho Señor Inquisidor [Diego Gonzalez] me mandó prender, ...' (Documentos inéditos, vol. X, p. 185).
Opinions differ as to whether Luis de Leon was imprisoned in the original Inquisitionary cells on the site of which 18 and 20 calle del Obispo now stand. Blanco García thought that this was not the case (op. cit., p. 129 n). The recurrence of such phrases as mandó subir de su cárcel (Documentos inéditos, vol. XI, pp. 22, 36, 129, 196) perhaps indicates that Luis de Leon's cell was underground.
Documentos inéditos, vol. X, p. 179. 'Y suplico á sus mercedes sean servidos dar licencia para que se le diga al dicho padre prior [Fray Gabriel Pinelo] que avise á Ana de Espinosa, monja en el monasterio de Madrigal, que envíe una caja de unos polvos que ella solia hacer y enviarme para mis melancolías y pasiones de corazon, que ella sola los sabe hacer, y nunca tuve dellos mas necesidad que agora; y sobre todo que me encomiende á Dios sin cansarse.'
The tone of his request shows that he anticipated a refusal on the ground that he might wilfully injure himself with a knife: 'Tambien si sus mercedes fuesen servidos, torno á suplicar se me dé un cuchillo para cortar lo que como; que por la misericordia de Dios, seguramente se me puede dar; que jamás deseé la vida y las fuerzas tanto como agora, para pasar hasta el fin con esta merced que Dios me ha hecho por la cual yo le alabo y bendigo' (Documentos inéditos, vol. X, pp. 179-180).
The concession of the Inquisitors reads thus: 'Que se le dé esto que pide; y atento que es hombre enfermo y delicado, dijeron que mandaban y mandaron que el alcaide le dé un cuchillo sin punta. Lo cual se mandó al alcaide luego en su presencia' (Documentos inéditos, vol. X, p. 180).
It figures as the sixth charge in the speech of the prosecuting counsel, Diego de Haedo (Documentos inéditos, vol. X, p. 208). Even at this early stage, Haedo is found suggesting that the prisoner should be tortured till he tells the whole truth: 'pido sea puesto á quistion de tormento hasta que enteramente diga verdad etc.' (Documentos inéditos, vol. X, p. 209).
The date of the translation is stated on the authority of Luis de Leon himself (Documentos inéditos, vol. X, p. 98).
The exordium, the translation of the first chapter of the Song of Solomon and the commentary on this first chapter are printed in Documentos inéditos, vol. X, pp. 449-467.
Documentos inéditos, vol. X, p. 99: '...pero no obstante esto á algunos amigos mios, y á otros, les ha parecido tener inconveniente por andar en lengua vulgar; y á mí, por la misma razon, me ha pesado que ande, y si lo pudiera estorbar, lo hubiera estorbado. Y para remedio dello, el año pasado comencé á ponello en latin, para siendo examinado y aprobado, imprimillo, dando por cosa agena y no mia todo lo que anduviese en vulgar y escrito de mano. Y por la falta de salud que he tenido como es notorio, no lo he podido acabar. Y así digo que estoy presto á hacer esta ó otra cualquier diligencia que por V.m. me fuere mandada, y que me pesa de cualquier culpa que haya cometido, ó en componer en vulgar el dicho libro, ó en haber dado ocasion directa ó indirectamente á que se divulgase. Y estoy aparejado á hacer en ello la enmienda que por V.m. me fuere impuesta: y digo que subjecto humilde y verdaderamente á V.m. y á este Sancto Oficio y tribunal, ansí este dicho libro, como cualquier otra obra y doctrina que ó por escrito ó por palabra, leyendo ó disputando, ó en otra cualquier manera haya afirmado ó enseñado, para en todo ser enmendado y corregido.
Documentos inéditos, vol. X, pp. 252-254. The following occurs in a document handed in by Luis de Leon on January 26, 1573: '...digo que en fin del mes de hebrero que viene, deste presente año de setenta y tres, ó por principio de marzo, se cumple el cuadrienio por el cual me está proveida la cátreda de Durando que tengo en la universidad de Salamanca, el cual cumplido como es notorio se vacará, y no oponiéndome yo á ella otra vez, se proveerá en el que se opusiere y los estudiantes eligieren. Y aunque es verdad que yo no tengo deseo ni intento de tratar mas de escuelas, habiendo trabajado en ellas tan bien como mis concurrentes, y habiendo sacado por ocasion dellas y de sus competencias el trabajo en que estoy; pero entendiendo que si en esta coyuntura se vacase la dicha cátreda y se proveyese en otra persona, mucho número de gentes que en el reino y fuera dél tienen noticia de mi prision, y presumen por ella mal de mí, sabiendo la dicha vacatura de cátreda y provision en otra persona, no entendiendo como no entienden, ni saben la ley y estilo de la dicha universidad, me tendrian del todo por culpado y condenado, y quedaria siempre en pie esta mala opinion contra mí, aunque Vs. Mds. conociendo en la prosecucion deste pleito mi inocencia, me den por libre y me restituyan en mi honra como espero en Dios que sucederá; porque las sobredichas personas que no saben el estilo de la dicha universidad, viéndome fuera destas cárceles, y fuera de las escuelas, siempre entenderian que fué órden de Vs. Mds. y pena de mi culpa, siendo como son los hombres fáciles á creer lo peor, en lo cual mi órden y mis deudos, y lo que es principal, la opinion de mi fé y doctrina recibiria notable agravio y detrimento; por tanto en la mejor manera y conforme á derecho haya lugar, pido y suplico á Vs. Mds. sean servidos de ó mandar á la dicha universidad que no innove cosa alguna acerca de la dicha cátreda, ni de otra cosa que me toque hasta que Vs. Mds. habiendo conocido los méritos deste pleito juzguen y manden lo que fueren servidos conforme á justicia, ó me den licencia para... dar poder á dos ó las demas personas que me pareciere en Salamanca, porque por mí y en mi nombre, al tiempo que se vacare la dicha cátreda, se puedan oponer y opongan á ella, y hagan por mí las demas diligencias que conforme á las leyes y estatutos de aquella universidad fueren necesarias.'
This is recorded in a letter from Francisco Sancho to the Valladolid Inquisitors (Documentos inéditos, vol. X, p. 135): 'Tres cartas tengo á que responder á Vs. Mds. La una es sobre la cátedra del maestro Barrientos, en la cual mandan Vs. Mds. que diga al rector de esta universidad, como está detenido en ese Santo Oficio, y que en tanto que estuviere ansí detenido, no se provea su cátedra, ni se haga mudanza en ello. Y luego que recebí la dicha carta, que fué estando con el mesmo rector, se la mostré y dijo que ansí lo haria y cumpliria de buena voluntad.'
Gonzalez de Tejada, op. cit., pp. 44-46. No time was wasted in filling the chair. It was declared vacant on March 30, 1573; Medina was elected to it on April 4; he received 95 votes, and the Augustinian Pedro de Uceda received 54. Uceda (Documentos inéditos, vol. X, pp. 85-90) testified in favour of Fray Luis de Leon; his evidence gives the impression that he was a timid man, overawed by the court.
The Inquisitioners' phrase (Documentos inéditos, vol. X, p. 180) has been already quoted: 'atento que es hombre enfermo....'
Documentos inéditos, vol. XI, p. 188: 'E antes de ser llevado á su cárcel, dijo quél está muy enfermo de calenturas como á sus mercedes les consta, y no tiene quien le cure en su cárcel sino un mochachico que está allí preso, que es simple; y para habelle de despertar padece trabajo con él, y ha venido dia de quedarse desmayado de hambre por no tener quien le dé la comida; y que suplica á sus mercedes le den un fraile de su órden que le sirva, pues en esto no hay enconveniente, si ya no quieren permitir de que muera entre cuatro paredes solo: que por reverencia de nuestro Señor se duelan dél y le den un fraile que esté en su compañía siquiera para que si se muere le ayude á bien morir; y que podrá ser que fray Alonso Siluente, que á la sazon que á este prendieron estaba en su compañía, holgaria de venir á tenérsela si está en Salamanca, ó sino que sea quien sus mercedes mandaren. Con tanto fué llevado á su cárcel.'
Documentos inéditos, vol. XI, p. 197. In a letter which reached Madrid on November 21, 1575, Luis de Leon wrote as follows to the Inquisitor-General: 'Por lo cual y atento... a lo mucho que ha que estoy preso, y á mis pasiones y flaquezas, en caso que pareciere ser conveniente que la sentencia deste pleito se dilate; suplico á V.S. Illma. por Jesucristo sea servido, dando yo fianzas suficientes, mandarme poner en un monasterio de los que hay en esta villa, aunque sea en S. Pablo, en la forma que V.S. Illma. fuese servido ordenar, hasta la sentencia deste negocio, para que si en este tiempo el Señor me llamare, lo cual debo temer por el mucho trabajo que paso y por mis pocas fuerzas, muera como cristiano entre personas religiosas, ayudado de sus oraciones, y recebiendo los sacramentos, y no como infiel solo en una cárcel y con un moro á la cabecera.'
Documentos inéditos, vol. XI, p. 194: 'Tambien se consultó á su Señoría Reverendísima lo que escribís cerca de la indispusicion del maestro fray Luis de Leon y la necesidad que tiene de servicio, el cual pide que en el monesterio de Sant Augustin de Salamanca ó en el de esta villa se pida un fraile que esté con él, y ha parescido que así se haga; pero adviérteseos que el fraile que se le hubiere de dar no ha de salir de la compañía del dicho fray Luis hasta que se acabe su causa, y ansí será bien se le avise al que hubiere de ser antes que entre en las cárceles.'
Documentos inéditos, vol. XI, pp. 50-51: '...ha tres años que estoy preso, y todo este tiempo he estado sin el uso de los sacramentos con detrimento de mi ánima, y sin causa que conforme á derecho obligase á Vs. Mds. á privarme dellos,... Por lo cual pido y suplico á Vs. Mds., y si menester es les encargo las conciencias, pues que no son servidos de pronunciar lo que en este mi negocio tienen difinido, y lo dilatan por concluir primero otros procesos que no me tocan, ó por los respectos que á Vs. Mds. parece y me tienen preso; alomenos no me priven de este bien, sino que me den licencia para confesarme con quien Vs. Mds. señalaren, y para decir misa en esta sala siquiera de quince en quince días, en lo cual Vs. Mds. harán gran servicio á Dios, y á mí darán grandísimo consuelo.' This is from a document which was handed in by Luis de Leon at Valladolid on March 12, 1575. An order was made that this document should be forwarded to the Supreme Inquisition. I have failed to trace any further reference to it.
They may have thought that, owing to his unacquaintance with legal procedure, Luis de Leon was wasting the time of the court; at any rate, as early as May 6, 1572, Dr. Ortiz de Funes was appointed counsel to the prisoner (Documentos inéditos, vol. X, p. 217). No saving of time was wrought by this change.
Documentos inéditos, vol. X, p. 220: '...yo tengo flaca memoria, y despues que estoy en la cárcel he perdido gran parte della,...'
Documentos inéditos, vol. X, p. 193: 'Es imposible acordarse memoria de hombre de todo lo que en las dichas juntas se ha dicho, mayormente que con la cólera de la disputa, algunas veces salen de todos los términos de razon y modestia los hombres, y se ciegan de manera que dende á poco ellos mismos no saben lo que han dicho.'
Luis de Leon's memory betrayed him as regards the signatures attached to the Vatable Bible. He was under the impression that he had signed a copy which was handed over to Francisco Sancho. In this he proved to be mistaken. On thinking the point over, Luis de Leon suggested that he must have signed a copy in the possession of the Salamancan bookseller, Gaspar de Portonariis; this impression was likewise mistaken. (Documentos inéditos, vol. X, pp. 520-527.)
An amazing lapse of memory led Luis de Leon astray with respect to Bartolomé de Medina; as Medina did not take his degree till 1570 (Documentos inéditos, vols. X, p. 323, and XI, p. 340), Luis de Leon felt justified in stating that his opponent did not take part in the revision of Vatable's Bible, which (such was the prisoner's impression) was finished in 1569. The discovery of Medina's signature in the Sancho copy of Vatable (Documentos inéditos, vol. X, p. 522) rendered this position untenable. The fact appears to be that the Old Testament was revised in 1569; owing to the absence of Sancho and Luis de Leon, the revision of the New Testament was suspended; it was not finished till 1571, and thus Medina was enabled to sign the Vatable Bible. It seems clear that Luis de Leon had no head for dates. He was, as we have seen (p. 94), doubtful as to when he was arrested, and he was capable of imagining that a sitting of the Valladolid court had been held a week before, when no such sitting had taken place. (Documentos inéditos, vol. XI, p. 18.)
Documentos inéditos, vol. XI, pp. 23, 24: '...antes de agora yo tengo pedido que se me declaren los nombres y personas de los Señores del Consejo de la santa y general Inquisicion, ante quien los auctos y sentencias interlocutorias y difinitivas deste negocio pueden ir á parar, para que sabiendo quien son yo pueda deliberar lo que conviene á mi justicia, y si tengo justa causa para recusar á alguno dellos; y por no se me haber declarado yo tengo apelado. Y porque por estar preso en cárceles secretas no puedo por mí ni por otro informarme... pido y suplico á Vs. Mds., é si necesario es, con debido acatamiento y reverencia requiero, no se envíe cosa alguna de lo tocante á este mi proceso á los dichos Señores del Consejo, y protesto la nulidad de lo que en contrario se hiciere. Y si tácita ó expresamente me fuere denegado otra vez, apelo para ante quien y con derecho debo, y pido los apóstolos desta mi apelacion con las instancias é ahincamientos necesarios, y pídolo por testimonio.' It will be seen that the account given in the text is an under-statement. Luis de Leon not only appealed over the heads of the Valladolid judges to the General Inquisition; he was prepared also to challenge, if necessary, individual members of the General Inquisition itself.
Documentos inéditos, vol. X, pp. 81-83. Diego de Gaona states that he knew Luis de Leon in 1567 or 1568. Gaona esteemed Luis de Leon to be 'hombre muy hábil en su facultad de teología, aunque le tenia por hombre algo atrevido en su manera de leer, y á esta causa este testigo... le oia muy pocas veces por ver su desenvoltura en las liciones que leia... entraba muy pocas veces á oir al dicho fray Luis de Leon, é que á esta causa no se le acuerda quienes estaban presentes, mas de que estaba el general lleno de gente...'
Luis de Leon frequently makes this point. The following passage (Documentos inéditos, vol. X, p. 482) is sufficiently categorical to render further quotations superfluous: 'Demás desto digo que el dia pasado aquí en la audiencia entendí que algunos de mis papeles, los cuales se veen por mandado de Vs. Mds. se han dado á ver y examinar á fray Juan Gutierrez fraile dominico, y ansí entiendo que se habrán dado á otros de la misma órden: y siendo notorio como es que todos los frailes de la dicha órden son sospechosos contra mí por las competencias que mi órden, y yo señaladamente he tenido con ellos, y por la cátreda que les hemos quitado, y por las demas causas que yo en este proceso tengo alegadas y probadas, por las cuales los tengo tachados por enemigos...'
Documentos inéditos, vol. X, pp. 559-560: 'Que por cuanto para hacer el juicio difinitivo acerca de la cualidad de mi doctrina, Vs. Mds. han de consultar á teólogos doctos y desapasionados; y porque yo tengo tachados por apasionados y sospechosos á todos los frailes de la órden de Santo Domingo y de Sant Hierónimo, y agora de nuevo tacho por lo mismo á los teólogos de la universidad de Alcalá, porque como es notorio estan encontrados con los teólogos de Salamanca por muchas causas antiguas y recientes, y señaladamente porque el Consejo general de la Inquisicion cosas notadas y censuradas por ellos las ha remitido á los de Salamanca, los cuales corrigieren las censuras de los dichos, y el Consejo siguió el parecer de los de Salamanca...' According to Juan de Guevara (Documentos inéditos, vol. XI, p. 277): 'hizo el dicho fray Luis públicamente cuanto pudo contra Hector Pinto, fraile gerónimo, en la sostitucion de Biblia, por el maestro Grajal; y los dichos frailes gerónimos se quejaron dél en el monasterio de Sant Augustin'.