[296] See Sections 23 and 64; and for a curious vow made by one of the wounded knights, that he would never again make love to nuns as he had done, see Sect. 25.

[297] Don Quixote makes precisely such a use of the Passo Honroso as might be expected from the perverse acuteness so often shown by madmen,—one of the many instances in which we see Cervantes’s nice observation of the workings of human nature. Parte I. c. 49.

[298] Take the years immediately about 1434, in which the Passo Honroso occurred, and we find four or five instances. (Crónica de Juan el IIº, 1433, Cap. 2; 1434, Cap. 4; 1435, Capp. 3 and 8; 1436, Cap. 4.) Indeed, the Chronicle is full of them; and in several, the Great Constable Alvaro de Luna figures.

[299] The “Seguro de Tordesillas” was first printed at Milan, 1611; but the only other edition, that of Madrid, 1784, (4to,) is much better.

[300] “Nos desnaturamos,” “We falsify our natures,” is the striking old Castilian phrase used by the principal personages on this occasion, and, among the rest, by the Constable Alvaro de Luna, to signify that they are not, for the time being, bound to obey even the king. Seguro, Cap. 3.

[301] See Crónica de Juan el IIº, 1440-41 and 1444, Cap. 3. Well might Manrique, in his beautiful Coplas on the instability of fortune break forth,—

Luis de Aranda’s commentary on this passage is good, and well illustrates the old Chronicle;—a rare circumstance in such commentaries on Spanish poetry.

[302] Pulgar (Claros Varones de Castilla, Madrid, 1775, 4to, Título 3) gives a beautiful character of him.

[303] The “Crónica de Don Pero Niño” was cited early and often, as containing important materials for the history of the reign of Henry III., but was not printed until it was edited by Don Eugenio de Llaguno Amirola (Madrid, 1782, 4to); who, however, has omitted a good deal of what he calls “fábulas caballerescas.” Instances of such omissions occur in Parte I. c. 15, Parte II. c. 18, 40, etc., and I cannot but think Don Eugenio would have done better to print the whole; especially the whole of what he says he found in the part which he calls “La Crónica de los Reyes de Inglaterra.”

[304] See Parte I. c. 4.

[305] Parte I. c. 14, 15.

[306] Parte II. c. 1-14.

[307] Parte II. c. 16-40.

[308] Parte III. c. 11, etc.

[309] Parte II. c. 31, 36.

[310] Parte III. c. 3-5. The love of Pero Niño for the lady Beatrice comes, also, into the poetry of the time; for he employed Villasandino, a poet of the age of Henry III. and John II., to write verses for him, addressed to her. See Castro, Bibl. Esp., Tom. I. pp. 271 and 274.

[311] The “Crónica de Don Alvaro de Luna” was first printed at Milan, 1546, (folio,) by one of the Constable’s descendants, but, notwithstanding its value and interest, only one edition has been published since,—that by Flores, the diligent Secretary of the Academy of History (Madrid, 1784, 4to). “Privado del Rey” was the common style of Alvaro de Luna;—“Tan privado,” as Manrique calls him;—a word which almost became English, for Lord Bacon, in his twenty-seventh Essay, says, “The modern languages give unto such persons the names of favorites or privadoes.”

[312] Tít. 91-95, with the curious piece of poetry by the court poet, Juan de Mena, on the wound of the Constable during the siege.

[313] Tít. 68.

[314] Tít. 74, etc.

[315] Tít. 127, 128. Some of the details—the Constable’s composed countenance and manner, as he rode on his mule to the place of death, and the awful silence of the multitude that preceded his execution, with the universal sob that followed it—are admirably set forth, and show, I think, that the author witnessed what he so well describes.

[316] The mistake between the two Pulgars—one called Hernan Perez del Pulgar, and the other Fernando del Pulgar—seems to have been made while they were both alive. At least, I so infer from the following good-humored passage in a letter from the latter to his correspondent, Pedro de Toledo: “E pues quereis saber como me aveis de llamar, sabed, Señor, que me llaman Fernando, e me llamaban e llamaran Fernando, e si me dan el Maestrazgo de Santiago, tambien Fernando,” etc. (Letra XII., Madrid, 1775, 4to, p. 153.) For the mistakes made concerning them in more modern times, see Nic. Antonio, (Bib. Nova, Tom. I. p. 387,) who seems to be sadly confused about the whole matter.

[317] This dull old anonymous Chronicle is the “Crónica del Gran Capitan Gonzalo Fernandez de Córdoba y Aguilar, en la qual se contienen las dos Conquistas del Reino de Napoles,” etc., (Sevilla, 1580, fol.,)—which does not yet seem to be the first edition, because, in the licencia, it is said to be printed, “porque hay falta de ellas.” It contains some of the family documents that are found in Pulgar’s account of him, and was reprinted at least twice afterwards, viz., Sevilla, 1582, and Alcalá, 1584.

[318] Pulgar was permitted by his admiring sovereigns to have his burial-place where he knelt when he affixed the Ave Maria to the door of the mosque, and his descendants still preserve his tomb there with becoming reverence, and still occupy the most distinguished place in the choir of the cathedral, which was originally granted to him and to his heirs male in right line. (Alcántara, Historia de Granada, Granada, 1846, 8vo, Tom. IV., p. 102; and the curious documents collected by Martinez de la Rosa in his “Hernan Perez del Pulgar,” pp. 279-283, for which see next note.) The oldest play known to me on the subject of Hernan Perez del Pulgar’s achievement is “El Cerco de Santa Fe,” in the first volume of Lope de Vega’s “Comedias” (Valladolid, 1604, 4to). But the one commonly represented is by an unknown author, and founded on Lope’s. It is called “El Triunfo del Ave Maria,” and is said to be “de un Ingenio de este Corte,” dating probably from the reign of Philip IV. My copy of it is printed in 1793. Martinez de la Rosa speaks of seeing it, and of the strong impression it produced on his youthful imagination.

[319] This Life of the Great Captain, by Pulgar, was printed at Seville, by Cromberger, in 1527; but only one copy of this edition—the one in the possession of the Royal Spanish Academy—is now known to exist. A reprint was made from it at Madrid, entitled “Hernan Perez del Pulgar,” 1834, 8vo, edited by D. Fr. Martinez de la Rosa, with a pleasant Life of Pulgar and valuable notes, so that we now have this very curious little book in an agreeable form for reading,—thanks to the zeal and persevering literary curiosity of the distinguished Spanish statesman who discovered it.

[320] Ed. Fr. Martinez de la Rosa, pp. 155, 156.

[321] Ibid., pp. 159-162.

[322] Hernan Perez del Pulgar, el de las Hazañas, was born in 1451, and died in 1531.

[323] Discurso hecho por Argote de Molina, sobre el Itinerario de Ruy Gonzalez de Clavijo, Madrid, 1782, 4to, p. 3.

[324] The edition of Argote de Molina was published in 1582; and there is only one other, the very good one printed at Madrid, 1782, 4to.

[325] They were much struck with the works in mosaic in Constantinople, and mention them repeatedly, pp. 51, 59, and elsewhere. The reason why they did not, on the first day, see all the relics they wished to see in the church of San Juan de la Piedra is very quaint, and shows great simplicity of manners at the imperial court: “The Emperor went to hunt, and left the keys with the Empress his wife, and when she gave them, she forgot to give those where the said relics were,” etc. p. 52.

[326] Page 84, etc.

[327] Page 118, etc.

[328] Pages 149-198.

[329] Page 207, etc.

[330] Hijos de Madrid, Ilustres en Santidad, Dignidades, Armas, Ciencias, y Artes, Diccionario Histórico, su Autor D. Joseph Ant. Alvarez y Baena, Natural de la misma Villa; Madrid, 1789-91, 4 tom. 4to;—a book whose materials, somewhat crudely put together, are abundant and important, especially in what relates to the literary history of the Spanish capital. A Life of Clavijo is to be found in it, Tom. IV. p. 302.

[331] “Hay en ella grandes edificios de muy grande obra, que fizo Virgilio.” p. 30.

[332] All he says of Amalfi is, “Y en esta ciudad de Malfa dicen que está la cabeza de Sant Andres.” p. 33.

[333] Mariana says that the Itinerary contains “muchas otras cosas asaz maravillosas, si verdaderas.” (Hist., Lib. XIX. c. 11.) But Blanco White, in his “Variedades,” (Tom. I. pp. 316-318,) shows, from an examination of Clavijo’s Itinerary, by Major Rennell, and from other sources, that its general fidelity may be depended upon.

[334] In the account of his first voyage, rendered to his sovereigns, he says he was in 1492 at Granada, “adonde, este presente año, á dos dias del mes de Enero, por fuerza de armas, vide poner las banderas reales de Vuestras Altezas en las torres de Alfambra,” etc. Navarrete, Coleccion de los Viajes y Descubrimientos que hicieron por Mar los Españoles desde Fines del Siglo XV., Madrid, 1825, 4to, Tom. I. p. 1;—a work admirably edited, and of great value, as containing the authentic materials for the history of the discovery of America. Old Bernaldez, the friend of Columbus, describes more exactly what Columbus saw: “E mostraron en la mas alta torre primeramente el estandarte de Jesu Cristo, que fue la Santa Cruz de plata, que el rey traia siempre en la santa conquista consigo.” Hist. de los Reyes Católicos, Cap. 102, MS.

[335] This appears from his letter to the Pope, February, 1502, in which he says, he had counted upon furnishing, in twelve years, 10,000 horse and 100,000 foot soldiers for the conquest of the Holy City, and that his undertaking to discover new countries was with the view of spending the means he might there acquire in this sacred service. Navarrete, Coleccion, Tom. II. p. 282.

[336] One of the prophecies he supposed himself called on to fulfil was that in the eighteenth Psalm. (Navarrete, Col., Tom. I. pp. xlviii., xlix., note; Tom. II. pp. 262-266.) In King James’s version, the passage stands thus:—“Thou hast made me the head of the heathen; a people whom I have not known shall serve me. As soon as they hear of me, they shall obey me; the strangers shall submit themselves unto me.” vv. 43, 44.

[337] “Ya dije que para la esecucion de la impresa de las Indias no me aprovechó razon ni matematica ni mapamundos;—llenamente se cumplió lo que dijo Isaías, y esto es lo que deseo de escrebir aquí por le reducir á V. A. á memoria, y porque se alegren del otro que yo le dije de Jerusalen por las mesmas autoridades, de la qual impresa, si fe hay, tengo por muy cierto la vitoria.” Letter of Columbus to Ferdinand and Isabella (Navarrete, Col., Tom. II. p. 265). And elsewhere in the same letter he says: “Yo dije que diria la razon que tengo de la restitucion de la Casa Santa á la Santa Iglesia; digo que yo dejo todo mi navegar desde edad nueva y las pláticas que yo haya tenido con tanta gente en tantas tierras y de tantas setas, y dejo las tantas artes y escrituras de que yo dije arriba; solamente me tengo á la Santa y Sacra Escritura y á algunas autoridades proféticas de algunas personas santas, que por revelacion divina han dicho algo desto.” Ibid., p. 263.

[338] “Segund esta cuenta, no falta, salvo ciento e cincuenta y cinco años, para complimiento de siete mil, en los quales digo arriba por las autoridades dichas que habrá de fenecer el mundo.” Ibid., p. 264.

[339] See the very beautiful passage about the Orinoco River, mixed with prophetical interpretations, in his account of his third voyage, to the King and Queen, (Navarrete, Col., Tom. I. pp. 256, etc.,)—a singular mixture of practical judgment and wild, dreamy speculation. “I believe,” he says, “that there is the terrestrial paradise, at which no man can arrive except by the Divine will,”—“Creo, que allá es el Paraiso terrenal, adonde no puede llegar nadie, salvo por voluntad divina.” The honest Clavijo thought he had found another river of paradise on just the opposite side of the earth, as he journeyed to Samarcand, nearly a century before. Vida del Gran Tamorlan, p. 137.

[340] See the letter to Ferdinand and Isabella, concerning his fourth and last voyage, dated, Jamaica, 7 July, 1503, in which this extraordinary passage occurs. Navarrete, Col., Tom. I. p. 303.

[341] To those who wish to know more of Columbus as a writer than can be properly sought in a classical life of him like that of Irving, I commend as precious: 1. The account of his first voyage, addressed to his sovereigns, with the letter to Rafael Sanchez on the same subject (Navarrete, Col., Tom. I. pp. 1-197); the first document being extant only in an abstract, which contains, however, large extracts from the original made by Las Casas, and of which a very good translation appeared at Boston, 1827 (8vo). Nothing is more remarkable, in the tone of these narratives, than the devout spirit that constantly breaks forth. 2. The account, by Columbus himself, of his third voyage, in a letter to his sovereigns and in a letter to the nurse of Prince John; the first containing several interesting passages showing that he had a love for the beautiful in nature. (Navarrete, Col., Tom. I. pp. 242-276.) 3. The letter to the sovereigns about his fourth and last voyage, which contains the account of his vision at Veragua. (Navarrete, Col., Tom. I. pp. 296-312.) 4. Fifteen miscellaneous letters. (Ibid., Tom. I. pp. 330-352.) 5. His speculations about the prophecies, (Tom. II. pp. 260-273,) and his letter to the Pope (Tom. II. pp. 280-282). But whoever would speak worthily of Columbus, or know what was most noble and elevated in his character, will be guilty of an unhappy neglect, if he fails to read the discussions about him by Alexander von Humboldt; especially those in the “Examen Critique de l’Histoire de la Géographie du Nouveau Continent,” (Paris, 1836-38, 8vo, Vol. II. pp. 350, etc., Vol. III. pp. 227-262,)—a book no less remarkable for the vastness of its views than for the minute accuracy of its learning on some of the most obscure subjects of historical inquiry. Nobody has comprehended the character of Columbus as he has,—its generosity, its enthusiasm, its far-reaching visions, which seemed watching beforehand for the great scientific discoveries of the sixteenth century.

[342] All relating to these adventures and voyages worth looking at on the score of language or style is to be found in Vols. III., IV., V., of Navarrete, Coleccion, etc., published by the government, Madrid, 1829-37, but unhappily not continued since, so as to contain the accounts of the discovery and conquest of Mexico, Peru, etc.

[343] My copy is of the edition of Alcalá de Henares, 1587, and has the characteristic title, “Crónica del Rey Don Rodrigo, con la Destruycion de España, y como los Moros la ganaron. Nuevamente corregida. Contiene, demas de la Historia, muchas vivas Razones y Avisos muy provechosos.” It is in folio, in double columns, closely printed, and fills 225 leaves or 450 pages.

[344] From Parte II. c. 237 to the end, containing the account of the fabulous and loathsome penance of Don Roderic, with his death. Nearly the whole of it is translated as a note to the twenty-fifth canto of Southey’s “Roderic, the Last of the Goths.”

[345] See the grand Torneo when Roderic is crowned, Parte I. c. 27; the tournament of twenty thousand knights in Cap. 40; that in Cap. 49, etc.;—all just as such things are given in the books of chivalry, and eminently absurd here, because the events of the Chronicle are laid in the beginning of the eighth century, and tournaments were unknown till above two centuries later. (A. P. Budik, Ursprung, Ausbildung, Abnahme, und Verfall des Turniers, Wien, 1837, 8vo.) He places the first tournament in 936. Clemencin thinks they were not known in Spain till after 1131. Note to Don Quixote, Tom. IV. p. 315.

[346] See the duels described, Parte II. c. 80 etc., 84 etc., 93.

[347] The King of Poland is one of the kings that comes to the court of Roderic “like a wandering knight so fair” (Parte I. c. 39). One might be curious to know who was King of Poland about A. D. 700.

[348] Thus, the Duchess of Loraine comes to Roderic (Parte I. c. 37) with much the same sort of a case that the Princess Micomicona brings to Don Quixote.

[349] Parte I. c. 234, 235, etc.

[350] To learn through what curious transformations the same ideas can be made to pass, it may be worth while to compare, in the “Crónica General,” 1604, (Parte III. f. 6,) the original account of the famous battle of Covadonga, where the Archbishop Orpas is represented picturesquely coming upon his mule to the cave in which Pelayo and his people lay, with the tame and elaborate account evidently taken from it in this Chronicle of Roderic (Parte II. c. 196); then with the account in Mariana, (Historia, Lib. VII. c. 2,) where it is polished down into a sort of dramatized history; and, finally, with Southey’s “Roderic, the Last of the Goths,” (Canto XXIII.,) where it is again wrought up to poetry and romance. It is an admirable scene both for chronicling narrative and for poetical fiction to deal with; but Alfonso the Wise and Southey have much the best of it, while a comparison of the four will at once give the poor “Chronicle of Roderic or the Destruction of Spain” its true place.

Another work, something like this Chronicle, but still more worthless, was published, in two parts, in 1592-1600, and seven or eight times afterwards; thus giving proof that it long enjoyed a degree of favor to which it was little entitled. It was written by Miguel de Luna, in 1589, as appears by a note to the first part, and is called “Verdadera Historia del Rey Rodrigo, con la Perdida de España, y Vida del Rey Jacob Almanzor, traduzida de Lengua Arábiga,” etc., my copy being printed at Valencia, 1606, 4to. Southey, in his notes to his “Roderic,” (Canto IV.,) is disposed to regard this work as an authentic history of the invasion and conquest of Spain, coming down to the year of Christ 761, and written in the original Arabic only two years later. But this is a mistake. It is a bold and scandalous forgery, with even less merit in its style than the elder Chronicle on the same subject, and without any of the really romantic adventures that sometimes give an interest to that singular work, half monkish, half chivalrous. How Miguel de Luna, who, though a Christian, was of an old Moorish family in Granada, and an interpreter of Philip II., should have shown a great ignorance of the Arabic language and history of Spain, or, showing it, should yet have succeeded in passing off his miserable stories as authentic, is certainly a singular circumstance. That such, however, is the fact, Conde, in his “Historia de la Dominacion de los Arabes,” (Preface, p. x.,) and Gayangos, in his “Mohammedan Dynasties of Spain,” (Vol. I. p. viii.,) leave no doubt,—the latter citing it as a proof of the utter contempt and neglect into which the study of Arabic literature had fallen in Spain in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.

[351] Two Spanish translations of chronicles should be here remembered; one for its style and author, and the other for its subject.

The first is the “Universal Chronicle” of Felipe Foresto, a modest monk of Bergamo, who refused the higher honors of his Church, in order to be able to devote his life to letters, and who died in 1520, at the age of eighty-six. He published, in 1486, his large Latin Chronicle, entitled “Supplementum Chronicarum”;—meaning rather a chronicle intended to supply all needful historical knowledge, than one that should be regarded as a supplement to other similar works. It was so much esteemed at the time, that its author saw it pass through ten editions; and it is said to be still of some value for facts stated nowhere so well as on his personal authority. At the request of Luis Carroz and Pedro Boyl, it was translated into Spanish by Narcis Viñoles, the Valencian poet, known in the old Cancioneros for his compositions both in his native dialect and in Castilian. An earlier version of it into Italian, published in 1491, may also have been the work of Viñoles, since he intimates that he had made one; but his Castilian version was printed at Valencia, in 1510, with a license from Ferdinand the Catholic, acting for his daughter Joan. It is a large book, of nearly nine hundred pages, in folio, entitled, “Suma de todas las Crónicas del Mundo,” and though Viñoles hints it was a rash thing in him to write in Castilian, his style is good and sometimes gives an interest to his otherwise dry annals. Ximeno, Bib. Val., Tom. I. p. 61. Fuster, Tom. I. p. 54. Diana Enam. de Polo, ed. 1802, p. 304. Biographie Universelle, art. Foresto.

The other Chronicle referred to is that of St. Louis, by his faithful follower Joinville; the most picturesque of the monuments for the French language and literature of the thirteenth century. It was translated into Spanish by Jacques Ledel, one of the suite of the French Princess Isabel de Bourbon, when she went to Spain to become the wife of Philip II. Regarded as the work of a foreigner, the version is respectable; and though it was not printed till 1567, yet its whole tone prevents it from finding an appropriate place anywhere except in the period of the old Castilian chronicles. Crónica de San Luis, etc., traducida por Jacques Ledel, Madrid, 1794, folio.

[352] An edition of the “Chronicle of Don Roderic” is cited as early as 1511; none of “Amadis de Gaula” earlier than 1510, and this one uncertain. But “Tirant lo Blanch” was printed in 1490, in the Valencian dialect, and the Amadis appeared perhaps soon afterwards, in the Castilian; so that it is not improbable the “Chronicle of Don Roderic” may mark, by the time of its appearance, as well as by its contents and spirit, the change, of which it is certainly a very curious monument.

[353] Warton’s Hist. of English Poetry, first Dissertation, with the notes of Price, London, 1824, 4 vols. 8vo. Ellis’s Specimens of Early English Metrical Romance, London, 1811, 8vo, Vol. I. Turner’s Vindication of Ancient British Poems, London, 1803, 8vo.

[354] Turpin, J., De Vitâ Caroli Magni et Rolandi, ed. S. Ciampi, Florentiæ, 1822, 8vo.

[355] Preface to the “Roman de Rou,” by Robert Wace, ed. F. Pluquet, Paris, 1827, 8vo, Vol. I.

[356] Letter to M. de Monmerqué, by Paulin Paris, prefixed to “Li Romans de Berte aux Grans Piés,” Paris, 1836, 8vo.

[357] See, on the whole subject, the Essays of F. W. Valentine Schmidt; Jahrbücher der Literatur, Vienna, 1824-26, Bände XXVI. p. 20, XXIX. p. 71, XXXI. p. 99, and XXXIII. p. 16. I shall have occasion to use the last of these discussions, when speaking of the Spanish romances belonging to the family of Amadis.

[358] Don Quixote, in his conversation with the curate, (Parte II. c. 1,) says, that, to defeat any army of two hundred thousand men, it would only be necessary to have living “alguno de los del inumerable linage de Amadis de Gaula,”—“any one of the numberless descendants of Amadis de Gaul.”

[359] Ayala, in his “Rimado de Palacio,” already cited, says:—

[360] Barbosa, Bib. Lusitana, Lisboa, 1752, fol., Tom. III. p. 775, and the many authorities there cited, none of which, perhaps, is of much consequence except that of João de Barros, who, being a careful historian, born in 1496, and citing an older author than himself, adds something to the testimony in favor of Lobeira.

[361] Gomez de Zurara, in the outset of his “Chronicle of the Conde Don Pedro de Meneses,” says that he wishes to write an account only of “the things that happened in his own times, or of those which happened so near to his own times that he could have true knowledge of them.” This strengthens what he says concerning Lobeira, in the passage cited in the text from the opening of Chap. 63 of the Chronicle. The Ferdinand to whom Zurara there refers was the father of John I. and died in 1383. The Chronicle of Zurara is published by the Academy of Lisbon, in their “Colecção de Libros Ineditos de Historia Portuguesa,” Lisboa, 1792, fol., Tom. II. I have a curious manuscript “Dissertation on the Authorship of the Amadis de Gaula,” by Father Sarmiento, who wrote the valuable fragment of a History of Spanish Poetry to which I have often referred. This learned Galician is much confused and vexed by the question;—first denying that there is any authority at all for saying Lobeira wrote the Amadis; then asserting, that, if Lobeira wrote it, he was a Galician; then successively suggesting that it may have been written by Vasco Perez de Camões, by the Chancellor Ayala, by Montalvo, or by the Bishop of Cartagena;—all absurd conjectures, much connected with his prevailing passion to refer the origin of all Spanish poetry to Galicia. He does not seem to have been aware of the passage in Gomez de Zurara.

[362] The Saint Graal, or the Holy Cup which the Saviour used for the wine of the Last Supper, and which, in the story of Arthur, is supposed to have been brought to England by Joseph of Arimathea, is alluded to in Amadis de Gaula (Lib. IV. c. 48). Arthur himself—“El muy virtuoso rey Artur”—is spoken of in Lib. I. c. 1, and in Lib. IV. c. 49, where “the Book of Don Tristan and Launcelot” is also mentioned. Other passages might be cited, but there can be no doubt the author of Amadis knew some of the French fictions.

[363] See the end of Chap. 40, Book I., in which he says, “The Infante Don Alfonso of Portugal, having pity on the fair damsel, [the Lady Briolana,] ordered it to be otherwise set down, and in this was done what was his good pleasure.”

[364] Ginguené, Hist. Litt. d’Italie, Paris, 1812, 8vo, Tom. V. p. 62, note (4), answering the Preface of the Conte de Tressan to his too free abridgment of the Amadis de Gaula, Œuvres, Paris, 1787, 8vo, Tom. I. p. xxii.

[365] The fact that it was in the Arveiro collection is stated in Ferreira, “Poemas Lusitanas,” (Lisboa, 1598, 4to,) where is the sonnet, No. 33, by Ferreira in honor of Vasco de Lobeira, which Southey, in his Preface to his “Amadis of Gaul,” (London, 1803, 12mo, Vol. I. p. vii.,) erroneously attributes to the Infante Antonio of Portugal, and thus would make it of consequence in the present discussion. Nic. Antonio, who leaves no doubt as to the authorship of the sonnet in question, refers to the same note in Ferreira to prove the deposit of the manuscript of the Amadis; so that the two constitute only one authority, and not two authorities, as Southey supposes. (Bib. Vetus, Lib. VIII. cap. vii. sect. 291.) Barbosa is more distinct. (Bib. Lusitana, Tom. III. p. 775.) But there is a careful summing up of the matter in Clemencin’s notes to Don Quixote, (Tom. I. pp. 105, 106,) beyond which it is not likely we shall advance in our knowledge concerning the fate of the Portuguese original.

[366] In his Prólogo, Montalvo alludes to the conquest of Granada in 1492, and to both the Catholic sovereigns as still alive, one of whom, Isabella, died in 1504.

[367] I doubt whether the Salamanca edition of 1510, mentioned by Barbosa, (article Vasco de Lobeira,) is not, after all, the edition of 1519 mentioned in Brunet as printed by Antonio de Salamanca. The error in printing, or copying, would be small, and nobody but Barbosa seems to have heard of the one he notices. When the first edition appeared is quite uncertain.

[368] Ferrario, Storia ed Analisi degli antichi Romanzi di Cavalleria, (Milano, 1829, 8vo, Tom. IV. p. 242,) and Brunet’s Manuel; to all which should be added the “Amadigi” of Bernardo Tasso, 1560, constructed almost entirely from the Spanish romance; a poem which, though no longer popular, had much reputation in its time, and is still much praised by Ginguené.

[369] For the old French version, see Brunet’s “Manuel du Libraire”; but Count Tressan’s rifacimento, first printed in 1779, has kept it familiar to French readers down to our own times. In German it was known from 1583, and in English from 1619; but the abridgment of it by Southey (London, 1803, 4 vols. 12mo) is the only form of it in English that can now be read. It was also translated into Dutch; and Castro, somewhere in his “Biblioteca,” speaks of a Hebrew translation of it.

[370] “Casi que en nuestros dias vimos y comunicamos y oimos al invencible y valeroso caballero D. Belianis de Grecia,” says the mad knight, when he gets to be maddest, and follows out the consequence of making Amadis live above two hundred years and have descendants innumerable. Parte I. c. 13.

[371] Don Quixote, ed. Clemencin, Tom. I. p. 107, note.

[372] Amadis de Gaula, Lib. I. c. 4.

[373] Lib. II. c. 17.

[374] Lib. IV. c. 32.

[375] See Lib. II. c. 13, Lib. IV. c. 14, and in many other places, exhortations to knightly and princely virtues.

[376] See the mourning about his own time, as a period of great suffering (Lib. IV. c. 53). This could not have been a just description of any part of the reign of the Catholic kings in Spain; and must therefore, I suppose, have been in the original work of Lobeira, and have referred to troubles in Portugal.

[377] Don Quixote, Parte I. c. 6. Cervantes, however, is mistaken in his bibliography, when he says that the Amadis was the first book of chivalry printed in Spain. It has often been noted that this distinction belongs to “Tirant lo Blanch,” 1490; though Southey (Omniana, London, 1812, 12mo, Tom. II. p. 219) thinks “there is a total want of the spirit of chivalry” in it; and it should further be noted now, as curious facts, that “Tirant lo Blanch,” though it appeared in Valencian in 1490, in Castilian in 1511, and in Italian in 1538, was yet, like the Amadis, originally written in Portuguese, to please a Portuguese prince, and that this Portuguese original is now lost;—all remarkable coincidences. See note on Chap. XVII. of this Period. On the point of the general merits of the Amadis, two opinions are worth citing. The first, on its style, is by the severe anonymous author of the “Diálogo de las Lenguas,” temp. Charles V., who, after discussing the general character of the book, adds, “It should be read by those who wish to learn our language.” (Mayans y Siscar, Orígenes, Madrid, 1737, 12mo, Tom. II. p. 163.) The other, on its invention and story, is by Torquato Tasso, who says of the Amadis, “In the opinion of many, and particularly in my own opinion, it is the most beautiful, and perhaps the most profitable, story of its kind that can be read, because, in its sentiment and tone, it leaves all others behind it, and, in the variety of its incidents, yields to none written before or since.” Apologia della Gerusalemme, Opere, Pisa, 1824, 8vo, Tom. X. p. 7.

[378] I possess of “Esplandian” the curious edition printed at Burgos, in folio, double columns, 1587, by Simon de Aguaya. It fills 136 leaves, and is divided into 184 chapters. As in the other editions I have seen mentioned or have noticed in public libraries, it is called “Las Sergas del muy Esforçado Cavallero Esplandian,” in order to give it the learned appearance of having really been translated, as it pretends to be, from the Greek of Master Elisabad;—“Sergas” being evidently an awkward corruption of the Greek Ἔργα, works or achievements. Allusions are made to it, as to a continuation, in the Amadis, Lib. IV.; besides which, in Lib. III. cap. 4, we have the birth and baptism of Esplandian; in Lib. III. c. 8, his marvellous growth and progress; and so on, till, in the last chapter of the romance, he is armed as a knight. So that the Esplandian is, in the strictest manner, a continuation of the Amadis. Southey (Omniana, Vol. I. p. 145) thinks there is some error about the authorship of the Esplandian. If there is, I think it is merely typographical.