CHAPTER II

IN WHAT WAY WAS DE GALBA CONNECTED WITH THE PRODUCTION OF TIRANT LO BLANCH?

We are told in the note at the end of the book that Martorell, because of his death, was unable to translate more than three parts of it, and that “la quarta part que es la fi del libre es stada traduida ... per lo magnifich caualler Mossen Marti Johan de Galba.” Now the question arises: What did de Galba have to do with the production of _Tirant lo Blanch_? It is difficult to answer the question definitely.

In the first place, we do not know what the four parts of the book are. Martorell, at the beginning of the work, probably intended to divide it into a number of parts, for, after the dedication and the prologue, we read: “Comença la primera part del libre de Tirant la qual tracta de certs virtuosos actes que feu lo Comte Guillem de Ueroych en los seus benaventurats darrers dies.” Then, in the chapter immediately following this caption, we find these words: “E per tant com la divina providencia ha ordenat, e li plau que los .vii. planets donen influencia en lo mon e tenen domini sobre la humana natura.... per ço ab lo diuinal adiutori sera departit lo present libre de caualleria en .vii. parts principals.... La primera part sera del principi de caualleria. La segona sera del stament e offici de caualleria, etc.” After informing us of what these seven parts shall treat, he makes this puzzling statement: “Les quals .vii. parts de caualleria seran deduydes en serta part del libre.”[29] Here, then, we have the conflicting statements that the book is to be divided into seven parts, and then follows the announcement that these seven parts shall be produced in a certain part of the work. But nowhere in it do we find any indications that the author attempted to make such a division. It is true, as we have already stated, that the beginning of the first part is announced, but after that no mention of the beginning or end of any other part is made. A logical division into four almost equal parts is absolutely impossible. But we do find that in Chapters XXXI-XXXVI some of the subjects mentioned in the proposed divisions of the work are treated and discussed.

[29] Here commences the first part of the book of Tirant, which treats of certain great deeds done by the Earl, William of Warwick, in his last blessed days.... And inasmuch as Divine Providence has ordained and is pleased that the seven planets exert an influence over the world and hold dominion over human nature. ... on account of this, with divine aid, this book of chivalry will be divided into seven principal parts.... The first part shall treat of the beginning of chivalry. The second shall treat of the state and profession of chivalry, etc.... These seven parts shall be presented in a certain part of the book.

An examination of Lull’s _Libre del Orde d’Cauayleria_ will explain the inconsistency. In this book we find, in the “Incipit Prologus,” the following words:

“Per Significança de les .vii. planetes ... que gouernen e ordonen los corsos terrenals, departim aquest libre d’cauayleria en .vii. parts.... La primera part es d’l començament d’cauayleria. La segona es del offici de cauayleria, etc.”[30]

[30] With the significance of the seven planets ... which govern and control the terrestrial bodies, we divide this book of chivalry into seven parts.... The first part treats of the commencement of chivalry. The second treats of the profession of chivalry, etc.

Martorell had evidently copied from Lull’s book, and the inconsistency was overlooked and found its way into his work.

We have made endeavors to locate the fourth part, which we are told was translated by de Galba, but all our efforts have been in vain. We have carefully examined the spelling, vocabulary, and style of the whole book, but have been unable to find any part that differed sufficiently from the rest of the work to justify the assertion of even a possibility that it represents the part translated by de Galba. The statement can hardly be accepted, for we cannot find anything at all that would tend to support or corroborate it in any way.

But we have concluded that _Tirant lo Blanch_ was originally written in Catalan. Consequently it is not the question: What part did de Galba translate? but, What part did he write? It is not a difficult matter to see why de Galba states that he _translated_ the fourth part. Martorell had called his book a translation and consequently de Galba was obliged to do the same. But the assumption that the latter wrote a part of considerable importance can hardly be maintained. We have already remarked that there is no appreciable difference in vocabulary and style in any part. Moreover, we find throughout the work a marked similarity in the manner of observation and description. The author has certain favorite expressions which he uses again and again, and these are not confined to any special parts. The same method of composing the book is followed from beginning to end. The same mind and the same heart are always in evidence. The different characters, when laboring under intense emotion, speak and act in practically the same way. Martorell has stamped his work with a strong individuality, and his characteristics are revealed throughout. All these facts tend to indicate that _Tirant lo Blanch_ is the work of one author and one only. If it were not for the statement to the contrary, we feel certain that no one would ever doubt that the whole book was written by Martorell.

But if we conclude that de Galba neither translated nor wrote a considerable part of the work, what did he do that would give him any right to claim part of the honor in the production? Perhaps Givanel Mas is right when he hints that de Galba’s rôle was limited to the preparation of the manuscript for publication. We are rather inclined to accept that suggestion. We are, however, disposed to add that probably de Galba did contribute something to the story. Perhaps he wrote the very last chapter, which consists of about three hundred words. We suggest this probability, because the reading of that chapter leaves the impression that the ending of the story is overdone. It may be that he wrote it for no other reason than to be able to say that he “translated” the fourth part, “la fi del libre.” In this chapter we are told that under the rule of Hypolite the empire was prosperous and extended its limits. After the death of the empress, according to the same chapter, he married a daughter of the King of England, who bore him three sons and two daughters. The eldest of these sons was named after his father and performed great deeds of prowess. The emperor and the empress reached a very advanced age, and they died on the same day. Their rule was so excellent, and their lives were so good and virtuous, that we may feel assured that they are now enjoying the glory of heaven.

We have not been able to find anything in the style and language of this last chapter that would indicate that it was written by any other than Martorell, and we confess that our suggestion is based almost exclusively upon the fact that it might very well have been omitted. In the chapters immediately preceding this one, Tirant and Carmesina are placed in their tomb, Hypolite marries the empress, rewards his friends, and marries them to ladies of the imperial court. The closing words of the next to the last chapter are:

“Apres dona a tots aquells qui se eren casats ab les criades de la Emperadriu e de la Princessa bones heretats, quen podien molt be viure a lur honor, e cascu segons son grau, que tots nestauen molt contents. E apres per temps casa totes les altres axi com de bon senyor se pertanyia.”[31]

[31] Afterwards, to all those who had married the maids of the empress and of the princess, he gave generous gifts, so that they could live well and in honor, and each one according to his rank. As a result all were very happy. And in time, as a worthy lord ought, he gave all the others maids in marriage.

The passage just quoted seems to have been intended for the conclusion of _Tirant lo Blanch_. This indication, together with the fact that the last chapter seems unnecessary and superfluous, surely justifies the suggestion that probably de Galba wrote “la fi del libre,” but not the fourth part, unless he called these last few lines “la quarta part.”

The best explanation that we can suggest in regard to de Galba’s statement is, that on account of preparing the manuscript for the printer, he considered himself entitled to some credit in the production of this book. Why he claims to have translated the fourth part can only be a matter of conjecture. Perhaps that part was in special need of revision. He may have made some changes or additions, but we cannot admit that he wrote or translated the whole or a considerable portion of it.