Chapter 2
The superficial nature of this literature is exhibited in the controversy excited by the efforts of Boscán and Garcilaso to substitute Italian forms for the older Spanish ones. The discussion dealt with externals; with meters, not ideas. Both schools delighted in the airy nothings of the conventional love lyric, and it matters little at this distance whether they were cast in lines of eleven or eight syllables.
The contest was warm at the time, however. Sá de Miranda (1495-1558), the chief exponent of the Italian school in Portugal, wrote effectively also in Castilian. Gutierre de Cetina (1518?-1572?) and Fernando de Acuña (1500?-1580?) are two others who supported the new measures. One whose example had more influence is Diego Hurtado de page xxi Mendoza (1503-1575), a famous diplomat, humanist and historian. He entertained his idle moments with verse, writing cleverly in the old style but turning also toward the new. His sanction for the latter seems to have proved decisive.
Cristóbal de CASTILLEJO (1490-1556) was the chief defender of the native Spanish forms. He employed them himself in light verse with cleverness, clearness and finish, and also attacked the innovators with all the resources of a caustic wit. In this patriotic task he was for a time aided by an organist of the cathedral at Granada, Gregorio Silvestre (1520-1569), of Portuguese birth. Silvestre, however, who is noted for the delicacy of his poems in whatever style, was later attracted by the popularity of the Italian meters and adopted them.
This literary squabble ended in the most natural way, namely, in the co-existence of both manners in peace and harmony. Italian forms were definitively naturalized in Spain, where they have maintained their place ever since. Subsequent poets wrote in either style or both as they felt moved, and no one reproached them. Such was the habit of Lope de Vega, Góngora, Quevedo and the other great writers of the seventeenth century.
A Sevillan Italianate was Fernando de HERRERA (1534?-1597), admirer and annotator of Garcilaso. Although an ecclesiastic, his poetic genius was more virile than that of his soldier master. He wrote Petrarchian sonnets to his platonic lady; but his martial, patriotic spirit appears in his _canciones_, especially in those on the battle of Lepanto and on the expedition of D. Sebastian of Portugal in Africa. In these stirring odes Herrera touches a sonorous, grandiloquent chord which rouses the page xxii reader's enthusiasm and places the writer in the first rank of Spanish lyrists. He is noteworthy also in that he made an attempt to create a poetic language by the rejection of vulgar words and the coinage of new ones. Others, notably Juan de Mena, had attempted it before, and Góngora afterward carried it to much greater lengths; but the idea never succeeded in Castilian to an extent nearly so great as it did in France, for example; and to-day the best poetical diction does not differ greatly from good conversational language.
Beside Herrera stands a totally different spirit, the Salamancan monk Luis DE LEÓN (1527-1591). The deep religious feeling which is one strong trait of Spanish character has its representatives in Castilian literature from Berceo down, but León was the first to give it fine artistic expression. The mystic sensation of oneness with the divine, of aspiration to heavenly joys, breathes in all his writings. He was also a devoted student of the classics, and his poems (for which he cared nothing and which were not published till 1631) show Latin rather than Italian influence. There is nothing in literature more pure, more serene, more direct or more polished than _La vida del campo, Noche serena_ and others of his compositions.
The other great mystics cared less for literature, either as a study or an accomplishment. The poems of Saint Theresa (1515-1582) are few and mostly mediocre. San Juan de la Cruz, the Ecstatic Doctor (1542-1591), wrote the most exalted spiritual poems in the language; like all the mystics, he was strongly attracted by the Song of Songs which was paraphrased by Pedro Malón de Chaide (1530-1596?). It is curious to note that the stanza adopted in the great mystical lyrics is one page xxiii invented by Garcilaso and used in his amatory fifth _Canción_. It has the rime-scheme of the Spanish _quintilla_, but the lines are the Italian eleven-and seven-syllable (cf. pp. 9-12). Religious poems in more popular forms are found in the _Romancero espiritual_ (1612) of José de Valdivielso, and in Lope de Vega's _Rimas sacras_ (1614) and _Romancero espiritual_ (1622).
There were numerous secular disciples of Garcilaso at about the same period. The names most deserving mention are those of Francisco de la Torre (d. 1594?), Luis Barahona de Soto (1535?-1595) and Francisco de Figueroa (1536?-1620), all of whom wrote creditably and sometimes with distinction in the Italian forms. Luis de Camoens (1524?-1580), author of the great Portuguese epic _Os Lusiadas_, employed Castilian in many verses with happy result.
These figures lead to the threshold of the seventeenth century which opened with a tremendous literary output in many lines. Cervantes was writing his various novels; the romance of roguery took on new life with _Guzmán de Alfarache_ (1599); the drama, which had been developing rather slowly and spasmodically, burst suddenly into full flower with Lope de Vega and his innumerable followers. The old meter of the _romance_ was adopted as a favorite form by all sorts and conditions of poets and was turned from its primitive epic simplicity to the utmost variety of subjects, descriptive, lyric and satiric.
From out this flood of production--for every dramatist was in a measure a lyric poet, and dramatists were legion--we can select for consideration only the men most prominent as lyrists. First in the impulse which he gave to literature for more than a century following stands Luis de ARGOTE Y GÓNGORA (1561-1627), a Cordovan page xxiv who chose to be known by his mother's name. His life was mainly that of a disappointed place-hunter. His abrupt change of literary manner has made some say that there were in him two poets, Góngora the Good and Góngora the Bad. He began by writing odes in the manner of Herrera and _romances_ and _villancicos_ which are among the clearest and best. They did not bring their author fame, however, and he seems deliberately to have adopted the involved metaphoric style to which Marini gave his name in Italy. Góngora is merely the Spanish representative of the movement, which also produced Euphuism in England and _préciosité_ in France. But he surpassed all previous writers in the extreme to which he carried the method, and his _Soledades_ and _Polifemo_ are simply unintelligible for the inversions and strained metaphors with which they are overloaded.
His influence was enormous. Gongorism, or _culteranismo_, as it was called at the time, swept the minor poets with it, and even those who fought the movement most vigorously, like Lope and Quevedo, were not wholly free from the contagion. The second generation of dramatists was strongly affected. Yet there are few lyric poets worth mentioning among Góngora's disciples for the reason that such a pernicious system meant certain ruin to those who lacked the master's talent. The most important names are the Count of Villamediana (1580-1622), a satirist whose sharp tongue caused his assassination, and Paravicino y Arteaga (1580-1633), a court preacher.
Obviously, such an innovation could not pass without opposition from clear-sighted men. LOPE DE VEGA (1562-1635) attacked it whenever opportunity offered, and his verse seldom shows signs of corruption. It page xxv is impossible to consider the master-dramatist at length here. He wrote over 300 sonnets, many excellent eclogues, epistles, and, in more popular styles, glosses, _letrillas, villancicos, romances_, etc. Lope more than any other poet of his time kept his ear close to the people, and his light poems are full of the delicious breath of the country.
The other principal opponent of Gongorism was Francisco GÓMEZ DE QUEVEDO Y VILLEGAS (1580-1645), whose wit and independence made him formidable. In 1631 he published the poems of Luis de León and Francisco de la Torre as a protest against the baleful mannerism in vogue. But he himself adopted a hardly less disagreeable style, called conceptism, which is supposed to have been invented by Alonso de Ledesma (1552-1623). It consists in a strained search for unusual thoughts which entails forced paradoxes, antitheses and epigrams. This system, combined with local allusions, double meanings and current slang, in which Quevedo delighted, makes his poems often extremely difficult of comprehension. His _romances de jaques_, written in thieves' jargon, are famous in Spain. Quevedo wrote too much and carelessly and tried to cover too many fields, but at his best his caustic wit and fearless vigor place him high.
There were not lacking poets who kept themselves free from taint of _culteranismo_, though they did not join in the fight against it. The brothers Argensola (LUPERCIO LEONARDO DE ARGENSOLA, 1559-1613, BARTOLOMÉ LEONARDO DE ARGENSOLA, 1562-1631), of Aragonese birth, turned to Horace and other classics as well as to Italy for their inspiration. Their pure and dignified sonnets, odes and translations rank high. Juan MARTÍNEZ DE JÁUREGUI page xxvi (1583-1641) wrote a few original poems, but is known mainly for his excellent translation of Tasso's _Aminta_. He too succumbed to Gongorism at times. The few poems of Francisco de RIOJA (1586?-1659) are famous for the purity of their style and their tender melancholy tone. A little apart is Esteban Manuel de VILLEGAS (1589-1669), an admirer of the Argensolas, "en versos cortos divino, insufrible en los mayores," who is known for his attempts in Latin meters and his successful imitations of Anacreon and Catullus.
The lyrics of CALDERÓN (1600-1681) are to be found mostly in his _comedias_ and _autos_. There are passages which display great gifts in the realm of pure poetry, but too often they are marred by the impertinent metaphors characteristic of _culteranismo_.
His name closes the most brilliant era of Spanish letters. The decline of literature followed close upon that of the political power of Spain. The splendid empire of Charles V had sunk, from causes inherent in the policies of that over-ambitious monarch, through the somber bigotry of Philip II, the ineptitude of Philip III, the frivolity of Philip IV, to the imbecility of Charles II; and the death of the last of the Hapsburg rulers in 1700 left Spain in a deplorably enfeebled condition physically and intellectually. The War of the Succession (1701-1714) exhausted her internal strength still more, and the final acknowledgment of Philip V (reigned 1701-1746) brought hardly any blessing but that of peace. Under these circumstances poetry could not thrive; and in truth the eighteenth century in Spain is an age devoted more to the discussion of the principles of literature than to the production of it. At first the decadent remnants of page xxvii the _siglo de oro_ still survived, but later the French taste, following the principles formulated by Boileau, prevailed almost entirely. The history of Spanish poetry in the eighteenth century is a history of the struggle between these two forces and ends in the triumph of the latter.
The effects of Gongorism lasted long in Spain, which, with its innate propensity to bombast, was more fertile soil for it than other nations. Innumerable poetasters of the early eighteenth century enjoyed fame in their day and some possessed talent; but the obscure and trivial style of the age from which they could not free themselves deprived them of any chance of enduring fame. One may mention, as the least unworthy, Gabriel Álvarez de Toledo (1662-1714) and Eugenio Gerardo Lobo (1679-1750).
Some one has said that the poetry of Spain, with the exception of the _romances_ and the drama of the _siglo de oro_, has always drawn its inspiration from some other country. Add to the exceptions the medieval epic and the statement would be close to the truth. First Provence through the medium of Galicia; then Italy and with it ancient Rome; and lastly France and England, on more than one occasion, have molded Spanish poetry. The power of the French classical literature, soon dominant in Europe, could not long be stayed by the Pyrenees; and Pope, Thomson and Young were also much admired. Philip V, a Frenchman, did not endeavor to crush the native spirit in his new home, but his influence could not but be felt. He established a Spanish Academy on the model of the French in 1714.
It was some time before the reaction, based on common sense and confined to the intellectuals, could take deep root, and, as was natural, it went too far and condemned much of the _siglo de oro_ entire. The _Diario page xxviii de los literatos_, a journal of criticism founded in 1737, and the _Poética_ of Ignacio de Luzán, published in the same year, struck the first powerful blows. Luzán (1702-1754) followed in general the precepts of Boileau, though he was able to praise some of the good points in the Spanish tradition. His own poems are frigid. The _Sátira contra los malos escritores de su tiempo_ (1742) of Jorge Pitillas (pseudonym of José Gerardo de Hervás, d. 1742) was an imitation of Boileau which had great effect. Blas Antonio Nasarre (1689-1751), Agustín Montiano (1697-1765) and Luis José Velázquez (1722-1772) were critics who, unable to compose meritorious plays or verse themselves, cut to pieces the great figures of the preceding age.
Needless to say, the Gallicizers were vigorously opposed, but so poor were the original productions of the defenders of the national manner that their side was necessarily the losing one. Vicente García de la Huerta (1734-1787) was its most vehement partisan, but he is remembered only for a tragedy, _Raquel_.
Thus it is seen that during a century of social and industrial depression Spain did not produce a poet worthy of the name. The condition of the nation was sensibly bettered under Charles III (reigned 1759-1788) who did what was possible to reorganize the state and curb the stifling domination of the Roman Church and its agents the Jesuits and the Inquisition. The Benedictine Feijóo (1675-1764) labored faithfully to inoculate Spain, far behind the rest of Europe, with an inkling of recent scientific discoveries. And the budding prosperity, however deceitful it proved, was reflected in a more promising literary generation. page xxix
Nicolás FERNÁNDEZ DE MORATÍN (1737-1780) followed the French rules in theory and wrote a few mediocre plays in accordance with them; but he showed that at heart he was a good poet and a good Spaniard by his ode _Á Pedro Romero, torero insigne_, some _romances_ and his famous _quintillas_, the _Fiesta de toros en Madrid_. Other followers of the French, in a genre not, strictly speaking, lyric at all, were the two fabulists, Samaniego and Iriarte. F. María de SAMANIEGO (1745-1801) gave to the traditional stock of apologues, as developed by Phaedrus, Lokmân and La Fontaine, a permanent and popular Castilian form. Tomás de IRIARTE (1750-1791), a more irritable personage who spent much time in literary polemics, wrote original fables (_Fábulas literarias_, 1781) directed not against the foibles of mankind in general, but against the world of writers and scholars.
The best work which was done under the classical French influence, however, is to be found in the writers of the so-called Salamancan school, which was properly not a school at all. The poets who are thus classed together, Cadalso, Diego González, Jovellanos, Forner, Meléndez Valdés, Cienfuegos, Iglesias, were personal friends thrown together in the university or town of Salamanca, but they were not subjected to a uniform literary training and possessed no similarity of style or aim as did the men of the later Sevillan school.
José de CADALSO (1741-1782), a dashing soldier of great personal charm killed at the siege of Gibraltar, is sometimes credited with founding the school of Salamanca. He was a friend of most of the important writers of his time and composed interesting prose satires; his verse (_Noches lúgubres_, etc.) is not remarkable. FRAY DIEGO GONZÁLEZ (1733-1794) is one of the masters of page xxx idiomatic Castilian in the century. He admired Luis de León and imitated him in paraphrases of the Psalms. The volume of his verse is small but unsurpassed in surety of taste and evenness of finish. The _Murciélago alevoso_ has passed into many editions and become a favorite in Spain. The pure and commanding figure of JOVELLANOS (1744-1811) dominated the whole group which listened to his advice with respect. It was not always sure, for he led Diego González and Meléndez Valdés astray by persuading them to attempt philosophical poetry instead of the lighter sort for which they were fitted. He was in fact a greater man than poet, but his satires and _Epístola al duque de Veragua_ are strong and dignified.
Juan MELÉNDEZ VALDÉS (1754-1817) was on the contrary a greater poet than man. Brilliant from the first, he was petted by Cadalso and Jovellanos who strove to develop his talent. In 1780 he won a prize offered by the Academy for an eclogue. In 1784 his comedy _Las bodas de Camacho_, on a subject suggested by Jovellanos (from an episode in _Don Quijote_, II, 19-21), won a prize offered by the city of Madrid, but failed on the stage. His first volume of poems was published in 1785; later editions appeared in 1797 and 1820. He attached himself to the French party at the time of the invasion in 1808, incurred great popular odium and died in France. He is the most fluent, imaginative poet of the eighteenth century and is especially successful in the pastoral and anacreontic styles. Fresh descriptions of nature, enchanting pictures of love, form an oasis in an age of studied reasonableness. His language has been criticized for its Gallicisms. José IGLESIAS DE LA CASA (1748-1791), a native of Salamanca and a priest, wrote much light satirical verse, epigrams, parodies page xxxi and _letrillas_ in racy Castilian; he was less successful in the graver forms. Nicasio ÁLVAREZ DE CIENFUEGOS (1764-1809) passes as a disciple of Meléndez; he was a passionate, uneven writer whose undisciplined thought and habit of coining words lead to obscurity. Politically he opposed the French with unyielding vigor, barely escaped execution at their hands and died in exile. The verse of Cienfuegos prepared the way for Quintana. Differing from him in clarity and polish are Fr. Sánchez Barbero (1764-1819) and Leandro F. de Moratín, the dramatist (1760-1828).
One curious result of rationalistic doctrines was the "prosaism" into which it led many minor versifiers. These poetasters, afraid of overstepping the limits of good sense, tabooed all imagination and described in deliberately prosy lines the most commonplace events. The movement reached its height at the beginning of the reign of Charles IV (1788-1808) and produced such efforts as a poem to the gout, a nature-poem depicting barn-yard sounds, and even Iriarte's _La música_ (1780), in which one may read in carefully constructed _silvas_ the definition of diatonic and chromatic scales.
II
SPANISH LYRIC POETRY OF THE NINETEENTH CENTURY
Early in the nineteenth century the armies of Napoleon invaded Spain. There ensued a fierce struggle for the mastery of the Peninsula, in which the latent strength and energy of the Spaniards became once more evident. The page xxxii French devastated parts of the country, but they brought with them many new ideas which, together with the sharpness of the conflict, served to awaken the Spanish people from their torpor and to give them a new realization of national consciousness. During this period of stress and strife two poets, Quintana and Gallego, urged on and encouraged their fellow countrymen with patriotic songs.
Manuel José QUINTANA (1772-1857) had preëminently the "gift of martial music," and great was the influence of his odes _Al armamento de las provincias contra los franceses_ and _Á España después de la revolución de marzo_. He also strengthened the patriotism of his people by his prose _Vidas de españoles célebres_ (begun in 1806): the Cid, the Great Captain (Gonzalo de Córdoba), Pizarro and others of their kind. In part a follower of the French philosophers of the eighteenth century, Quintana sang also of humanity and progress, as in his ode on the invention of printing. In politics Quintana was a liberal; in religious beliefs, a materialist. Campoamor has said of Quintana that he sang not of faith or pleasures, but of duties. His enemies have accused him of stirring the colonies to revolt by his bitter sarcasm directed at past and contemporaneous Spanish rulers, but this is doubtless an exaggeration. It may be said that except in his best patriotic poems his verses lack lyric merit and his ideas are wanting in insight and depth; but his sincerity of purpose was in the main beyond question and he occasionally gave expression to striking boldness of thought and exaltation of feeling. In technique Quintana was a follower of the Salamancan school.
The cleric Juan Nicasio GALLEGO (1777-1853) rivaled Quintana as a writer of patriotic verses. A liberal in politics like Quintana, Gallego also took the page xxxiii side of his people against the French invaders and against the servile Spanish rulers. He is best known by the ode _El dos de mayo_, in which he exults over the rising of the Spanish against the French on the second of May, 1808; the ode _Á la defensa de Buenos Aires_ against the English; and the elegy _Á la muerte de la duquesa de Frías_ in which he shows that he is capable of deep feeling. Gallego was a close friend of Quintana, whose salon in Madrid he frequented. Gallego wrote little, but his works are more correct in language and style than those of Quintana. It is interesting that although the writings of these two poets evince a profound dislike and distrust of the French, yet both were in their art largely dominated by the influence of French neo-classicism. This is but another illustration of the relative conservatism of belles-lettres.