Chapter 10

Though most people who are interested in Luis de Leon at all are familiar with Pacheco's portrait of him, Pacheco's character-sketch is so apt to be overlooked that it may be briefly summarized here.[261] Pacheco reports Luis de Leon as having a special gift of silence, as being the most taciturn of men though one of the wittiest; as being a man most trustworthy, truthful and upright, precise in speech and in the keeping of promises, reserved, not given to smiling; in the gravity of his countenance his nobility of soul and, still more, his deep humility were obvious; most cleanly, chaste, and reflective, he was a great monk and a close observer of laws; so marked was his devotion to the Blessed Virgin that he fasted on the eve of feasts, dined at three, and ate no supper; in her honour he wrote the lovely hymn _Virgen que el Sol mas pura_, very spiritually-minded and greatly given to prayer, at the time of his severest trials God hearkened to him. Though by nature hasty, he was very long-suffering and gentle to those with whom he had to deal; he was most abstemious in matters of food, drink, and sleep; indeed with regard to sleep (as was stated to Pacheco by Fray Luis Moreno de Bohorquez, who had lived in the same monastery as Luis de Leon for four years) he carried mortification so far that he seldom lay down, and the monk who had to make his bed would often find that it had not been slept in. So great were his intellectual gifts that he seemed more meet to teach every one than to learn things from anybody. On matters concerning government his judgement was sound; he was highly esteemed by prominent men both in Spain and out of it; Philip II was wont to consult him in difficult cases, and would send messengers from Madrid to Salamanca; when he visited Madrid on University business he was admitted to private audience and received signal marks of royal favour; with respect to offers of bishoprics and the Archbishopric of Mexico he displayed his courage and magnanimous spirits not only by stripping himself of rank (a thing seldom done) but of all he had in the world; a man of truly evangelical temper. In those holy exercises, and in fitting sequel to his life, he piously ended his course as Provincial of Castile, leaving all in great affliction, but with a still greater certainty of his glory.

This estimate was printed in 1599, eight years after Luis de Leon's death and one year after Philip II's death. Making some allowance for the partiality of an admirer, Pacheco's description may stand. A dry contemporary chronicler, like Luis Cabrera de Córdoba,[262] after paying tribute to Luis de Leon's intellectual gifts and heroic courage in adversity, speaks of his death as a national loss. Even in his lifetime Luis de Leon was recognized by men of exceptional genius as one of themselves. His poems, which were not published till forty years after his death, must have been handed about in manuscript long before. In 1585 Cervantes in his _Galatea_ introduced Luis de Leon into the _Canto de Caliope_. It cannot well be maintained that Cervantes had been impressed by Luis de Leon's Latin treatises, by _De los nombres de Cristo_, and by _La perfecta casada_. The _Canto de Caliope_ records the names of those only whom Cervantes considered to be eminent poets--masters _en la alegre sciencia dela poesia_--and hence it is to the poet that he refers when he writes in his 84th stanza:

Quisiera rematar mi dulce canto en tal sazon pastores, con loaros un ingenio que al mundo pone espanto y que pudiera en estasis robaros. En el cifro y recojo todo quanto he mostrado hasta aqui, y he de mostraros Fray Luys de Leon el que digo a quien yo reverencio, adoro, y sigo.

IV

[Footnote 189: Bartolomé José Gallardo, _Ensayo de una biblioteca española de libros raros y curiosos_ (Madrid, 1863-66-88-89), vol. IV, col. 1328: 'En unos apuntes cronológicos que hacia en Salamanca un curioso (jesuita?) á fines del siglo XVI, fol. 23 de un tomo de _Papeles varios_, en folio, se lee:

'Año de 76, Mártes 23 de diciembre dia de San Dámaso, dieron por libre a _fr. Luis_ sin pena. Y donde a 30 de diciembre entró en Salamanca a las tres de la tarde con atabales, trompetas y gran acompañamiento de Caballeros, Doctores, Maestros, &c.']

[Footnote 190: He is clearly wrong in stating that Luis de Leon was set free on December 23. We have already seen that Luis de Leon presented two applications in writing on December 15. From the nature of these applications, it is a fair inference that he was free when he made them.]

[Footnote 191: Especially as the fact is confirmed by a contemporary Augustinian, Fray Juan Quijano: see Blanco García, _op. cit._, p. 206, _n._ 1.]

[Footnote 192: This date is given on the authority of the anonymous writer quoted by Gallardo, _op. cit._, col. 1328: 'Y lunes _adelante_ le presentó el Comisorio al Claustro, para que se le diese su proprio lugar, honra y cátedra de _Durando_. Él no la quiso y la Universidad cedió 200 ducados de partido.' The date in this case is corroborated by a summons from the Rector of the University: see P. Fr. Luis G. Alonso Getino, O.P., _Vida y procesos del maestro Fr. Luis de León_ (Salamanca, 1907), p. 244.]

[Footnote 193: According to Blanco García (_op. cit._, p. 207), Luis de Leon did not vote, but assigned his proxy to Bartolomé de Medina. This incident occurred, but it happened at a meeting of the _Claustro_ held two days later: see Alonso Getino (_op. cit._, pp. 252-254). Medina seems to have thought that Luis de Leon's chair had not been legally vacated, and that it was not in Luis de Leon's power to say that he would assign it to Castillo.]

[Footnote 194: Alonso Getino, _op. cit._, p. 258.]

[Footnote 195: Gallardo, _op. cit._, vol. IV, col. 1328: '...y martes a 29 [de enero de 1577] empezó a leer. Hubo gran concurso, &c.']

[Footnote 196: _Monasticon Augustinianum_ (Munich, 1623), p. 208: 'Primam vero lectionem post tenebras ut auspicabatur, pleno concessu ad novitatem evocato, inquit: _Dicebamus hesterna die_.' Blanco García, who quotes this passage (_op. cit._, p. 209, _n._ 1), refers also to p. 119 of a reprint issued at Valladolid in 1890: this reprint I have not seen.]

[Footnote 197: Early instances, dating from 1636, are given by Blanco García, _op. cit._, p. 209, _n._ 2. The story first appeared in print in Spain in 1771, when it was given in the fifth volume of Juan Josef Lopez de Sedano, _Parnaso Español_ (Madrid, 1768-1778).]

[Footnote 198: C. Muiños Sáenz, _Sobre el 'Decíamos ayer'... y otros excesos_ in _La Ciudad de Dios_ (1909), vol. LXXIX, p. 22.]

[Footnote 199: C. Muiños Sáenz, _La Ciudad de Dios_ (1909), vol. LXXIX, p. 29.]

[Footnote 200: Luis G. Alonso Getino, _Vida y procesos del Maestro Fr. Luis de León_ (Salamanca, 1907), pp. 242-243, 262-263.]

[Footnote 201: C. Muiños Sáenz, _El 'Decíamos ayer' de Fray Luis de León_ (Madrid, 1905) and _Sobre el 'Decíamos ayer'... y otros excesos_ in _La Ciudad de Dios_ (1909), vol. LXXVIII, pp. 479-495, 544-560; (1909), vol. LXXIX, pp. 18-34, 107-124, 191-212, 353-374, 529-552; (1909), vol. LXXX, pp. 99-125, and 177-197.]

[Footnote 202: Alonso Getino, _op. cit._, pp. 260-261.]

[Footnote 203: Alonso Getino, _op. cit._, pp. 262-263: 'É despues de lo sobredicho en la dicha ciudad de Salamanca martes á la hora que dió las diez de la mañana el relox de la iglesia mayor, al fin de la lecion del padre mº. Pedro de Uceda, que se contaron veinti nueve dias del mes de Enero... Antonio de Almaraz bedel puso en la posesion del dicho salario al dicho padre mº. fray Luis de Leon en la catedra questá en el general mayor de theologia de escuelas mayores, el qual la tomó é apprehendió sin contradicion ninguna, y _en lugar de posesion leyó un poco_. É dijo y protestó... que estaba y está presto de leer el dicho salario é partido, é que si no leyere no se le pare por ello perjuicio ni se le descuente de su salario y partido ni por ello sea multado en cosa alguna, pues no es su culpa, hasta tanto que le den hora en que lea, conforme á lo proveido por la junta de los señores theologos... y le señalen lectura, é asi lo pidió é protestó, siendo presentes por todo el Padre mº. Pedro de Uceda... é Antonio de Almaraz bedel, é otros muchos estudiantes y personas de la universidad é yo Bartme. Sanchez notario é vicesecretario.']

[Footnote 204: Alonso Getino, _op. cit._, pp. 266-268.]

[Footnote 205: Blanco García, _op. cit._, pp. 212-213.]

[Footnote 206: Blanco García, _op. cit._, p. 214, _n._ 1; Alonso Getino, _op. cit._, pp. 282-301.]

[Footnote 207: The bishop seems to have resented Luis de Leon's opposition to the candidature of the bishop's brother, Juan Gallo, for the _cátedra de vísperas de teología_. In this contest Juan Gallo, a Dominican, was defeated by the Augustinian Fray Juan de Guevara (_Documentos inéditos_, vol. XI, pp. 275-277). Guevara was present when the bishop told Luis de Leon that 'he knew Luis de Leon's hostility to his (the bishop's) brother had done him more harm than all the rest' (_Documentos inéditos_, vol. XI, p. 261). Later on, Juan Gallo appears to have been appointed to another chair at Salamanca (_Documentos inéditos_, vol. XI, p. 318).]

[Footnote 208: _Documentos inéditos_, vol. XI, p. 303. Salinas, it should be noted, denied having heard that this applied specially to opponents of the Dominican order.]

[Footnote 209: The verses ascribed to Domingo de Guzman are reproduced in part by Adolfo de Castro, _Biblioteca de Autores Españoles desde la formacion del lenguaje hasta nuestros dias_ (Madrid, 1847-1880), vol. XXXV, p. x; they are given in full by Cayetano Alberto de la Barrera in the _Revista de Ciencias, Literatura y Artes_ (Sevilla, 1856), vol. II, pp. 731-741; (Sevilla, 1857), vol. III, pp. 5-22, 69-80, 209-220. La Barrera, following Gallardo, was careful to point out that lines 37-40 of the verses to Urganda la Desconocida are practically identical with four lines in Domingo de Guzman's _glosa_. Sr. Rodríguez Marín, in his edition of _Don Quixote_, published at Madrid in 1916-1917, prints the four lines (vol. I, pp. 49-50) in inverted commas. Cervantes, if he meant to quote, must have trusted to his memory.

GUZMAN CERVANTES

que don Albaro de Luna, Que don Aluaro de Lu que Anibal Cartajines, Que Anibal el de Carta que Francisco Rey frances, Que Rey Francisco de Espa se queja de la fortuna. Se quexa de la fortu.

In Guzman's case I reproduce La Barrera's transcription. In the case of Cervantes I follow the spelling adopted in the _princeps_ of the First Part of _Don Quixote_.

For some readers, it may be convenient to refer to the revised but abridged reprint in C.A. de la Barrera, _El Cachetero del Buscapié_ (Santander, 1916), pp. 133-136.]

[Footnote 210: The first _quintilla_ of some verses by a poetaster on Luis de Leon's side is quoted by Fray Antolin Merino in the preface to his edition of the _Poesías_ of Luis de Leon contained in the _Obras del Il. Fr. Luis de Leon_ (Madrid, 1804-1805-1806-1816), vol. XI, p. xxv:

Luis y Mingo pretenden casarse con Ana bella, cada cual pretende habella, mas segun todos entienden muérese por Luis ella.

[Footnote 211: Gallardo, _op. cit._, vol. IV, col. 1328: '...En este año (79) domingo 6 de diciembre se proveyó la (cátedra) de Biblia a Fr. Luis de Leon, y el dia siguiente tomó la posesión: tuvo 281 votos, y el maestro fr. Domingo de Guzman tuvo 245: llevóla con 36 votos.']

[Footnote 212: Gallardo, _op. cit._, vol. IV, col. 1328-1329: 'Reguláronse los cursos, y vino en llevarla por solo tres Cursos, y esto fué quitando un voto señalado, que tenia cinco cursos, el cual se sospechó era Dominico. No pudiendo conformarse con él, hubo concierto entre los frailes, que votasen de Santo Domingo 100 y de San Agustin 50. Anduvo pleito hasta viernes 13 de Octubre de 81, que sentenciaron en Valladolid en favor de fr. Luis de Leon.']

[Footnote 213: For example, by Alonso Getino, op. cit., pp. 268-274.]

[Footnote 214: This is stated by Alonso Fernandez, who wrote more than twenty years after the election. A relevant passage is given in Alonso Getino, _op. cit._, pp. 272-273.]

[Footnote 215: The terms of Suarez's order are reproduced by Blanco García, _op. cit._, p. 218, _n._ 3.]

[Footnote 216: Nothing was known of this second suit by the Valladolid Inquisitors till 1882, when a considerable part of the report of the proceedings was published by Sr. D. Álvarez Guijarro in the _Revista Hispano-Americana_.

It was given later more fully in _La Ciudad de Dios_ (Madrid, 1896), vol. XLI, pp. 15-31, by P. Francisco Blanco García. The subsequent references are to the _tirage à part_ entitled: _Segundo Proceso instruído por la Inquisición de Valladolid contra Fray Luis de León con prólogo y notas del P. Francisco Blanco García_ (Madrid, 1896).]

[Footnote 217: Zumel gives the date (Blanco García, _Segundo proceso_, p. 40) as January 21; the delator, Santa Cruz, fixes the date a day earlier (Blanco García, _Segundo proceso_, p. 20).]

[Footnote 218: Blanco García, _Segundo proceso_, p. 31: '...mouime lo uno por parecerme que los padres dominicos le querian oprimir por ser de la compañia contra la qual se muestran siempre apasionados y lo otro y principal porque me pareció gran sin razon condenar por eregía una cosa que la presuponen por cierta muchos sanctos y otros muchos catholicos sanctos y no sanctos la afirman y defienden...']

[Footnote 219: Luis de Leon merely says (Blanco García, _Segundo proceso_, p. 31) 'un fraile benito': Castañeda's full name is given in the report of the Valladolid Inquisitors (Blanco García, _Segundo proceso_, p. 52).]

[Footnote 220: Blanco García, _Segundo proceso_, p. 32: '...porque se dezia en la escuela que el maestro yuañez dezia que era error pelagiano yo dixe que no tenia razon de ponelle aquella nota,...']

[Footnote 221: Blanco García, _Segundo proceso_, p. 33: '...y despues del acto me dixo el maestro Vañez que el quedaba bien satisfecho de la manera como el sustentante auia declarado su opinion'.]

[Footnote 222: Juan de Guevara and Pedro de Aragon, for example. This emerges from the evidence of the Augustinian Fray Martín de Coscojales (Blanco García, _Segundo proceso_, p. 37). Pedro de Aragon was Duns Scotus Professor of Theology at Salamanca, a former pupil of Luis de Leon's and a great admirer of his. He appeared as a witness against Luis de Leon (Blanco García, _Segundo proceso_, pp. 36-37).]

[Footnote 223: Blanco García, _Segundo proceso_, pp. 20-27.]

[Footnote 224: _Documentos inéditos_, vol. XI, p. 328.]

[Footnote 225: Blanco García, _Segundo proceso_, pp. 28-34.]

[Footnote 226: Even in his official _calificacion_ Joan de la Cruz (Blanco García, _Segundo proceso_, p. 24) speaks of 'las [cosas] que yo ví y las que oy y se por Relacion....']

[Footnote 227: Blanco García, _Segundo proceso_, p. 35.]

[Footnote 228: Blanco García, _Segundo proceso_, pp. 36-40.]

[Footnote 229: Blanco García, _Fr. Luis de León: estudio biográfico_, p. 225; Blanco García, _Segundo proceso_, pp. 40-45.]

[Footnote 230: This seems to follow from a question which Luis de Leon proposed to put to six witnesses: the Augustinians Juan de Guevara, Pedro de Rojas, and Hernando de Peralto, and three laymen, Loarte, Ruiz, and Madrigal: 'Item si saben etc. que el maestro fray Domingo Ibañez, antes y al tiempo que juró y depuso en esta causa, era y es enemigo capital del dicho fray Luis de Leon, ansí por ser fraile dominico como porque se opuso contra él á una substitucion de vísperas, y se la llevó fray Luis de Leon con mucho exceso, de lo cual él y sus frailes se sintieron mucho' (_Documentos inéditos_, vol. XI, pp. 261-263). Luis de Leon was mistaken in supposing that Bañez had deposed against him at Valladolid. Alonso Getino endeavours to show (_op. cit._, pp. 384-386) that Luis de Leon never competed against Bañez, and that his memory played him a trick on this point.]

[Footnote 231: See note 222.]

[Footnote 232: Blanco García, _Segundo proceso_, pp. 46-47: 'V.P. dexe las cosas de la orden aunque esten en peor estado del que hahora tienen, trate de su cathreda, y dexe de tomar á su cargo el remedio de las tiranias. No llame tyrano a nadie, y sepa V.P. que publicamente dicen muchos religiosos que V.P. no hiço bien a nadie y disgustos sí a muchos, recibiendo buenas obras de aquellos a quien hahora maltrata, cosa que no puede tener buen suçeso ni puede parecer bien a nadie.']

[Footnote 233: Blanco García, _Segundo proceso_, p. 52.]

[Footnote 234: Blanco García, _Segundo proceso_, pp. 52-53: '...sea gravemente Reprehendido, y... que en su cathedra publicamente declare la calidad de las proposiciones que se le dieren diçiendo que en dezir que lo contrario de lo que el sustentaba era heregía, dixo mal, y que esto era su parezer'. The official report of the proceedings must be incomplete, for Arresse's _parecer_ mentions that Domingo de Guzman had spoken of receiving an apology from Luis de Leon. No evidence by Domingo de Guzman is disclosed in the record.]

[Footnote 235: Fr. Heinrich Reusch, _Luis de Leon und die spanische Inquisition_ (Bonn, 1873), p. 111.]

[Footnote 236: Blanco García, _Segundo proceso_, p. 53: 'En Toledo... parescío siendo llamado, el Maestro fray Luis de Leon..., al qual su señoría Illma reprehendío y declaro la culpa que contra el resulta por los auctos y meritos deste processo, y le amoneste benigna y caritativamente, que de aquí adelante se abstenga de dezir, ni deffender publica ni secretamente, las proposiciones que paresce haver dicho y defendido,... y el ha confesado que la sentencia dellas no caresce de alguna temeridad, ni otras semejantes, con apercibimiento que no lo cumpliendo se procedera contra el por todo rigor de derecho, y el dicho fray luis de leon promettío de lo cumplir y que lo haria assí.]

[Footnote 237: By Sr. D. Carlos Álvarez Guijarro. Blanco García (_Segundo proceso_, p. 54, _n._ 1) dissents from this view.]

[Footnote 238: Alonso Getino, _op. cit._, pp. 305-308.]

[Footnote 239: Alonso Getino, _op. cit._, pp. 308-315.]

[Footnote 240: Alonso Getino, _op. cit._, p. 316.]

[Footnote 241: Alonso Getino, _op. cit._, pp. 309, 317-318.]

[Footnote 242: Alonso Getino, _op. cit._, pp. 319-320.]

[Footnote 243: Alonso Getino, _op. cit._, p. 321.]

[Footnote 244: Alonso Getino, _op. cit._, pp. 327-329.]

[Footnote 245: Alonso Getino, _op. cit._, pp. 329-331.]

[Footnote 246: Alonso Getino, _op. cit._, pp. 329-335.]

[Footnote 247: Blanco García, _Fr. Luis de León: estudio biográfico, &c._, pp. 236-239.]

[Footnote 248: Blanco García, _Fr. Luis de León: estudio biográfico_, pp. 239-240. The pressmark of this autograph letter in the British Museum is Add. MSS. 28, 698.]

[Footnote 249: Blanco García, _Fr. Luis de León: estudio biográfico_, pp. 242-244.]

[Footnote 250: The whole episode is clearly set forth by Blanco García, _Fr. Luis de León: estudio biográfico_, pp. 246-250.]

[Footnote 251: Blanco García, _Fr. Luis de León: estudio biográfico_, pp. 248-249; Alonso Getino, _op. cit._, pp. 349-351.]

[Footnote 252: A passage in Alonso Getino (_op. cit._, p. 349) describes Santa Maria as 'contemporáneo de los sucesos'. This, though literally true, is somewhat misleading. Santa Maria was twenty-four the year that Luis de Leon died. See Gallardo, _op. cit._, vol. IV, col. 489.]

[Footnote 253: '...al principal de ellos [los que habían procurado el Breve] y pretensor de mitra, le costó la vida el sentimiento que tuvo de ver tan indignado al Rey Católico'. I have not been able to consult Jesús y Maria's work. My quotation, like Alonso Getino's (_op. cit._, p. 354), is taken at second-hand from Vicente de la Fuente's edition of Saint Theresa's works.]

[Footnote 254: January 26, 1591, is the latest date attached to the _Documentos_ published by Cristóbal Pérez Pastor, _Bibliografía madrileña_ (Madrid, 1907), Parte III, pp. 404-409. On January 25, 1591, Luis de Leon signed a document undertaking to accept 1,000 _reales_ in lieu of 2,800 due to him by the estate of Cornelio Bonard, formerly a bookseller at Salamanca; see Cristóbal Pérez Pastor, _Bibliografía madrileña_ (Madrid, 1906), Parte II, pp. 454-455.]

[Footnote 255: F. Blanco García, _Segundo proceso_, p. 53. The Salamancan Inquisitors reported to the Supreme Inquisition: '...havemos entendido que los de su orden se xatan y alaban de que en este sto offiº se a declarado ser verdad lo que el dho frai luis sustentó...']

[Footnote 256: F. Blanco García, _Segundo proceso_, p. 49.]

[Footnote 257: C. Muiños Sáenz, _Sobre el 'Decíamos ayer'... y otros excesos_ in _La Ciudad de Dios_ (1909), vol. LXXIX, p. 540.]

[Footnote 258: Alonso Getino, _op. cit._, p. 355.]

[Footnote 259: C. Muiños Sáenz, _Sobre el 'Decíamos ayer'... y otros excesos_ in _La Ciudad de Dios_ (1909), vol. LXXIX, p. 540, _n._ 1.]

[Footnote 260: Alonso Getino writes (_op. cit._, p. 355): 'al ser elegido Provincial, nueve dias antes de morir, no puede suponerse que estuviera enfermo de consideración'. This is a guess very wide of the mark. F. de Méndez, in the _Revista Agustiniana_ (1881), quoted (p. 351) Juan Quijano, a contemporary whose chronicle is now lost, as saying that when Luis de Leon was elected Provincial he was already confined to his bed with the illness of which he died.]

[Footnote 261: The portrait and character-sketch will be found in the photo-chromotype reproduction of Francisco Pacheco, _Libro de descripcion de verdaderos retratos de illustres y memorables varones_. The original is dated Sevilla, 1599. The reproduction, due to José María Asensio y Toledo, was photo-chromotyped between 1881 and 1884. Owing to the rarity of the reproduction, it has been thought desirable to reprint in an appendix the passage in which Pacheco deals with Luis de Leon.]

[Footnote 262: The reference is given by C. Muiños Sáenz, _Sobre el 'Decíamos ayer'... y otros excesos_ in _La Ciudad de Dios_ (1909), vol. LXXX, p. 119.]

V