Fernan Perez de Guzman was held in no trifling consideration at the court of John II. His family, which was one of the most distinguished in Castile, was related to all the other great families in the country. As a poet, he studied to combine the peculiar tone of moral and spiritual poetry with that of the old romances. His Representation of the Four Cardinal Virtues, dedicated to the Marquis of Santillana, which consists of sixty-four strophes or couplets, is versified in redondillas, as are also his Ave Maria, his Paternoster, and his other spiritual songs.
Rodriguez del Padron seems likewise to have been held in some esteem at the court of John II. His family name is not known, and as little are the dates of his birth and death, but he is named after the place of his nativity, the little town El Padron in Galicia. It is remarkable that in his poetry he dropped his Galician idiom and adopted the Castilian. Besides the reputation he obtained by his poetic productions, which are chiefly love songs, he is celebrated for his friendship with the Galician poet Macias, who will be further mentioned in the history of Portuguese poetry. The tragical death of Macias, who fell a sacrifice to his romantic susceptibility, made such an impression on Rodriguez del Padron, that he shut himself up in a Dominican cloister, which he had erected at his own expense. He became a monk, and terminated his life in that convent.
Alonzo de Santa Maria, called also Alonzo de Cartagena, wrote love songs, probably in his youth, and then devoted himself to spiritual affairs. He died Archbishop of Burgos, in the year 1456.
Several other poets whose works fill the Cancionero general, also lived in the reign, or rather under the anticipated domination of queen Isabella, who, in the year 1465, vouchsafed to her almost dethroned brother, Henry IV. the little authority, which, as a nominal king he retained till his death in 1474. At this troubled period Garci Sanchez de Badajoz sang his passionate and glowing songs of love; and at the same time flourished the two Manriques, Gomez Manrique and Jorge Manrique; the latter was nephew to the former. Both owed the consideration they enjoyed no less to their poetical works than to their high and pure Castilian descent. The Bachelor de la Torre, of whom nothing further is known than what his own songs express, lived at the same period.
Between the works of the above poets, all of which are to be found in the Cancionero general, and the other poems contained in the same collection, whether their authors lived in the first or the second half of the fifteenth century, there is a very striking resemblance. This collection, so remarkable in its kind, may therefore be regarded as a single work, which, together with a portion of the General Romance Book (Romancero general), embraces nearly all the Castilian poetry of the fifteenth century. No other remains of Spanish poetry, belonging to the same age, are sufficiently important to be brought into comparison with this national treasure. It may not, then, be improper to introduce here, a few particulars respecting the history of the Cancionero general. Of the Romancero general some further account must hereafter be given.
The bibliographic notices towards the history of the collections of Spanish poetry, to be found in the works of various authors, readily explain why many old Spanish poems and names of poets have been either totally lost, or are still only preserved in manuscript in a way which renders them foreign to literature. It appears that having been withheld from the press, on the introduction of printing into Spain,102 they were forgotten as soon as other collections were made known by means of that art. In the reign of John II. Alphonso de Baena, who himself wrote in verse, prepared a collection of old lyric pieces, under the title of Cancionero de Poetas Antiguos. This collection, though still preserved in the library of the Escurial, was never printed;103 but a list of the poets whose works are contained in it, has appeared, and includes names which do not occur elsewhere. Alvarez de Villapandino is mentioned as a particularly excellent “master and patron of the said art,” namely, poetry. Sanchez Salavera, Ruy Paez de Ribera, and others, of whom besides their names, nothing else is known, are also cited. It is not very probable that Alphonso de Baena’s collection was the origin of that which subsequently appeared under the title of the Cancionero general. Of this celebrated collection it is merely known that it was originally produced by Fernando del Castillo, at the commencement of the sixteenth century, and within a short period frequently augmented and reprinted. Fernando del Castillo began his collection with the poets of the age of John II. He did not, however, take the trouble to carry on the series in chronological order through the fifteenth century. He places the spiritual poems before the rest. He then gives the works of several poets of the reign of John II. mingled with others of more recent date, but so arranged, that the productions of each author seem to be kept distinct. After, however, the works are thus apparently given, other poems follow under particular heads, partly by the same and partly by different authors, whose names are sometimes mentioned and sometimes not: there are also a few Italian sonnets, and some coplas in the Valencian language. In proportion as the collection extended, the additions were always inserted at the end of the book. In the oldest editions the number of poets mentioned amounts to one hundred and thirty-six.104
A nation which can enumerate one hundred and thirty-six song writers in a single century, and which also possesses a great number of songs by unknown authors, produced within the same period, may well boast of its lyric genius; and the literary historian, before he proceeds to a closer review of this collection, may reasonably expect to find in it a full and true representation of the national character. Thus the old Spanish Cancionero is even more interesting to the philosophic observer of human nature than to the critic.
The Spiritual Songs, (Obras de Devocion,) at the head of the collection, probably will not fulfil the expectations which may be formed respecting them. It is natural to presume that in a nation so poetically inclined, and in an age when, for the most part, nature was followed without reference to the rules of art, the poets could not fail to view Christianity on its poetic side. But the scholastic forms of the existing theology crushed the genius of poetry; and the unpoetic side of Christianity, because it was the most learned, was alone deemed worthy the strains of the Spanish poets of the fifteenth century. They likewise seldom ventured to give scope to the fancy in devotional verses, because the nation was accustomed to the most implicit faith in every dogma of the church, and the recognition of the sacredness of literal interpretation was identified with orthodoxy, long before the terrors of the inquisition and its burning piles were known. This rigid orthodoxy of the Spanish Christians was a consequence of their war of five hundred years duration with the Moors. Throughout that long period the Spanish knight invariably fought for religion and his country; and from the constant hostility that prevailed between the Christian and Mahometan faiths, the Spanish Christians were wont to make a parade of their creed, as the Christians of the east are accustomed to do at the present day. Hence the strictest formality was observed in all matters connected with religion; and great as was the enthusiasm of the Spaniards in the fifteenth century, it produced few, if any, lyric compositions, containing more poetry than a common hymn. Whether reference be made to the Twenty Perfections of the Holy Virgin,105 (Obra en loor de veinte excellencias de nuestra Señora), by Juan Tulante, who is the author of most of the spiritual songs in the Cancionero general; to the play on the five letters of the name Maria,106 by the Visconde de Altamira; or to Fernan Perez de Guzman’s versions of the Ave Maria and Paternoster,107 which could not have been more dryly and formally written in prose; we find in all the same monotony without any poetic adaptation of the materials.
The moral poems of this collection do not weigh heavier in the scale of poetic merit. The art which the ancients possessed of introducing moral ideas into the region of poetry, was not attainable by the pupils of the monastic schools. They allegorized either virtues or vices according to the catalogue and definitions of the scholastic philosophy; or they made common place observations on human life, sometimes with declamatory pomp, sometimes with real warmth of feeling, and occasionally in agreeable verse, though destitute of any poetic spirit. Gomez Manrique with commendable frankness addressed a didactic poem on the Duties of Sovereigns (Regimiento de Principes) in redondillas, to Queen Isabella and her husband Ferdinand of Arragon; but however valuable the truths which he wished to impart to the royal pair, he could only express them in versified prose.108 The moral coplas of his nephew Jorge Manrique present somewhat stronger claims to poetic merit; they were subsequently glossed as a National Book of Devotion, and were held in high estimation up to a recent period.109 In the moral as well as in the spiritual songs the character of the nation is manifest. With equal warmth of feeling, with the same disposition for light and sportive gaiety, the Spaniards were invariably distinguished from the Italians by moral gravity. Hence, they have in all times set a high value on rules of conduct, sentences, and useful proverbs, and have never regarded the principles of genuine rectitude as less important than maxims of worldly wisdom.
But love songs form by far the principal part of the contents of the old Spanish Cancioneros. To read them regularly through, would require a strong passion for compositions of this class, for the monotony of the authors is interminable. To extend and spin out a theme as long as possible, though only to seize a new modification of the old ideas or phrases, was, in their opinion, essential to the truth and sincerity of their poetic effusions of the heart. That loquacity which is an hereditary fault of the Italian Canzone, must also be endured in perusing the amatory flights of the Spanish redondillas, while in them the Italian correctness of expression would be looked for in vain. From the desire perhaps of relieving their monotony, by some sort of variety the authors have indulged in even more witticisms and plays of words than the Italians, but they also sought to infuse a more emphatic spirit into their compositions than the latter.110 The Spanish poems of this class, exhibit, in general, all the poverty of the compositions of the Troubadours, but blend with the simplicity of these bards, the pomp of the Spanish national style in its utmost vigour. This resemblance to the Troubadour songs was not however produced by imitation; it arose out of the spirit of romantic love, which at that period, and for several preceding centuries, gave to the south of Europe the same feelings and taste. Since the age of Petrarch, this spirit had appeared in classical perfection in Italy. But the Spanish amatory poets of the fifteenth century had not reached an equal degree of cultivation; and the whole turn of their ideas required rather a passionate than a tender expression. The sighs of the languishing Italians became cries in Spain. Glowing passion, despair and violent ecstacy, were the soul of the Spanish love songs. The continually recurring picture of the contest between reason and passion is a peculiar characteristic of these songs. The Italian poets did not place so much importance on the triumph of reason. The rigidly moral Spaniard was, however, anxious to be wise even in the midst of his folly. But this obtrusion of wisdom in its improper place, frequently gives an unpoetic harshness to the lyric poetry of Spain, in spite of all the softness of its melody. It would be no unprofitable or useless task to pursue this comparison still further. But the limited extent of this work can afford space for only a few notices and examples.
How successful the Spanish poets of the fifteenth century were in gay and graceful love songs, when guided only by their own feelings, is manifest from some of the compositions of Juan de Mena; but the charm vanishes the instant the poet begins to display his skill and erudition.111 In a love song by Diego Lopez de Haro, reason and the mind enter into a prolix conversation on the value to be attached to affections of the heart; and the thinking faculty admits reason at the expense of poetry.112 In the other songs of the same author, in which the mind obeys only the heart, he is poetic in all the simplicity of passion, though in search of wit he sometimes involves himself in obscure subtilties.113 The fire of passion is excellently painted, even amidst sports of wit,114 in several songs by Alonzo de Cartagena, afterwards archbishop of Burgos; and it seems to rage incessantly in the love songs of Guivara, to one of which he has given the emphatic title of El Infierno de Amores; or, The Hell of Love.115 Sanchez de Badajoz, when, like a despairing lover, he wrote his will in poetry, thought he might avail himself of some passages from the book of Job to express his suffering. He divided this strange kind of will into nine lessons, (leciones). The ideas are very extravagant, but the execution is vigorous, and in many parts not unpoetic.116 It might be presumed that profane applications of the doctrines and language of the bible would have given offence to the Spanish public, or at least alarmed the guardians of catholic orthodoxy. But such was not the case. Rodriguez del Padron chose the Seven Joys of Love as the subject of one of his songs, the title of which calls to mind the Marquis of Santillana’s Joys of the Holy Virgin; he also versified Love’s Ten Commandments, (Los diez Madamientos de Amor.)
The other kinds of lyric poems, for example, the laudatory poems, which are dispersed through the Cancionero general, are not distinguished by any peculiar features; but the poems under miscellaneous titles in this collection deserve particular attention. They exhibit the natural style, amalgamated with a conventional, and thus form the model of a species of national poetry, which has descended to the present age. Certain short lyric poems, usually called songs, (canciones,) in the more strict sense of the term are distinguished by a peculiar character and a decided metrical form. They have always a sententious or an epigramatic turn. The number of lines is generally twelve, which are divided into two parts. The first four lines comprehend the idea on which the song is founded. And this idea is developed or applied in the eight following lines. The Cancionero general contains one hundred and fifty-six of these little songs, some of which are the best poems in the whole book. For this advantage they are probably indebted to their conventional form, which confined the romantic verbosity within narrow bounds. These little songs were to the Spaniards of the fifteenth century, what the epigram had been to the Greeks, and what the madrigal was to the Italians and French. Like the latter, they are generally devoted to some theme of gallantry; and though they do not possess so high a polish, yet the interest excited by the truth with which they paint the character of the age, and their ingenious simplicity, entitles them to be ranked among the sweetest blossoms of the ancient spirit of romance.117
The Villancicos bear an immediate affinity to these little songs. The idea which forms the subject of the Villancico, is sometimes contained in two, but more commonly in three lines. The developement, or application, may be completed in one short stanza, but often extends to several similar stanzas. These stanzas always include seven lines. It was, perhaps, by way of irony that the name Villancico was originally applied to productions of this kind; for the spiritual motets, which are sung during high mass on Christmas eve, are also called Villancicos. At least no satisfactory etymology has yet been found for the name. The Cancionero general contains fifty-four Villancicos, and among them are some which possess inimitable grace and delicacy.118
These remarkable compositions, whose origin appears to be lost in the early periods of the formation of the Spanish language, doubtless gave rise to the poetic gloss (glosa,) a kind of poem scarcely known, even by name, on this side of the Pyrenees, but to which the Spaniards and Portuguese of the fifteenth century were particularly attached, and which subsequently even after the introduction of the Italian forms, continued to be preserved as national poetry in Spain and Portugal.
The poetic glosses may, in some measure, be compared to musical variations. The musician selects as his theme some well known melody, which he paraphrases or modifies into variations; in like manner in Spain and Portugal, well known songs and romances were paraphrased or modified into new productions, but in such a manner that the original composition was, without any alteration in the words, intertwined line after line, at certain intervals into the new one. A poem of this kind was called a gloss. By this operation the connection of the glossed poem was broken, and the comparison of the poetic glosses to musical variations is therefore not in all respects exactly just. But the distinction between them arises out of the different nature of the arts of music and poetry; and it is indeed more surprising that these compositions have not flourished beyond the boundaries of Spain and Portugal, than that they should have been peculiar favourites in those two countries. At first, the old romances were glossed;119 then, as it appears, mottos, or sentiments, (motes,) in the style of gallantry peculiar to the age,120 and, at length, every thing that was capable of being glossed. There is a particular class of jeux d’esprit, in the Cancionero general, namely, versified questions and answers, and versified interpretations of devices (letras,) which, together with corresponding emblems, lords and ladies drew by lot at festivals, tourneys, bull fights, &c. But these questions, answers, and devices, are in general more whimsical than ingenious.
The latter half of the fifteenth century seems also to have given birth to the greater portion of those Spanish romances, which wrested the approbation of criticism and public favour from the older productions of the same class; and which, therefore, in the sequel, formed the bulk of the Romancero general, or General Romance Book. This Romancero of the Spaniards is so closely related to their Cancionero general, that some account of it may not be out of place here, though it was not printed as a complete collection until the close of the sixteenth century. With the exception of the narrative romances, the Romancero may be considered merely as a continuation of the Cancionero. The poetry of the lyric pieces contained in it, which are extremely numerous, is both in spirit and metrical form, precisely the same as that which appears in the Cancionero, but more polished in manner and language. The title of romance indicates no essential difference. The narrative romances, which occupy the greater portion of the Romancero, have, in some measure, been characterized in this history in treating of the old romances of the same class; for most of them, particularly those of the historical kind, differ little from the more ancient. But a considerable portion of compositions of every class have been contributed to the Romancero by poets of the sixteenth century. The collectors have mingled these romances and the older ones together, without any attention to critical arrangement or chronological order; and in no instance is there any mention or indication of an author. In a history of literature, it therefore becomes necessary to speak of the Romancero as a whole; and for this purpose, the present is perhaps the most convenient opportunity; for, even at the period when this collection was produced, the poets who wrote romances in the old national style, merely improved that style without essentially altering it.
Among the historical romances, contained in the Romancero, those in which anecdotes of the Moorish war, or the heroic and gallant adventures of Moorish knights, are poetically treated, seem, for the most part, to belong to the latter half of the fifteenth century. All these romances relate to the civil wars of Granada, the last Moorish principality in Spain. The civil dissensions of Castile retarded for upwards of half a century the conquest of Granada, which was at length effected in the year 1492, by the united power of Isabella of Castile and Ferdinand of Arragon. During this last period of the conflict between the Christians and the Mahometans of Spain, the former became more intimately acquainted with the history of the latter. As the last blow for the deliverance of the Peninsula was now about to be struck, all that related to the Moors was doubly interesting to the Castilians. The two rival factions, the Zegris and the Abencerrages, whose mutual enmity accelerated the fall of Granada, were, in a particular manner, the objects of their adversaries attention.
About this period it seems to have become a fashion among the Spanish romance writers, to select from the events of Moorish history, materials for their songs; and in these romances the heroes of the Zegri and Abencerrage tribes sustain the principal characters. Even after the conquest of Granada, the interest excited throughout Spain by that great national event, still continued; and, doubtless, many romances, the subjects of which are borrowed from Moorish history, were produced in the sixteenth century.121
The first Spanish pastoral romances, were probably produced during the last ten years of the fifteenth century. But no distinct traces exist of the rise of this species of poetry in Spain. In the poetry of the age of John II. neither pastoral names nor ideas appear, except in the satyrical poem, entitled, Mingo Rebulgo, which will be hereafter noticed. Pastoral dramas are, however, to be found in the works of Juan de la Enzina, who flourished towards the close of the fifteenth century, and of whom we shall also have occasion to speak more at large. The Spanish pastoral poetry seems, shortly after its rise, to have been blended with the romantic poetry. Many of the most beautiful narrative pieces in the Romancero general are properly pastoral romances. It is quite impossible to ascertain correctly to what age these bucolicks belong;122 and it has, hitherto, proved equally impossible to obtain any positive information respecting the origin of the facetious and satyrical romances and songs, dispersed through the Romancero general.123
Finally, the history of the Romancero general itself still waits for bibliographic illustration; and in order to throw any light on this subject, it would be necessary to have the opportunity of examining the Spanish libraries and old collections of manuscripts, and to be able to bestow on them the most indefatigable attention. Of all the collections, bearing the common title of Romancero general, only two are quoted by authors; one was edited by Miguel de Madrigal, in the year 1604; and the other by Pedro de Flores in 1614.124 Another publication, however, under the same title, which also appeared in 1604, and which contains upwards of a thousand romances and songs, professes to be a new and augmented collection of this kind.125 At what time, then, was the first collection made or published?
Those, however, who may think it unimportant to enquire how many of these anonymous poems, which have for ages delighted the Spanish public, were produced in the fifteenth or sixteenth century, and who may merely wish to see a selection of the best Spanish poems in the old national style, have only to turn to the Romancero general. Many of the narrative romances which it contains, vie, in romantic simplicity, with those of apparently older date in other collections, and exceed them in elegance; and still more do a number of the songs in the Romancero surpass those in the Cancionero general. Thus the historian of literature has additional cause to lament that through the absence of all chronological and bibliographical notices, he is deprived of even the slight satisfaction of paying a just tribute to the memory of the authors of the best of these romances and songs, which really deserve to be immortal. The poets themselves, it is true, do not seem to have attached much value to fame. If their songs, accompanied by the guitar, interested the hearts and charmed the ears of their auditors, they sought no laurels in addition to that true reward of the poet. Yet, for this very reason, in an age when the lowest degree of poetic merit presumptuously claims literary distinction, the task would be the more pleasing to do honour to those venerable authors, by raising the veil beneath which their names have too long been concealed.
All that now remains to be stated respecting the poetic literature of the Spaniards during the fifteenth century, must be comprehended in a notice of their first essays in dramatic poetry.
In lieu of those poetic works which are styled dramatic in the true sense of the word, and which afterwards formed the most brilliant portion of Spanish poetry, the Spaniards of the fifteenth century possessed merely spiritual or temporal farces, written in the style which prevailed in the middle ages, and which can scarcely be said to belong to literature. At Saragossa, the residence of the Court of Arragon, attempts towards the improvement of dramatic amusements were earlier made than in the Castilian court. There, as has already been observed, the Marquis de Villena devoted his learning and inventive talents to the drama. Allegorical dramas, indeed, do not seem to have been in favour at the court of Castile, notwithstanding the taste for allegory which distinguished the poets of the reign of John II. A singular union of pastoral and satirical poetry first gave birth to a species of dramatic poem in the Castilian language.
In the reign of John II. an anonymous poet amused himself by describing the court of that monarch in satirical coplas. It is impossible to account for the whim which induced him to throw his rhymes into the form of a dialogue, and to select shepherds for his interlocutors. The work extends to thirty-two coplas, and critics have sometimes classed it among the eclogues, and sometimes among the first satirical productions of the Spanish poets. Some make Rodrigo de Cota the author of these coplas; and others, who ascribe them to Juan de Mena, seem to forget that the latter was zealously devoted to the court party. This singular composition is usually mentioned under the title of Mingo Rebulgo, from the names of the two shepherds who carry on the dialogue. Supposing pastoral poetry to have been in vogue at that period in Spain, and particularly at the court of John II. it would be easy to explain how a witty author might conceive the bold idea of converting a pastoral dialogue into a satire; but in that case the ideas of a poetic pastoral existence must have been diffused through Spain, as they were through Italy. It is probable, however, that in both countries the revived study of classical literature, and particularly of Virgil’s eclogues, gave rise to the practice of clothing modern ideas in a garb imitated from the ancient bucolic poetry; and it seems the effect of mere accident that a Spaniard should have been the first to devote a work of this kind to the purposes of satire.126
Doubtless neither the eclogue of Mingo Rebulgo, nor the colloquial stanzas in the Cancionero can properly be regarded as the commencement of dramatic poetry in Spain. But all these preliminary essays in dialogue, are in a literary point of view connected together; and about the close of the fifteenth century, pastoral dialogues were converted into real dramas, by a musical composer, named Juan de la Enzina, or del Enzina, as he is styled in the old collections of his works. This ingenious man who was born in Salamanca during the reign of Queen Isabella, though in what year is not precisely known, was equally celebrated as a poet and musician. He travelled to Jerusalem in company with the Marquis de Tarifa, and this journey could not fail to store his mind with many new ideas. He lived for some time at Rome in the quality of chapel-master, or musical director to Pope Leo; who, it is well known, afforded great encouragement to dramatic amusements. But at Rome, as well as in Palestine, Juan de la Enzina still remained a Spaniard. His poetry imbibed no tincture of the Italian taste, and he continued to write songs and lyric romances in the old Castilian style. He also exercised his fancy in making jests, consisting of ridiculous combinations or heterogeneous conceits, called disparates, which he wrote in the form of romances. For instance, he talks with an absurd but harmless humour of a “cloud which at night, at day break in the afternoon arrived from a pilgrimage, having in its train a domestic utensil which appeared in pontificalibus,” &c.127 These oddities rendered his name a proverb in Spain. He converted Virgil’s eclogues into romances, in which he displayed singular simplicity, and applied to his patrons, Ferdinand and Isabella, the duke and duchess of Alba, and others, the compliments which Virgil addressed to the emperor Augustus. Accident had introduced into Spain a mixture of pastoral poetry with the drama, and Juan de la Enzina wrote sacred and profane eclogues, in the form of dialogues, which were represented before distinguished audiences on Christmas eve, during the carnival, and on other festivals. They are, however, entirely lost to literature.128
The dramatic romance of Callistus and Melibœa is, however, more celebrated than Juan de la Enzina’s eclogues. It was probably commenced in the reign of Ferdinand and Isabella; though some authors assign this singular production of popular descriptive talent and well meant plainness to the age of John II. The author is supposed to be Rodrigo de Cota, to whom the pastoral dialogue of Mingo Rebulgo is also attributed. This dramatic romance was continued and completed at the commencement of the fifteenth century by Fernando de Roxas, who has recorded his own name in the initials of the introductory stanzas.129 Fernando de Roxas did not possess the forcible descriptive powers of the unknown author, though he appears to have fully entered into the plan traced out by the latter. Either he or his precursor entitled the work a tragi-comedy. It consists of twenty-one acts, and consequently its vast length renders it unfit for theatrical representation. This production may be regarded as original in a certain sense, for there existed no work of the same kind which the author could have chosen as his model. But in a higher and truly critical point of view, it possesses as little originality as real poetic merit. Natural description and moral precept seem to have formed the great object of both authors. They both aimed at exhibiting a series of dramatic lessons to warn youth against the seductive arts of base agents employed to promote intrigues. In order to attain this moral end, the authors deemed it necessary to paint in glowing colours the disgusting picture of a brothel, and through a series of scenes unconnected by the unities of time or place, to exhibit in the most striking point of view, the tragical end of an intrigue conducted by a woman of infamous character. Owing to its moral object, the book has found admirers in all ages, though many have not unreasonably conceived it more advisable to withdraw such scenes of vice from the eye of youth, than to paint them with the minuteness and vivid colouring of truth. But, even allowing that an inconsiderate young person may have occasionally been deterred from an intrigue by the sad history of Callistus and Melibœa, yet the whole dramatic tale, both in the subject and execution, is nevertheless revolting to good taste. The story is as follows:—Callistus, a young man of noble family, entertains a romantic passion for Melibœa. The young lady is also attached to him; but her own prudence, as well as the strict observation to which she is subject in the house of her parents, prevents all communication between the lovers. In this difficulty, Callistus applies to an artful and abandoned woman, to whom the author has given the elegant name of Celestina. She easily devises a pretence for insinuating herself into the house of Melibœa’s parents, where she succeeds in bribing the servants. The intrigue then proceeds in the most common manner, though the author thinks it necessary to call in the aid of witchcraft and magic. Callistus at length attains his object, and Melibœa’s parents discover the mischief when it is too late. Murder is committed among the servants of Melibœa; Celestina’s house likewise becomes the scene of bloodshed; the profligate woman is herself murdered in the most horrible manner imaginable; Callistus is assassinated, and Melibœa closes the tragedy by throwing herself from the top of a lofty tower. Such is the ground-work of the twenty-one acts of this tragi-comedy. It must be admitted, that the authors appear to have wished to paint the scenes in the house of Celestina in as decorous a manner as the nature of the subject would permit. The profligate personages, particularly Celestina, are drawn with great truth; and in the list of the characters their description is unreservedly added to their names. The first act, which is by the unknown author, is distinguished above the rest for the easy flow of the dialogue.130 Considered in this point of view alone, the work is extremely interesting. It affords a fair proof that the fluent and natural style of conversation which the dramatic poets of the north did not attain, until after much labour and repeated failures, arose spontaneously in Spain, on the first attempt made by a writer of talent to make dramatic characters speak in prose.131 This tragi-comedy, as it is styled, has, however, but little relation to poetry.132
In a history of Spanish prose of the fifteenth century, it would be improper to omit a brief notice of the chronicles, which, in Spain, at this period, were not written by monks, as in other parts of Europe, but by knights, many of whom were at the same time poets. The custom instituted by Alphonso X. of appointing historiographers to record the most remarkable events of national history, was maintained by his successors throughout the fourteenth century; and, in addition to those historians, who were regularly appointed and paid, there arose others in the fifteenth century, who wrote of their own accord from the love of fame, or for the sake of doing honour to the parties to which they were respectively attached. Historians were never held in such high estimation in modern Europe as they were at this time in Castile.
But notwithstanding the fortunate circumstances which combined to revive the taste for historical composition in Spain, the noble authors of the Spanish chronicles in very few instances rose above the vulgar chronicle style. They faithfully adhered to the language of the historical books of the bible. In nothing is their poetic talent disclosed, except in a better choice of expression, than is to be found in the common chronicles, which were in general written by monks. Spirited and adequate historical description was totally unknown to them. They all wrote in nearly the same manner. Facts were heaped on facts, in long monotonous sentences, which uniformly commenced with the conjunction and. Occasionally, indeed, the writers of these chronicles seem to have made attempts to imitate the ancient historians; for at every favourable opportunity little speeches are put into the mouths of the characters they record; but these speeches are given either in the language of scripture or the law. Thus wrote the illustrious Perez de Guzman, who was celebrated among the poets of his age; and thus wrote the grand Chancellor of Castile, Pedro Lopez de Ayala, who is better known than the former as an historian, in consequence of having compiled from ancient chronicles a connected history of the kings of Castile of the fourteenth century.133
An agreeable surprise is, however, excited in discovering among these chronicles some biographical works, one of which was probably written in the last years of the fourteenth century, and another, doubtless, belongs to the fifteenth. These two productions deserve to be noticed, but in a rhetorical point of view neither can be very highly estimated. The first is the history of Count Pedro Niño de Buelna, one of the bravest knights of the reign of Henry III. The author is Gutierre Diez de Games, who was the Count’s standard-bearer.134 The gothic taste of the age, it must be confessed, is sufficiently apparent in this history. The chivalrous author begins by apostrophizing the Trinity and the Holy Virgin. He then reasons methodically on virtue and vice, according to the scholastic notions of morality. It is, however, easy to perceive that the author has taken great pains to avoid the dry chronicle style. He evidently wished to give to the history of his hero the interest of a romance. He did not, therefore, confine himself very scrupulously to historical truth, and he has even blended fabulous stories in his narrative. But on the other hand he paints real events with a degree of spirit of which no example is to be found in the chronicles; and some of his descriptions are so remarkable for precision, and accuracy of expression, that they might be mistaken for the production of a modern writer, if the simplicity of the ideas did not betray the age to which the chivalrous author belonged.135
The second of these biographical works is the history of Count Alvaro de Luna. The author, whose name is not known, appears to have been in the Count’s service, and to have taken up the pen soon after the execution of that extraordinary man, to raise a monument to his memory in defiance of his enemies.136 The work is in fact an apology, in which the enthusiasm of the anonymous author for his hero carries him beyond the bounds of historical calmness and of impartiality. But this very enthusiasm gives the work a degree of rhetorical interest, which is wanting in the chronicles. Alvaro de Luna is regarded by his apologist in his real character; namely, as the greatest, if not the most disinterested man of his age in Spain: and it was the author’s intention that the animated picture he drew should mortify and shame the powerful party which overthrew his hero. His zeal frequently betrays him into declamatory pomp. But what other Spanish writer of that age could declaim with so much eloquence.137 He is not, however, always declamatory. His introduction, notwithstanding the high elevation of the ideas, possesses real dignity of expression, combined with the true harmony of prose.138 His apostrophe to truth at the close of this introduction, is a genuine overflowing of the heart.139 It is true that the narrative itself somewhat inclines to the manner of the chronicles; but the spirit which pervades the whole work is perceptible even in the style which, considered with reference to the period in which it was written, is remarkable for precision and facility.140 In short, this biographical chronicle, estimated by its rhetorical merit, has, in spite of all its gothic ornaments and declamatory excrescences, no parallel among the chronicles of the age to which it belongs.
Los Claros Varones, the Celebrated Men, is a work which claims particular attention. The author is Fernando del Pulgar, who filled the office of historiographer in the reign of Isabella and Ferdinand. This ingenious man was ambitious to be thought the Plutarch of his nation. In his twenty-six short biographical sketches, he has, however, confined himself within limits too narrow to effect all that he was capable of; but the precision of his descriptions, and the purity of his style, are nevertheless remarkable for the age in which he flourished.141
Fernando del Pulgar is also the oldest Castilian author in the epistolary style; and upon the whole he may be regarded as the first, who, in the character of a statesman and public functionary, formed his correspondence in a modern language on the model of Cicero and Pliny.142
Those who have time and opportunity to peruse Spanish manuscripts of the fifteenth century, will doubtless find many more documents to prove the high degree of cultivation which Spanish prose had attained at that period. In spite of the lofty poetic flight which then characterized the genius of Spain, and the powerful charm of the poetic prose of the chivalrous romances, the national gravity of the Spaniards, when their minds were directed, not to sports of the imagination, but to things, made them incline to what may be termed the style of affairs, in the same degree as the genius of the Italians, which attached itself exclusively to beautiful forms, had been accustomed to manifest an indifference for true prose. The philosophic writings of Aristotle were, in the same age, translated into Spanish by a scholar, whose name, as well as his work, have fallen into oblivion.143
The literature of this period possesses, however, not the slightest trace of true criticism. Though the poetical and rhetorical rules of Aristotle were known to a few scholars, they were of little utility to writers who either applied them erroneously, or considered them impracticable. Of the state of poetry in Spain, during the reign of Ferdinand and Isabella, a correct notion may be formed from a Treatise on Castilian Poetry, (Arte de Poesia Castellana,) by Juan de la Enzina. In this work, addressed to the Prince Royal of Spain, the author wished to prove that he thoroughly understood the art on which he wrote, and that he was not an unskilful Troubadour.144 The commencement of the treatise might teach the reader to expect some profound investigation. Juan de la Enzina observes, “that poetry is so excellent an art, that it merits the particular favour of princes and nobles”, who being reared “in the bosom of sweet philosophy,”145 know how to unite the virtues both of peace and war; it was therefore, he continues, his intention to write a theory (arte) of Castilian poetry, which might facilitate the distinction between good and bad. He treats of the origin of poetry among the ancients and among the Italians, and marks the difference between a poet and a Troubadour. The former, he says, is, with respect to the latter, “what a composer or learned musician is to a singer or musical performer, a geometrician to a mason, or a captain to a private soldier.”146 After all these high promises, Juan de la Enzina merely gives an Essay on Castilian prosody in a few chapters. Such is his art of poetry.
Thus did Castilian poetry and eloquence develope itself in the ancient national forms, during the first centuries that succeeded its birth, without any superior genius having either raised it to higher perfection, or enlarged its boundaries. Like the Gaya Ciencia of the Troubadours, it was a common property, protected by a literary democracy, which allowed no despotic genius to encroach upon its rights. It is difficult to imagine what might have been the fate of Castilian poetry, had not a new political connection formed between Spain and Italy, at the commencement of the sixteenth century, suddenly brought the Spanish nation, as it were in mass, in contact with the Italians. At all events, the Spaniards must, in the progress of cultivation, have ceased to be satisfied with the poetry of their old songs and romances, on their literary taste becoming in any way more refined.
The union of the kingdoms of Castile and Arragon, in consequence of the marriage of Isabella, the heiress of the Castilian throne, with Ferdinand king of Arragon, forms an epoch in Spanish literature, as well as in Spanish power. Hitherto Spain had been occupied only with her own internal affairs. The monarchs contended for their prerogatives with the powerful barons of their respective states; and the two kingdoms waged war against each other. The only object which they pursued in common, was the overthrow of the Moorish principality of Granada, which was enabled to resist them, as long as their political jealousy of each other counter-balanced their mutual zeal for religion and conquest. Spain, in her detached situation to the west of the Pyrenees, never appeared so completely separated from the rest of Europe as in the middle of the fifteenth century. With Italy, Spain maintained no relations, except such as were purely ecclesiastical. A marked change, however, took place on the union of the crowns of Castile and Arragon, though the union of the two monarchies was not properly consolidated until after Ferdinand’s death, which happened in 1516. Since the year 1492, Granada had been a Castilian province. The poets had no longer the feats of the Zegris and Abencerrages to record; and the Spanish knights had no infidels to vanquish, unless they travelled to Africa in quest of them. If, however, they were successful in that quarter of the world, their victories did not present subjects of such interest to the Castilian muse as former achievements had afforded. The love of industry and social order, which distinguished the people of Arragon, at length extended to Castile; and the old chivalrous spirit declined in proportion as the use of gunpowder, which was at this period rapidly increasing, became more general. The manners of the Spaniards of both monarchies, had now approximated to those of the Italians; and the analogy between the Castilian and Italian languages, could not fail to be remarked, whenever opportunities for making that observation occurred. Ferdinand soon afforded such an opportunity; his ambition induced him to take an active part in the transactions of Italy, and his interference was attended with success. The victorious Gonsalvo Fernandez de Cordova, admired as the conqueror of Granada, and a second Cid, and surnamed, by way of distinction, El gran Capitan, presented the crown of Naples to his sovereign in the year 1504. The political union which then took place between Spain and Italy, and which continued longer than a century, paved the way for that influence of the Italian poetry on the Spanish, which soon after became manifest.
About the same period that Ferdinand and Isabella united their dominions, they also co-operated in the establishment of that terrible tribunal which soon became known throughout Europe by the name of the Spanish Inquisition, and which to the disgrace of human reason exercised during two centuries and a half its monstrous powers in their fullest extent. A crafty policy contrived to render religion its instrument, in subjugating to one common tyranny the reason and the rights of mankind; for the establishment of regal despotism in both kingdoms was the great object of this institution, and its whole organization corresponded with the end for which it was destined. The pope, who penetrated the design of the founders, viewed their proceedings with much dissatisfaction; but even the pope was obliged to support the pretended interest of the church, and to honour Ferdinand by bestowing on him, as a peculiar distinction, the title of “Catholic King.” Thus the court of Rome contributed to annul the privileges of the Cortes of Castile and Arragon, and to invest the whole powers of government, without limitation, in the hands of an absolute monarch: and thus did political artifice triumph over the energy of one of the noblest nations in the world, at the very moment when the genius of that nation had begun to expand, when the promising flower had burst forth from the bud, and was about to unfold itself in full vigour and beauty. A simultaneous and concordant cultivation of the different powers of the human mind was now as little to be hoped for in Spain as the improvement of her political constitution. Under these circumstances the literary genius of the country could not be expected to reach that high maturity of taste which always presupposes a certain degree of harmony in the moral and intellectual faculties. Poetic freedom was circumscribed by the same shackles which fettered moral liberty. Thoughts which could not be expressed without fear of the dungeon and the stake, were no longer materials for the poet to work on. His imagination instead of improving them into poetic ideas, and embodying them in beautiful verse, had to be taught to reject them. But the eloquence of prose was more completely bowed down under the inquisitorial yoke than poetry, because it was more closely allied to truth, which, of all things, was the most dreaded.
The yoke of this odious tribunal weighed, however, far less heavily on the imagination than on the other faculties of the mind; and it must be confessed that a wide field still remained open for the range of fancy, though the boundaries of religious doctrine were not permitted to be overstepped. To suppose that the Spanish inquisition could have entirely annihilated the poetic genius of the nation, it must also be supposed, that at the period of its establishment, there had existed a style of poetry altogether hostile to such an institution, and that the spirit of the inquisition was directly opposed to the spirit of the nation. But it would be forming a false notion of the horrors of the inquisition, to imagine that they were ever felt in Spain in the same manner as in other countries, and particularly in the Netherlands, where that tribunal was introduced hand in hand with foreign despotism. When the inquisition was established in Spain, it harmonized to all appearance, that is to say, as far as orthodox faith was concerned, with the prevailing opinions of the Spanish Christians. It was ostensibly directed not so much against heretics as against infidels, namely, Mahometans and Jews. Its operations were accordingly commenced by waging war against those infidels, for no sect of Christian heretics existed at that period in Spain, and the inquisition took care that none should be afterwards formed. To maintain the purity of the ancient faith was the avowed object of the inquisition; and its wrath was poured out on the unfortunate Jews, Moors, and Moriscos, (the descendants of the Moors), with the view of removing every blemish from the faith of a nation, which prided itself in its orthodoxy. This bigotted pride was a consequence of the contest maintained in Spain during four centuries and a half, between Catholic Christianity and Mahometanism. The Spanish Christians celebrated the conquest of Granada as the triumph of the church; and the inquisition, which at first excited terror, soon became an object of veneration with men in whose hearts religious enthusiasm was inseparably blended with patriotism.
This view of the subject may serve to explain how it happened in the sequel, and particularly during the reign of Philip II. that while, throughout all the rest of Europe men shuddered at the very name of the Spanish inquisition, the Spaniards still lived under it as happily and cheerfully as ever; and also how, from the operation of the same cause, the ecclesiastical shackles had not a more injurious effect on the developement of the poetic genius of the nation. The conduct of the inquisition was no subject of alarm to those who were confident that they never could have any personal concern with it; for the suspicion of deficiency in Catholic orthodoxy, the ground on which that tribunal acted, was more degrading in Spain than the most odious crimes in other countries. Before the establishment of the inquisition, fanaticism was so firmly rooted in the minds of the Spaniards, that all scepticism in matters of religion was abhorred as a deadly sin. He, however, who submitted with blind devotion to the decrees of the church, was held to have a clear conscience, and in that sort of clear conscience the Spaniards prided themselves. The inquisition disturbed the good Catholic as little in his social enjoyments, as criminal justice the citizen who lived in conformity with the laws. The Spaniard was cruel only to heretics and infidels, because he thought it his duty to hate them; but in the orthodox bosom of his native country, he was animated by a spirit of gaiety of which the literature of Spain presents abundant proofs. While the Duke of Alba in the Netherlands ruled with the axe of the executioner, Cervantes, in Spain, wrote his Don Quixote, and Lope de Vega, who himself held a post connected with the inquisition, produced his admirable comedies. The dramatic literature of Spain flourished with most brilliancy during the reigns of the three Philips, from 1556 to 1665, and that is precisely the period when the Spanish inquisition exercised its power with the greatest rigour and the most sanguinary cruelty. Many melancholy traces of fanaticism are certainly observable in the literature of Spain during the reigns of the three Philips; but those traces are so insulated, and the painful impression which they naturally produce on liberal minds is so far compensated, by the noblest traits of humanity, that to him, who, from reading the works of the Spanish poets, should turn to the perusal of the political history of the Spaniards during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, and particularly to the history of their transactions in the Netherlands and America, it might well appear that he had become acquainted with two distinct nations.
Indeed, notwithstanding the generally prejudicial effects of the restrictions imposed by the inquisition on intellectual freedom, those restrictions could not fail, under the circumstances which have been described, to prove in one respect favourable to the polite literature of Spain. The poetic genius which, at the period of the establishment of this tribunal, was energetically developing itself throughout the Peninsula, was not now to be annihilated. Its strength was even augmented by that growing national pride, which the union of the Castilian and Arragonian monarchies fostered. During the period marked by the reign of Charles I. better known by his Germanic imperial title of Charles V. which was nearly half a century, namely, from the year 1516 to the year 1555, the Austrian and Spanish monarchies were also united, and Spain acquired rich possessions in a new quarter of the world. The Spanish arms were not so victorious under the three Philips as under Charles V. But, sacrificed as this gallant nation was to fanaticism and the most despicable of governments, its spirit never sunk under disaster, and its genius vented itself in the cultivation of poetry, because it was excluded by religious despotism from every graver study, except the scholastic philosophy of the convent. It is also to be considered, that the influence of the ever debasing despotism of the Spanish government could operate only gradually in extinguishing the energies of national genius. The bold manifestation of the spirit of freedom in Castile and Arragon on the accession of Charles V. was attended with discouraging results, because the nobility and the third estate did not unite in support of their common interests. Had that union existed, Spain would probably have presented the first model of a constitutional, and at the same time a vigorous monarchy. That honour was withheld by fate: but the genius of the Spanish people was not so easily suppressed as their political and religious freedom. Kings might rule as they pleased; they might madly shed the blood of their subjects, or waste the treasures drawn from America; but the people, who had yielded to despotism only for the sake of religion, continued in their hearts to be what they had always been, till the influence of time consummated their subjugation. The Spanish patriot, who fought in the cause of his king and country, was until then, in his own estimation, still a free man. Kings received homage in verse as well as in prose; but a court poetry, like that which existed in France in the reign of Lewis XIV. was never known in Spain. The kings of Spain, too, never bestowed any very liberal encouragement on the poetic literature of their country. Charles V. honoured a few Spanish and Italian poets with some degree of attention, according to the fashion of the princes of that age; for in the sixteenth century a poet was accounted an extremely useful man for business of every sort; but that sovereign seems to have taken a more particular interest in Italian than in Spanish literature. Philip II. from his joyless throne, occasionally cast a glance of favour on a man of talent; but restless ambition and blind bigotry occupied his gloomy mind, and deprived him of all susceptibility for the beautiful. His son, Philip III. though of a more amiable character, was too indolent to take a warm interest in any thing whatever. Philip IV. however, did more for Spanish literature than any of his predecessors since the time of John II. His taste for pomp and splendour, to which he thoughtlessly gave himself up, while decay and disorder preyed upon the vitals of the state, disposed him to favour the Spanish theatre. Calderon, whom he pensioned, was indebted to him for that leisure which enabled him to devote his life to dramatic poetry. But Calderon only improved on the labours of predecessors, who, without receiving the pay of kings, produced works which did honour to the nation, and were approved and rewarded by the public. Spanish literature owes nothing to kings, and has to thank only the popular spirit for all its brightest flowers. The drama, therefore, remained wholly national, even after the imitation of Italian forms had long prevailed in the lyric and epic poetry of Spain. Writers for the stage must of necessity obey the voice of a public possessing sufficient energy of character to condemn every piece which does not pay homage to the popular taste. The whole history of the Spanish theatre exhibits this dominion of the public over authors; and the particular taste of the dramatists being formed under the influence of the general poetic genius of the nation, they very willingly, like Lope de Vega, followed the stream, even though, like him, they well knew what the true theory of their art required. The cultivation of prose was more completely left to the individual taste of the authors; but any instance of encouragement from the throne was as uncommon with respect to it as to poetry. Antonio de Solis, who received a pension from Philip IV. as historiographer, for writing the History of Spanish America, was indebted for that honour in some measure to his reputation as a poet, and his various acquirements, but by no means for any particular esteem he had obtained on account of his talent for prose composition.
During the whole of this period, however, intellectual talents were never undervalued, either by the kings, or the nobles of Spain. In that country, as well as in Italy, the higher orders considered it a duty to seek distinction through learning, and poetry was the soul both of Spanish and Italian literature. Most of the Spanish poets of this period, if not of noble birth, belonged, at least, to families of consideration. Heroes, statesmen, ecclesiastics, all composed verses, and poetry was most intimately interwoven with all the relations of social life. No where did chivalrous gallantry so long survive the extinction of real chivalry as in Spain; and poetry was the exhaustless language of that gallantry, whether it displayed itself in secret love intrigues, or at public entertainments and festivals. Every characteristic national amusement, as for instance, a bull fight, proved an incitement to the writing of sonnets and romances. There are found in various Spanish poems of this period many expressions and allusions which have reference to popular amusements, but the poetic sense of which is only intelligible to readers who bear in their recollection the favourite diversions of the nation. The romantic intrigues which were common in high life, formed models for the intricate plots of the Spanish comedies; but no ordinary powers of invention were necessary to enable the dramatic author to maintain on the stage a competition with the scenes which actually occurred in society. Throughout the whole country, singing and dancing were essential ingredients in every amusement. Learned musical composition had, at this time, little attraction for the Spaniards; but wherever joy was, musicians were not wanting, and every dance had its song.
In the mean time the cultivation of the other fine arts, afforded little aid to Spanish poetry, as the overwhelming interest attached to it in its golden age directed the intellectual energies of the nation almost exclusively to that one object. All other liberal pursuits were consequently left far behind.
Spanish taste was, at this period, entirely left to form itself, being abandoned to the influence of Italian literature, and the authority of eminent national authors. The Italian system of academies found little favour in Spain. Perhaps the jealousy of the inquisition foreboded evil from meetings of men of letters. Be this as it may, Spanish literature sustained little loss by the want of those institutions. The Royal Academy for the Spanish language and literature was not established until the eighteenth century.
The intimate union, which, during the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, subsisted between the eloquence of prose and poetry in Spain, renders a separate history of each unnecessary. A division may, however, be advantageously made in the whole body of the Spanish literature of this period, though the two sections cannot form two distinct epochs. From the introduction of the Italian style into Spanish poetry, until the decline of learning in the latter years of the reign of Philip IV. no literary revolution was experienced in Spain. The corrupters of taste, as certain writers who appeared in the latter half of this period are called by some of the Spanish critics, only continued a movement, the impulse of which had been given long before by various authors, and particularly by the dramatic poets. Several of these writers were contemporaries with authors who placed a high value on classical correctness, and yet they exercised a much greater influence over the general literature of Spain than the latter. To confound Calderon, who perfected the Spanish comedy, according to its true national character, with the corrupters of taste, is an idea which could only have been entertained in the eighteenth century, when it became customary in Spain, as every where else, to measure all productions of genius by the rules of French criticism. But at the same time, that Spanish poetry approximated as closely to the Italian, as the necessary connection of the former with the national style would permit, that national style, with all its faults and beauties, still maintained the pre-eminence; and the passion for Italian correctness again declined. This crisis in Spanish literature, occasioned by the struggle between Italian refinement and the bold eccentricity of the national manners, occurred in the age of Cervantes. At that time Lope de Vega shone with more brilliancy in the eyes of his countrymen than Cervantes, and the party of the former gained the victory and kept the field. The taking of a distinct view of the progress of poetry and eloquence in Spain, will therefore be facilitated, if the period of the influence of Cervantes and Lope de Vega be made an historical resting point. It is doubtless very remarkable, that Cervantes, who created an epoch in the general literature of Europe, should not have produced sufficient effect on the Literature of his own country, to justify the choosing him as the founder of a new epoch in its literary history. An opportunity will hereafter arise for reverting to this subject.147