Chapter II: Introduction: To the Galatea (2)

Sr. D. Ramón León Máinez,[93] whose honourable enthusiasm for all that relates to Cervantes forbids his admitting that there are spots on his sun, considers the _Galatea_ to be the best of pastorals, and other whole-hearted admirers (such as August and Friedrich von Schlegel)[94] have said as much. This, however, is not the general verdict of those who have read the _Galatea_ from beginning to end, and really such readers are not many. Prescott[95] cautiously observes that it is "a beautiful specimen of an insipid class." Hazlitt, who may be taken as the honest representative of a numerous constituency, confesses that he does not know the book, and offers an ingenious apology for his remissness. Cervantes, he declares, claims the highest honour which can belong to any author--"that of being the inventor of a new style of writing." But, after this ingratiating prelude, he continues:--"I have never read his _Galatea_, nor his _Loves of Persiles and Sigismunda_, though I have often meant to do it, and I hope to do so yet. Perhaps there is a reason lurking at the bottom of this dilatoriness. I am quite sure that the reading of these works could not make me think higher of the author of _Don Quixote_, and it might, for a moment or two, make me think less." And no doubt it might: just as the reading of _Hours of Idleness_, of _Zastrozzi_, and of _Clotilde de Lusignan ou le beau Juif_ might, for a moment or two, make us think less of the authors of _Don Juan_, of _Epipsychidion_, and of _Eugénie Grandet_.

The _Galatea_ survives as the first timorous experiment of a daring genius. It had no great vogue in Spain, and it is a mistake to say that "seven editions were called for in the author's lifetime."[96] At least, bibliographers know that, if they were called for, they certainly did not appear. As a matter of fact the book was only twice reprinted while Cervantes was alive, and, as neither of these editions was published in Spain, it is possible that he was unaware of their existence. In 1590 the _Galatea_ was reproduced at Lisbon, expurgated of all heathenish allusions by Frey Bertholameu Ferreyra, acting for the Portuguese Inquisition; and this incomplete Portuguese reprint helped to make the pastoral known outside the Peninsula. It so happened that César Oudin, a teacher of Spanish at Paris--where he had already (1608) reprinted the _Curioso impertinente_,[97]--travelled through Spain and Portugal during 1610, and in the course of his journey he unsuccessfully endeavoured to obtain a copy of the Alcalá _Galatea_. He had to be content with a copy of the mutilated Lisbon edition, and this he reprinted in 1611 at Paris,[98] probably with an eye to using it as a text-book for his French pupils who were passing through an acute crisis of the pastoral fever. M. Jourdain had not yet put his embarrassing question to his music and dancing masters:--"Pourquoi toujours des bergers?" At all events, there is some evidence to prove that the _Galatea_ was popular in fashionable Parisian circles while Cervantes still lived. In his _Aprobación_ to the Second Part of _Don Quixote_, the Licenciado Francisco Márquez Torres records that when, on February 25, 1615, he visited the French embassy, he was beset by members of the Envoy's suite[99] who, taking fire at the mention of Cervantes's name, belauded the First Part of _Don Quixote_, the _Novelas exemplares_, and the _Galatea_--which one of them knew almost by heart.[100] It is unlikely that the author himself knew much of the _Galatea_ by heart; but at about this period Honoré d'Urfé[101] had restored the vogue of pastoralism in France, and Márquez Torres's ecstatic Frenchman (if he really existed) only shewed the tendency to exaggeration characteristic of recent converts. He was, very possibly, among the last of the elect in Madrid. One edition--some say two editions--of the _Galatea_ appeared posthumously in 1617: two more editions (provincial, like their immediate predecessor or predecessors) were issued in 1618. Then the dust of a hundred years settled down on all copies of the forgotten book. Three reprints during the eighteenth century, ten reprints during the nineteenth century, satisfied the public demand.[102]

The sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth centuries did not produce a single translation of the _Galatea_.[103] But in 1783 appeared a French adaptation of this pastoral by the once famous Chevalier Jean-Pierre Claris de Florian,[104] who compressed the six books of the original into three, added a fourth book of his own in which he married Elicio to Galatea, and so contrived a happy ending. "Il _florianise_ tant soit peu toutes choses," says Sainte-Beuve[105] drily. In this delicate, perfumed, powder-and-patch arrangement by the idyllic woman-beater[106] and Captain of Dragoons, Cervantes's novel became astonishingly popular. Edition after edition was struck off from the French presses, and the work was read all over Europe in translations: three in German, two in Italian, three in English, two in Portuguese, one in Greek. Odder still, in this form, the book made its way home again and, just as certain Spaniards who had forgotten Guillén de Castro enjoyed Juan Bautista Diamante's translation (1658) of Corneille's _Cid_, so three editions go to prove that, a century and a half later, certain other Spaniards who had forgotten Cervantes enjoyed Casiano Pellicer's translation (1797) of Florian's _Galatée_.[107] And there was more to follow next year. Cándido María Trigueros[108] showed himself worthy of his Christian name by bettering Florian's example: he laid violent hands on Cervantes, suppressed here, amplified there, purged the book of its verses, and supplied a still happier ending--on a monumental scale--by incontinently marrying ten lucky shepherds to ten lovely shepherdesses. One cannot help wondering what Cervantes would have thought of this astounding performance. It was too much for the Spanish public, and Trigueros turned to do better work in adapting old plays to the modern stage. The taste for Arcadianism died away at the beginning of the nineteenth century. Artificial pastorals have, indeed, not yet recovered from a polite but deadly note published in the preface to _Obermann_: "Le genre pastoral, le genre descriptif out beaucoup d'expressions rebattues, dont les moins tolérables, à mon avis, sont les figures employées quelques millions de fois et qui, dès la première, affaiblissent l'objet qu'elles prétendaient agrandir." Such expressions, continues the writer, are _l'émail des prés_, _l'azur des cieux_, _le cristal des eaux_, _les lis et les roses de son teint_, _les gages de son amour_, _l'innocence du hameau_, _des_ _torrens s'échapperènt de ses yeux_--"et tant d'autres que je ne veux pas condamner exclusivement, mais que j'aime mieux ne pas rencontrer." Sénancour was perhaps thinking more particularly of Florian at the moment, but his criticism applies also to Cervantes's first book.

It was not till 1830 that the first genuine translation of the _Galatea_ appeared, and this German version was followed by two others in the same language. These stood alone till 1867[109] when it occurred to a droll, strange man named Gordon Willoughby James Gyll (or James Willoughby Gordon Gill),[110] to publish an English rendering of Cervantes's pastoral in which, as he thought, "the rural characters are nicely defined; modesty and grace with simplicity prevailing." Gyll, who wrongly imagined that he was the first to translate the _Galatea_, seems to have been specially attracted by Cervantes's verses,--a compliment which the author would have enjoyed all the more on learning from his admirer that these "compositions are cast in lyrics and iambics, without being quite of a dithyrambic character, furnishing relief to the prose, and evincing the skill and tendency of the bard in all effusions relative to love, the master-passion of our existence, without which all would be arid and disappointing to the eagle spirit of the child of song." After this opening you know what to expect. And you get it--three hundred and forty-nine pages of it! Gyll never writes of parts, but of "portions"; rather than leave a place, he will "evacuate" it; nothing will induce him to return if he can "revert"; he prefers "scintillations" to gleams, "perturbators" to disturbers, "cogitation" to thought, and "exculpations" to excuses. Gyll's English, as may be judged from the specimens just quoted, is almost as eccentric as the English of Mohindronauth Mookerjee in his _Memoir of the late Honourable Justice Onoocool Chunder Mookerjee_, and it is much less amusing. His effrontery is beyond description. He knew nothing of Cervantes whom he actually believed to be a contemporary of Floridablanca in the eighteenth century.[111] He almost implies that he has read Cervantes's lost _Filena_, though he admits that it "is now rarely found." His ignorance of Spanish is illimitable. How he can have presumed to translate from it passes all understanding. He misinterprets the easiest phrases, and he follows the simple plan of translating each word by the first rough equivalent that he finds given in some poor dictionary. It would be waste of time to criticize the inflated prose and detestable verse which combine to make Gyll's rendering the worst in the world. Two specimens will suffice to show what Gyll can do when he gives his mind to it. At the very opening of the First Book, he reveals his powers:--"But the perspicacity of Galatea detected in the motions of his countenance what Elicio contained in his soul, and she evinced such condescension that the words of the enamoured shepherd congealed in his mouth, though it appeared to him that he had done an injury to her, even to treat of what might not have the semblance of rectitude." This is Gyll as a master of prose. Gyll, the lyric poet, is even richer in artistic surprises. Take, for instance, the closing stanzas of Lauso's song at the beginning of the Fifth Book:--

In this extraordinary agony,
The feelings entertained go but for dumb
Seeing that love defies,
And I am cast in the midst of the fierce fire.
Cold water I abhor
Were it not for my eyes,
Which fire augments and spoils
In this amorous forge.
I wish not or seek water,
Or from annoyance supplicate relief.

Begin would all my good,
My ills would finish all,
If fate should so ordain,
That my sincere trust in life,
Silenca[112] would assure,
Sighs assure it.
My eyes do thoroughly me inform
Me weeping in this truth.
Pen, tongue, will
In this inflexible reason me confirm.

These examples speak for themselves.[113] Cervantes was not indeed a very great poet; but his verses are often graceful and melodious, and it would have afflicted him sorely to see his lines travestied in this miserable fashion. It is inexplicable that such absolute nonsense should be published. But it is a singular testimony to the public interest in all concerning Cervantes that, in default of anything better, this discreditable version should have been read, and even reprinted.

For the present edition a new translation has been prepared. It proceeds on the one sound principle of translating from the original as faithfully as possible, without either omission or addition. The task of rendering the _Galatea_ into English is less trying, and therefore less tempting, than the task of rendering _Don Quixote_ or the _Novelas exemplares_; but the _Galatea_ offers numerous difficulties, and it will be found that these have been very satisfactorily overcome by Dr. Oelsner and Mr. A. Baker Welford. They have the distinction of producing the first really adequate translation of the _Galatea_ in any language.

JAS. FITZMAURICE-KELLY.

February, 1903.

FOOTNOTES:

[1] The article on Cervantes in Nicolás Antonio's _Bibliotheca Hispana_ (Roma, 1672), vol. ii., p. 105, is bibliographical rather than biographical. In Antonio's time practically nothing was known concerning the details of Cervantes's life. It is curious that the first writer to attempt a biography of Cervantes was a foreigner--possibly Peter Motteux, whose English translation dates from 1700: a biographical sketch, entitled _An Account of the Author_, was included in the third volume (London, 1703). The following sentences, which I quote from the first volume of the third edition (London, 1712), are not without interest:--

"For the other Passages of his Life, we are only given to understand that he was for some time Secretary to the Duke of Alva" (p. ii). "Some are of the Opinion, that upon our Author's being neglectfully treated by the Duke of Lerma, first Minister to K. Philip the Third, a strange imperious, haughty Man, and one who had no Value for Men of Learning; he in Revenge, made this Satyr which, as they pretend, is chiefly aim'd at that Minister" (pp. iii.-iv.). The biographer then refers to Avellaneda's spurious sequel, and continues:--"Our Author was extremely concern'd at this Proceeding, and the more too, because this Writer was not content to invade his Design, and rob him, as 'tis said, of some of his Copy, but miserably abuses poor Cervantes in his Preface" (p. iv.).

These idle rumours as to Cervantes's relations with Lerma are taken from René Rapin's _Réflexions sur la poétique d'Aristote, et sur les ouvrages des Poetes anciens & modernes_ (Paris, 1674, p. 229) and from Louis Moréri's _Grand Dictionaire historique ou le mélange curieux de l'histoire sacrée et profane_ (Paris, 1687, third edition, vol. i., p. 795); but it is odd to find them reaching England before they reached Spain. Mayáns and Pedro Murillo Velarde do not reproduce them till 1737 and 1752 respectively: the first in his _Vida de Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra_ (Briga-Real), and the second in his _Geographica historica_ (Madrid), vol x., lib. x., p. 28.

[2] See the _Vida de Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra_ in Tonson's reprint of _Don Quixote_ (Londres, 1738), vol. i., p. 6. This edition is generally described as Lord Carteret's edition; but, though Carteret certainly commissioned Mayáns to write the biography of Cervantes, and though he may have patronized Tonson's venture, it does not seem so sure that he paid for printing the text (which, as regards the First Part, is merely a mechanical reproduction of the 1607 Brussels edition). The usual version of the story is that Carteret, on looking over the library of Queen Caroline, wife of George II., missed _Don Quixote_ from the shelves, and ordered the sumptuous Tonson edition with a view to making the Queen a present of the most delightful book in the world. It may be so. Carteret appears to have been interested in Spanish literature, and we know that Harry Bridges's translation (Bristol, 1728) of some of the _Novelas exemplares_ was brought out "under the Protection of His Excellency." But, with regard to Carteret's defraying the entire cost of Tonson's reprint of _Don Quixote_, there are some circumstances which cause one to hesitate before accepting the report as true. So far as can be gathered, the first mention of Carteret in this connexion is found in Juan Antonio Mayáns's preface to the sixth edition (Valencia, 1792) of Luis Gálvez de Montalvo's _Pastor de Fílida_:--

"Carolina, Reina de Inglaterra, muger de Jorge segundo, avia juntado, para su entretenimiento, una coleccion de libros de Inventiva, i la llamava _La Bibliotheca del sabio Merlin_, i aviendosela enseñado a Juan Baron Carteret, le dijo este sabio apreciador de los Escritores Españoles, que faltava en ella la Ficcion más agradable, que se avia escrito en el Mundo, que era la Vida de D. Quijote de la Mancha, i que él queria tener el mérito de colocarla" (p. xxv.).

This statement, it will be seen, was made more than fifty years after the event to which it refers. Nevertheless it may be true. Juan Antonio Mayáns may have had the story from Gregorio Mayáns. He was most unlikely to invent it, and the fact that he gives 1737 as the date of Gregorio's biography inclines one to believe in his general accuracy: all other writers give 1738 as the date, but it has recently been found that a _tirage à part_ was struck off at Briga-Real (i.e. Madrid) a year before the _Vida_ was printed in London. It must, however, be remembered that Gregorio Mayáns never met Carteret, and was never in England. Knowing that Carteret paid him for his share in the work, he might easily have imagined that Carteret also paid Tonson, and may have been understood to state this inference as a positive fact. In any case, the memory of an elderly man is not always trustworthy in such matters as these. Moreover, as Gregorio Mayáns died in 1781, we must allow for the possibility of error on the part of Juan Antonio, when repeating a tale that he had heard at least eleven years before.

Some external evidence, such as it is, tells against the common belief, Leopoldo Rius in his _Bibliografía crítica de las obras de Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra_ (Madrid, 1895-1899) notes (vol. ii. p. 300) a German work entitled _Angenehmes Passetems_ (Frankfurt and Leipzig, 1734): in the preface to this publication it is stated as a piece of news that the Spanish Ambassador in London, the Conde de Montijo, has ordered a copy of _Don Quixote_ to be handsomely bound for Queen Caroline. We do not know if Montijo gave her the book, but it seems certain that _Don Quixote_ was in her library. A copy of the Antwerp edition of 1719, bearing her name and the royal crown, passed into the possession of my friend, the late Mr. Henry Spencer Ashbee: see his pamphlet, _Some Books about Cervantes_ (London, 1900), pp. 29-30. Possibly the interview with Carteret took place before 1734, or before Queen Caroline possessed the Antwerp edition. But it is worth noting that the Queen died on November 20, 1737, and that Tonson's edition appeared next spring. If Carteret were so deeply engaged in the undertaking as we are assured, and if his chief motive were (as reported) to pay a courtly compliment to Queen Caroline, it is strange that he should not have caused the edition to be dedicated to the Queen's memory, and it is still stranger that the preliminaries should not contain the least allusion to her. As it happens, the Dedication, dated March 26, 1738, is addressed to the Condesa de Montijo, wife of the ex-Ambassador above-named. It would be a small but useful service if one of Cervantes's many English admirers should establish what share Carteret actually had in an enterprise for which, hitherto, he has received the whole credit.

[3] See _El Ingenioso Hidalgo Don Quixote de la Mancha...._ Nueva edición corregida por la Real Academia Española (Madrid, 1780), vol. i., p. xii.

[4] See Juan Antonio Pellicer's edition of _Don Quixote_ (Madrid, 1797-1798), vol. i. pp. lxxv.-lxxvi.: "Restituido pues Cervantes á España en la primavera del año de 1581 fixó su residencia en Madrid.... Hizo también lugar para escribir y publicar el año de 1584 _La Galatea_."

It appears that all the assertions here made by Pellicer are mistaken. (1) Cervantes did not return to Spain in the spring of 1581, but late in 1580; (2) he did not reside permanently in Madrid during 1581, for we find him at Tomar on May 21 of that year; (3) if we are to understand that the _Galatea_ was composed in 1684, this is disproved by the fact that the manuscript was passed by the censor on February 1, 1584, and must naturally have been in his possession for some time previously; (4) it will be shewn that the _Galatea_ was not published in 1584, but in 1585. Pellicer is not to be blamed for not knowing the real facts. The pity is that he should give his guesses as though they were certainties. Yet, in a sense, events have justified his boldness; for no man's guesses have been more widely accepted.

[5] See Martín Fernández de Navarrete's _Vida de Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra_ (Madrid, 1819), pp. 65-68. Navarrete, however, points out that the _Galatea_ cannot have appeared early in 1584, as his predecessors had alleged: "No se publicó hasta los últimos meses de aquel año." I do not understand him to say that the book was published at Madrid.

[6] See George Ticknor's _History of Spanish Literature_ (Sixth American Edition, Boston, 1888), vol. ii., p. 117.

[7] Amongst others, John Gibson Lockhart in his _Introduction_ to a reprint of Peter Motteux's version of _Don Quixote_ (Edinburgh, 1822), vol. i., p. 25; Thomas Roscoe, _The Life and Writings of Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra_ (London, 1839), p. 38; Mrs. Oliphant in her _Cervantes_ (Edinburgh and London, 1880), p. 76; and Alexander James Duffield in his _Don Quixote: his critics and commentators_ (London, 1881), p. 79. In his _Later Renaissance_ (London, 1898), p. 149, Mr. David Hannay gives the date as 1580. On the other hand, John Ormsby stated the facts with his habitual accuracy in the Introduction to the first edition of his translation of _Don Quixote_ (London, 1885), vol. i., p. 29.

[8] See C.-B. Dumaine's _Essai sur la vie et les œuvres de Cervantes d'après un travail inédit de D. Luis Carreras_ (Paris, 1897), p. 47: "Les vers de la Galatée remontent au temps de son séjour en Italie. Ces poésies étaient addressées à une dame, à laquelle il témoignait de tendres sentiments."

[9] See Sr. D. José María Asensio y Toledo's _Nuevos documentos para ilustrar la vida de Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra, con algunas observaciones y articulos sobre la vida y obras del mismo autor y las pruebas de la autenticidad de su verdadero retrato_ (Seville, 1864), pp. 51-52. Sr. Asensio y Toledo, who repeats his view as to the date of composition in his _Cervantes y sus obras_ (Barcelona, 1901), p. 195, relies mainly on an expression in the preface: "Huyendo destos dos inconvenientes no he publicado antes de ahora este libro." Taken by itself, this phrase certainly implies that the book had been completed some time before; but the passage is too rhetorically, and too vaguely, worded to admit of safe deductions being drawn from it. The idea that the _Galatea_ was written in Portugal was thrown out long ago by Eustaquio Fernández de Navarrete: see his _Bosquejo histórico sobre la novela española_ in Manuel Rivadeneyra, _Biblioteca de autores españoles_, (Madrid, 1854), vol. xxxiii., p. xxiv.

[10] Lucas Gracián Dantisco wrote an imitation of Della Casa's book under the title of _Galateo español_ (Barcelona, 1594). His brother, Tomás, is mentioned by Cervantes in the _Canto de Calíope_.

[11] The earliest known edition of the _Celestina_ is believed to be represented by an unique copy which was once in Heber's collection. The colophon of this volume is dated Burgos 1499; but there is some doubt concerning the date inasmuch as the last page has been recently inserted and may not be a faithful reproduction of the original printer's mark. It is, however, tolerably certain that this edition came from the press of Fadrique de Basilea (Friedrich Biel): for whom, see Conrad Haebler's _Typographie Ibérique du quinzième siècle_ (La Haye and Leipzig, 1901), pp. 30-32. It is also fairly certain that this Heber copy, whatever its exact date may be, is earlier than the Seville edition of 1501, reprinted (1900) by M. Raymond Foulché-Delbosc in his _Bibliotheca Hispanica_. Finally, the probability is that the edition which survives in the Heber volume was preceded by another edition of which no trace remains: see M. Foulché-Delbosc's remarkable _Observations sur la Célestine_ in the _Revue hispanique_ (Paris, 1900), vol. vii., pp. 28-80.

[12] The earliest known edition of _Amadís de Gaula_ (Zaragoza, 1508) is believed to exist in an unique copy in the British Museum, press-marked as C. 57. g. 6. But there is reason to think that there was a previous edition which has disappeared.

[13] There are three distinct editions of _Lazarillo de Tormes_ all dated 1554. They were published respectively at Alcalá de Henares, Burgos, and Antwerp, and--so M. Foulché-Delbosc inclines to believe--in the order here given: see his _Remarques sur Lazarille de Tormes_ in the _Revue hispanique_ (Paris, 1900). vol. vii., pp. 81-97. M. Foulché-Delbosc argues with great ingenuity that these three editions of 1554 derive from another edition (printed before February 26, 1554) of which no copy has as yet been found.

[14] Sr. D. Francisco Rodríguez Marín mentions that a copy of the _princeps_ of the _Primera Parte de Guzmán de Alfarache_ (Madrid, 1599) existed in the library of the Marqués de Jerez de Caballeros, recently acquired by Mr. Archer M. Huntington: see Rodríguez Marín's _El Loaysa de "El Celoso Extremeño"_ (Sevilla, 1901), p. 283, _n._ 102. Another copy of this rare edition is in the British Museum Library.

[15] Rius (_op. cit._, vol. i., p. 4) mentions eight copies of the _princeps_ of _Don Quixote_ (Madrid, 1605), and it is certain that there are other copies in existence.

[16] In _Miguel de Cervantes, his life & works_ (London, 1895), p. 267, Mr. Henry Edward Watts, says of the Alcalá _Galatea_ (1585) that "only one copy is known--in the possession of the Marqués de Salamanca." This is a mistake. Rius, who does not refer to the volume alleged to be in the Marqués de Salamanca's possession, specifies (_op. cit._, vol. i., pp. 100-101) five other copies. He could not be expected to know that there was yet another copy in England. English students of Cervantes were, however, aware of the fact fifteen years before the publication of Mr. Watts's work: see _A Catalogue of the printed books, manuscripts, autograph letters, and engravings, collected by Henry Huth. With collations and bibliographical descriptions_ (London, 1880), vol. i., p. 282.

[17] See the Introduction to vol. vii. of the present edition (Glasgow, 1902), p. viii.

[18] It may be interesting to note the exact dates attached to the official instruments in Haedo's book. The _Licencia_ of the General of the Benedictines was signed by his deputy, Fray Gregorio de Lazcano, at Valladolid on October 6, 1604; the _Aprobación_ was signed by Antonio de Herrera at Madrid on October 18, 1608; the _Privilegio_ was signed by Jorge de Tovar at Madrid on February 18, 1610; the _Fe de erratas_ was signed by Dr. Agustín de Vergara at Valladolid on June 3, 1612; the _Tasa_ was signed by Miguel Ondarza Zabala at Madrid on October 19, 1612. As we have already seen, the last-named signed the _Tasa_ of the _Galatea_ some twenty-six years previously.

[19] See Fernández de Navarrete, _op. cit._, pp. 392-393: "Petri ad vincula 1º día de agosto de 1584 murió el Ilmo. Sr. Marco Antonio Colona, virey de Sicilia, en casa del Ilmo. Sr. duque de Medinaceli, que fué miércoles en la noche, á las once horas de la noche: rescibió todos los sacramentos: no hizo testamento: enterróse en depósito, que se hizo ante Hernando de Durango, secretario del consejo del Ilmo. Sr. duque, en la capilla mayor de esta colegial á la parte del evangelio, debajo de la reja de las reliquias; hiciéronse tres oficios con el cabildo de esta colegial, y en todos tres oficios celebraron por el ánima de S. E. todos los prebendados, y seis días consecutivos, que fué cada prebendado nueve misas: no se hizo otra cosa,--El canónigo Guzmán."

[20] See the _Catálogo de la biblioteca de Salvá_, escrito por D. Pedro Salvá y Mallen, y enriquecido con la descripcion de otras muchas obras, de sus ediciones, etc. (Valencia, 1872), vol. ii., p. 124, no. 1740.

[21] See the _Obras de Don Juan Donoso Cortés_, ordenadas y precedidas de una noticia biográfica por Don Gavino Tejado (Madrid, 1854), vol. iv., pp. 59-60: "Entre la verdad y la razón humana, después de la prevaricación del hombre, ha puesto Dios una repugnancia inmortal y una repulsión invencible ... entre la razón humana y lo absurdo hay una afinidad secreta, un parentesco estrechísimo."

[22] Of these perplexing statements it will suffice to note a few which occur in _Miguel de Cervantes, his life & works by Henry Edward Watts_ (London, 1895):

(_a_) "A new epoch in the life of Cervantes opens in 1584. In that year he printed his first book...." (p. 76).

(_b_) "A few days before the publication of _Galatea_, Cervantes was married at Esquivias.... The 12th of December, 1584, was the date of the ceremony." (p. 90).

(_c_) "Cervantes married his wife in December, 1584, and for reasons which will be manifest to those who have read the story of his life I think we may presume that his first book was printed before that date." (p. 257).

(_d_) "The _Galatea_, Cervantes' first book ... was approved for publication on the 1st of February, 1584, but, for some reason not explained, it was not published till the beginning of the year following." (p. 87).

(_e_) "Salvá maintains it (_i.e._ the Alcalá edition of 1585) to be the _editio princeps_, but I agree with Asensio and the older critics in believing that there must have been an edition of 1584." (p. 257).

(_f_) "Navarrete and Ticknor, following all the older authorities, make the place of publication Madrid and the date 1584. But Salvá has proved in his Bibliography that the _Galatea_ was first published at Alcalá, the author's birthplace, at the beginning of 1585." (p. 87 _n._ 3).

These sentences do not appear to convey a strictly consistent view: (_b_) contradicts (_c_), (_c_) contradicts (_d_), (_d_) contradicts (_e_), and (_e_) contradicts (_f_).

As to (_b_) and (_d_), the expressions "a few days" and "the beginning of the new year" should evidently be interpreted in a non-natural sense. The _Tasa_, as we have seen, was not signed at Madrid till March 13, 1585; the next step was to return the printed sheets to the publisher at Alcalá de Henares; the publisher had then to forward the _Tasa_ to the printer, and finally the whole edition had to be bound. In these circumstances, the date of publication cannot easily be placed earlier than April, 1585. Accordingly, the expression (_b_)--"a few days"--must be taken to mean about ninety or a hundred days: and "the beginning of the year," mentioned under (_d_), must be advanced from January to April.

Concerning (_e_), it is true that Sr. Asensio y Toledo was at one time inclined to believe in the existence of a 1584 edition of the _Galatea_: see Salvá, _op. cit._, vol ii, p. 124. But Sr. Asensio y Toledo admitted that Salvá's argument had shaken him: "sus observaciones de V. me han hecho parar un poco." This was over thirty years ago. Meanwhile, Sr. Asensio y Toledo has revised his opinion, as may be seen in his latest publication, _Cervantes y sus obras_ (Barcelona. 1902). "En el año 1585 salió á luz _La Galatea_" (p. 268).... "El libro se imprimió en Alcalá, por Juan Gracián, y es de la más extremada rareza" (pp. 382-383). He now accepts Salvá's view without reserve.

As to (_f_), I have searched Navarrete's five hundred and eighty pages and Ticknor's one thousand six hundred and ninety-seven pages, but have been unable to find that either of them gives Madrid as the place of publication. An exact reference to authorities is always advisable.

[23] See the _Life of Miguel de Cervantes by Henry Edward Watts_ (London, 1891), p. 117.

[24] See _Miguel de Cervantes, his life & works by Henry Edward Watts_ (London, 1895), p. 257.

[25] See _Documentos Cervantinos hasta ahora inéditos recogidos y anotados por el Presbítero D. Cristóbal Pérez Pastor Doctor en Ciencias_. Publicados á expensas del Excmo. Señor D. Manuel Pérez de Guzmán y Boza, Marqués de Jerez de los Caballeros (Madrid, 1902), vol. ii., pp. 87-89: "Madrid, 14 Junio 1584. En la villa de Madrid a catorce días del mes de Junio de mil e quinientos e ochenta e quatro años por ante mi el escribano público e testigos deyuso escriptos, paresció presente Miguel de Çerbantes, residente en esta corte, e otorgó que zede, vende, renuncia e traspassa en Blas de Robles, mercader de libros, residente en esta corte, un libro de prosa y verso en que se contienen los seis libros de Galatea, que él ha compuesto en nuestra lengua castellana, y le entrega el previllegio original que de Su Magestad tiene firmado de su real mano y refrendado de Antonio de Heraso, su secretario, fecho en esta villa en veinte e dos días del mes de Hebrero deste presente año de ochenta e quatro para que en virtud de él el dicho Blas de Robles, por el tiempo en él contenido, haga imprimir e vender e venda el dicho libro y hacer sobre ello lo (_sic_) y lo a ello anejo, dezesorio y dependiente, todo lo que el dicho Miguel de Çerbantes haria a hazer podria siendo presente, y para que cumplidos los dichos dies años del dicho previllegio pueda pedir e pida una o más prorrogaciones y usar y use de ellas y del privillegio que de nuevo se le concediere, esto por prescio de mill e trescientos e treynta e seys reales que por ello le da e paga de contado de que se dió y otorgó por bien contento y entregado a toda su voluntad, y en razón de la paga y entrega dellos, que de presente no paresce, renunció la excepcion de la _non numerata pecunia_ y las dos leyes y excepcion del derecho que hablan e son en razón de la prueba del entregamiento como en ellas y en cada una de ellas se contiene, que no le valan, e se obligó que le será cierto e sano el dicho previllegio e las demas prorrogaciones que se le dieren e concedieren en virtud de él e de este poder e cesion e no le será pedido ni alegado engaño, aunque sea enormísimo, en más o en menos de la mitad del justo precio, porque desde agora, caso que pudiera haber el dicho engaño, que no le hay, se lo suelta, remite y perdona, y si alguna cosa intentare a pedir no sea oido en juicio ni fuera de él, y se obligó que el dicho previllegio será cierto e sano e seguro y no se le porná en ello agora ni en tiempo alguno por ninguna manera pleito ni litigio alguno, e si le fuere puesto incoará por ello causa y la seguirá, fenescerá y acabará a su propia costa o mision e cumplimiento de su interese, por manera que pacificamente el dicho Blas de Robles quede con el dicho previllegio e prorrogaciones libremente so pena de le pagar todas las costas e daños que sobre ello se le recrescieren, e para el cumplimiento de ello obligó su persona e bienes, habidos e por haber, e dió poder cumplido a todas e qualesquier justicias e juezes de Su Magestad Real de qualesquier partes que sean al fuero e jurisdicion de las quales y de cada una de ellas se sometió, e renunció su propio fuero, jurisdicion e domicilio y la ley _Si convenerit de jurisdictione omnium judicum_ para que por todo rigor de derecho e via executiva le compelan e apremien a lo ansi cumplir e pagar con costas como si sentencia definitiva fuese dada contra él e por él consentida e pasada en cosa juzgada, e renunció las leyes de su favor e la ley e derecho en que dice que general renunciacion fecha de leyes non vala, e ansi lo otorgó e firmó de su nombre siendo testigos Francisco Martínez e Juan Aguado e Andrea de Obregón, vecinos de le dicha villa, al qual dicho otorgante doy fee conozco.--Miguel de Cerbantes.--Pasó ante mi Francisco Martínez, escribano.--Derechos xxxiiij^o."

[26] Sr. Asensio y Toledo (_op. cit._, p. 194) inclines to think that Cervantes, when engaged on the first rough draft of his novel, intended to call it _Silena_.

[27] _Documentos_, vol. ii., pp. 90-92. "Madrid, 14 Junio 1584. Sepan quantos esta carta de obligacion vieren como yo Blas de Robles, mercader de libros, vecino de esta villa de Madrid, digo: que por quanto hoy día de la fecha de esta carta y por ante el escribano yuso escripto, Miguel de Çervantes, residente en esta corte de Su Magestad, me ha vendido un libro intitulado los seys libros de Galatea, que el dicho Çervantes ha compuesto en nuestra lengua castellana, por prescio de mill e trescientos e treynta e seys reales y en la escriptura que de ello me otorgó se dió por contento y pagado de todos los dichos maravedís e confesó haberlos rescebido de mi realmente y con efecto, y porque en realidad de verdad, no obstante lo contenido en la dicha escriptura, yo le resto debiendo ducientos e cinquenta reales y por la dicha razón me obligo de se los dar e pagar a él o a quien su poder hubiere para en fin del mes de Setiembre primero que verná deste presente año de ochenta e quatro, llanamente en reales de contado, sin pleito ni litigio alguno, so pena del doblo e costas, para lo qual obligo mi persona e bienes habidos e por haber e por esta carta doy poder cumplido a todas e qualesquier justicias e juezes de Su Magestad real de qualesquier partes que sean, al fuero e jurisdicion de las quales e de cada una de ellas me someto, e renuncio mi propio fuero, jurisdicion e domicilio y la ley _Si convenerit de jurisdictione omnium judicum_ para que por todo rigor de derecho e via executiva me compelan e apremien a lo ansi cumplir e pagar con costas como si sentencia difinitiva fuese dada contra mi e por mi consentida e pasada en cosa juzgada, e renuncio todas e qualesquier leyes que en mi favor sean y la ley e derecho en que dice que general renunciacion fecha de leyes non vala, en firmeza de lo qual otorgué esta carta de obligacion en la manera que dicha es ante el presente escribano e testigos deyuso escriptos. Que fué fecha e otorgada en la villa de Madrid a catorze días del mes de Junio de mill e quinientos e ochenta e quatro años, siendo testigos Andrés de Obregón e Juan Aguado e Baltasar Pérez, vecinos de esta villa, y el otorgante, que doy fee conozco, lo firmó de su nombre en el registro.--Blas de Robles.--Pasó ante mi Francisco Martínez, escribano.--Sin derechos."

[28] It may be as well to say that my conjecture (p. xiii) was made, and that the draft of this Introduction was written, before the publication of Dr. Pérez Pastor's second volume.

[29] See Navarrete, _op. cit._, pp. 312-313: "Señor.--Miguel de Cervantes Saavedra dice, que ha servido á V. M. muchos años en las jornadas de mar y tierra que se han ofrecido de veinte y dos años á esta parte, particularmente en la batalla naval, donde le dieron muchas heridas, de las cuales perdió una mano de un arcabuzazo, y el año siguiente fué á Navarino, y después á la de Túnez y á la Goleta, y viniendo á esta corte con cartas del Sr. D. Joan y del duque de Sesa para que V. M. le hiciese merced, fué captivo en la galera del Sol, él y un hermano suyo, que también ha servido á V. M. en las mismas jornadas, y fueron llevados á Argel, donde gastaron el patrimonio que tenian en rescatarse, y toda la hacienda de sus padres y los dotes de dos hermanas doncellas que tenía, las cuales quedaron pobres por rescatar á sus hermanos, y después de libertados fueron á servir á V. M. en el reino de Portugal y á las Terceras con el marques de Santa Cruz, y agora al presente están sirviendo y sirven á V. M., el uno dellos en Flandes de alferez, y el Miguel de Cervantes fué el que trajo las cartas y avisos del alcaide de Mostagan, y fué á Oran por orden de V. M., y después ha asistido sirviendo en Sevilla en negocios de la armada por orden de Antonio de Guevara, como consta por las informaciones que tiene, y en todo este tiempo no se le ha hecho merced ninguna."

[30] See Cristóbal Mosquera de Figueroa's _Comentario en breve compendio de disciplina militar, en que se escriue la jornada de las islas de los Açores_ (Madrid, 1596), f. 58.

Dr. Pérez Pastor sums up the case concisely in the _Prólogo_ to his _Documentos Cervantinos_ (Madrid, 1897), vol. i., pp. xi.-xii.; "Casi todos los biógrafos de Cervantes han sostenido que éste asistió á la jornada de la Tercera, fundándose en que así lo indica en el pedimento de la Información del año 1590; pero si tenemos en cuenta que en dicho documento van englobados los servicios de Miguel y Rodrigo de Cervantes, y por ende que es fácil atribuir al uno los hechos del otro hermano, que Miguel estaba en Tomar por Mayo de 1581, en Cartagena á fines de Junio de este año, ocupado en cosas del servicio de S. M., y en Madrid por el otoño de 1583, que el Marqués de Santa Cruz, después de haber reducido la Tercera y otras islas, entró en Cádiz el 15 de Septiembre del dicho año, se hace casi imposible que Miguel de Cervantes pudiera asistir á dicha jornada."

[31] _Ibid._, p. 89. "Madrid, 10 Septiembre, 1585. En la villa de Madrid, a diez días del mes de septiembre de mill y quinientos y ochenta y cinco años, en presencia de mi el presente y testigos de yuso escriptos parescieron presentes Rodrigo de Zervantes y doña Magdalena de Zervantes, hermanos, residentes en esta corte, e dixeron que por quanto habrá dos años, poco más o menos tiempo, Miguel de Zerbantes, su hermano, por orden de la dicha doña Magdalena empeñó al señor Napoleon Lomelin cinco paños de tafetan amarillos y colorados para aderezo de una sala, que tienen setenta y quatro varas y tres quartas, por treinta ducados, y que hasta agora han estado en el empeño, y la dicha doña Magdalena hizo pedimento ante el señor alcalde Pedro Bravo de Sotomayor en que pidió se le entregasen pagado el dicho empeño, y después de haber puesto y fecho el dicho pedimento se han concordado en esta manera.... Testigos que fueron presentes a lo que dicho es, Juan Vázquez del Pulgar y Juste de Oliva, sastre, los quales juraron a Dios en forma debida de derecho conocer a los dichos otorgantes y que se llaman e nombran como de suso dize sin cautela, y Marcos Diaz del Valle, estantes en Madrid, y los dichos otorgantes lo firmaron de sus nombres.--Rodrigo de Cerbantes.--Doña Magdalena de Cerbantes--Pasó ante mi Baltasar de Ugena. Derechos real e medio."

[32] Curiously enough, there is some dispute as to whether Cervantes's great rival, Lope de Vega, did or did not take part in an expedition to the Azores. Lope's assertion in his _Epístola_ to Luis de Haro is explicit enough. If any doubt on the subject has arisen, this is mainly due to Lope's vanity in under-stating his age.

[33] See the _Letter Dedicatory_ in Gálvez de Montalvo's _Pastor de Fílida_ addressed to Don Enrique de Mendoza y Aragón. Gálvez de Montalvo rejoices in his good fortune without any false shame: "Entre los venturosos, que a U. S. conocen, i tratan, he sido yo uno, i estimo que de los más, porque deseando servir a U. S. se cumplio mi deseo, i assi degè mi casa, i otras mui señaladas, dò fué rogado que viviesse, i vine a èsta, donde holgaré de morir, i donde mi mayor trabajo es estar ocioso, contento, i honrado como criado de U. S."

[34] See the suggestive observations of that admirable scholar, Madame Carolina Michaëlis de Vasconcellos in Gustav Gröber's _Grundriss der romanischen Philologie_ (Strassburg, 1897), II Band, 2 Abteilung, p. 216, _n._ 2. "Schon an den Namen _Amadís_ knupft sich so manche Frage. Ist er eine willkurliche, auf der Halbinsel entstandene Abänderung aus dem frz. _Amadas_ (engl. _Amadace_) latinisirt zu _Amadasius_? d. h. eine wohlklingendere Analogiebildung zu dem portug. Namen _Dinís_? also _Amad-ysius_? Man vergleiche einerseits: _Belis Fiis Leonis Luis Belianis Belleris; Assiz Aviz; Moniz Maris_ etc., und andererseits das alte Adj. _amadioso_, heute _(a)mavioso_. Oder gab es eine frz. Form in _-is_, wie die bereits 1292 vorkommende ital. (_Amadigi_) wahrscheinlich machen würde, falls sie erwiesen echt wäre (s. _Rom._ xvii., 185)?..."

[35] See a very interesting note in _Il Cortegiano del Conte Baldesar Castiglione annotato e illustrato da Vittorio Cian_ (Firenze, 1894), p. 327. Commenting on Castiglione's allusion to _Amadís_--"pero bisogneria mandargli all'Isola Ferma" (lib. iii., cap. liv.)--Professor Cian notes the rapid diffusion of _Amadís de Gaula_ in Italy: "Ma i' _Amadís_ era conosciuto assai prima frai noi, ed è notevole a questo proposito una lettera scritta in Roma da P. Bembo, il 4 febbraio 1512, al Ramusio, nella quale parlando del Valerio (Valier), loro amico, e amico del nostro C. e dell' Ariosto e dei Gonzaga di Mantova, il poeta veneziano ci porge questa notizia: 'Ben si pare che il Valerio sia sepolto in quel suo Amadagi....' (pubbl. da me nel cit. _Decennio delta vita del Bembo_, p. 206)."

[36] See vol. xl. of Manuel Rivadeneyra _Biblioteca de autores españoles_ entitled _Libros de caballerías con un discurso preliminar y un catalógo razonado por Don Pascual de Gayangos_ (Madrid, 1857), pp. xxxi. et seqq.

[37] The Portuguese case is well stated by Theophilo Braga in his _Historia das novelas portuguezas de cavalleria_ (Porto, 1873), in his _Questões de litteratura e arte portugueza_ (Lisboa, 1881), and in his _Curso de historia de litteratura portugueza_ (Lisboa, 1885). It is most forcibly summarized by Madame Michaëlis de Vasconcellos (_op. cit._, pp. 216-226) who cites, as partisans of the Portuguese claim, Warton, Bouterwek, Southey, Sismondi, Clemencín, Ticknor, Wolf, Lemcke, and Puymaigre. To these names might be added those of the two eminent masters, M. Gaston Paris and Sr. D. Marcelino Menéndez y Pelayo.

[38] See _La Littérature française au moyen âge XI^e-XIV^e siècle par Gaston Paris, Membre de l'Institut_. Deuxième édition revue, corrigée, augmentée et accompagnée d'un tableau chronologique. (Paris, 1890). Referring to the _romans bretons_, M. Gaston Paris writes (p. 104): "Le Perceforest français au XIV^e siècle, _l'Amadís_ portugais puis espagnol aux XV^e et XVI^e siècles sont des imitations de ces grands romans en prose."

[39] Chiefly by Gayangos in the _Discurso preliminar_ to Rivadeneyra, vol. xl.; by José Amador de los Ríos in his _Historia crítica de la literatura española_ (1861-65), vol. v., pp. 78-97; by Eugène Baret in _De l'Amadis de Gaule_ (second edition, Paris, 1871); by Ludwig Braunfels in his _Kritischer Versuch über den Roman Amadis von Gallien_ (Leipzig, 1876); and by Professor Gottfried Baist in the above-mentioned section of the _Grundriss der romanischen Philologie_, pp. 440-442.

[40] See the _Arcadia di Jacobo Sannazaro secondo i manoscritti e le prime stampe con note ed introduzione di Michele Scherillo_ (Torino, 1888).

[41] _Ibid._, pp. cclxi.-cccxliv.

[42] Compare, for example, Garcilaso's lines:--

Tengo vna parte aqui de tus cabellos,
Elissa, embueltos en vn blanco paño;
Que nunca de mi seno se me apartan.
Descojolos, y de vn dolor tamaño
Enternecer me siento, que sobre 'llos
Nunca mis ojos de llorar se hartan,
Sin que de allí se partan:
Con sospiros calientes,
Mas que la llama ardientes:
Los enxugo del llanto, y de consuno
Casi los passo y cuento vno a vno,
Iuntandolos con vn cordon los ato,
Tras esto el importuno
Dolor, me dexa descansar vn rato.

with the lines sung by Meliseo at the end of Sannazaro's twelfth _egloga_:--

I tuoi capelli, o Phylli, in una cistula
Serbati tegno, et spesso, quand' io volgoli,
Il cor mi passa una pungente aristula.
Spesso gli lego et spesso oimè disciolgoli,
Et lascio sopra lor quest' occhi piovere;
Poi con sospir gli asciugo e inseme accolgoli.
Basse son queste rime, exili et povere;
Ma se'l pianger in Cielo ha qualche merito,
Dovrebbe tanta fe' Morte commovere.
Io piango, o Phylli, il tuo spietato interito,
E'l mondo del mio mal tutto rinverdesi.
Deh pensa, prego, al bel viver preterito,
Se nel passar di Lethe amor non perdesi.

An exhaustive study on Garcilaso's debts to Italy is given by Professor Francesco Flamini--_Imitazioni italiane in Garcilaso de la Vega_--in _La Biblioteca delle scuole italiane_ (Milano, June 1899).

[43] See George Ticknor's _History of Spanish Literature_ (Sixth edition, Boston, 1888), vol. iii., p. 94. Ticknor, however, failed to notice that the date in his copy was a forgery: see Mr. J. L. Whitney's _Catalogue_ (Boston, 1879), p. 234, and compare Salvá y Mallen, _op. cit._, vol. ii., p. 168.

[44] Scherillo, _op. cit._, p. ccxlvii.

[45] The proof of this has been supplied independently by the late John Ormsby (see vol. iii. of the present edition (Glasgow, 1901), p. 51, _n._ i.); by Professor Hugo Albert Rennert (see _The Spanish Pastoral Romances_ (Baltimore, 1892), p. 9); and by myself (see the _Revue hispanique_ (Paris, 1895), vol. ii., pp. 304-311). All three appear to have been anticipated in the excellent monograph entitled _Jorge de Montemayor, sein Leben und sein Schäferroman die_ "_Siete Libros de la Diana_" _nebst einer Übersicht der Ausgaben dieser Dichtung und bibliographischen Anmerkungen herausgegeben von Georg Schönherr_ (Halle, 1886), p. 83.

The decisive point is that Ticknor's copy, the oldest known edition, must be at least as late as 1554, for Montemôr here refers to the Infanta Juana as a widow: see (lib. iv.) the fifth stanza of the _Canto de Orfeo_. Her husband, Dom João, died on January 2, 1554. A duplicate of the Ticknor volume is in the British Museum library.

[46] See the preface to Fray Bartholomé Ponce's _Primera Parte de la Clara Diana á lo divino, repartida en siete libros_ (Zaragoza, 1582): "El año mil quinientos cincuenta y nueue, estando yo en la corte del Rey don Philipe segundo deste nombre ... vi y ley la Diana de Jorge de Mõtemayor, la qual era tan accepta quanto yo jamas otro libro en Romance aya visto: entonces tuue entrañable desseo de conocer a su autor, lo qual se me cumplio tan a mi gusto, que dentro de diez días se offrecio tener nos combidados a los dos, vn canallero muy Illustre, aficionado en todo estremo al verso y poesia."

[47] For Ribeiro, see Madame Michaëlis de Vasconcellos, _op. cit._, pp. 291-295. Ribeiro's work seems to have been printed posthumously, the earliest known edition being issued at Ferrara in 1554. But, as Madame Michaëlis de Vasconcellos observes (p. 295, _n._ 8): "Dass lange vor dem ital. Drucke Ribeiro's wie Falcao's Werke grossen Ruf hatten, steht ausser Zweifel. Sie müssen in Handschriften oder Flugblättern unter den Lesenden Kurs gehabt haben." It is, perhaps, not superfluous to mention that Ribeiro's _Menina e moça_, like Virgil's _Formosum Corydon ardebat Alexim_, takes its title from the opening words.

[48] See Schönherr, _op. cit._, p. 26. "Was das genauere Datum des Todes Montemayor's betrifft, so wird hierfür im Vorwort der _Diana_ ed. 1622 der 26. Februar des Jahres 1561 angegeben, und zwar war es des Dichters Freund Alonso Pérez, der es der Nachwelt überlieferte, wiewohl es sich in dessen erster, 1564 erschienener Ausgabe der _Segunda Parte de la Diana_ noch nicht findet. Die Richtigkeit seiner Angabe lässt sich einigermassen prufen, nicht mit Hülfe der Elegie des Dorantes, die Salvá's Vermutung (No. 1909) entgegen der Ausgabe vom Jahre 1561 noch nicht angehängt ist, wol aber in Hinblick auf des oben stehende Sonett Pagan's, welches bereits in dessen 1562 erschienener _Floresta de varia poesía_ enthalten ist, so dass man hiernach keine Ursache hat, der Datierung des Pérez zu misstrauen."

The sonnet mentioned by Schönherr, and reprinted by Salvá y Mallen, occurs on _f_ of Diego Ramírez Pagán's _Floresta de varia poesía_ (1562):

Nuestro Monte mayor, do fué nascido?
En la ciudad del hijo de Laerte.
Y que parte en la humana instable suerte?
Cortesano, discreto, y entendido.
Su trato como fué, y de que ha biuido?
Siruiendo, y no acerto, ni ay quien acierte.
Quien tan presto le dió tan cruda muerte?
Imbidia, y Marte, y Venus lo ha mouido.
Sus huessos donde están? En Piamonte.
Porque? Por no los dar a patria ingrata.
Que le deue su patria? Inmortal nombre.
De que? Larga vena, dulce, y grata.
Y en pago que le dan? Talar el monte.
Y haura quien le cultiue? No ay tal hõbre.

The British Museum Library contains a copy of Ramírez Pagán's _Floresta_: a book esteemed by Gallardo, Gayangos, and Salvá (_op. cit._, vol. i., p. 153, no. 339) as "uno de los más raros que existen en la literatura poética española."

[49] See the prologue to Pérez' continuation (A 5 of the Antwerp edition, 1580) " ... casi en toda esta obra no ay narracion, ni platica, no solo en verso, más aun en prosa, que à pedaços de la flor de Latinos y Italianos hurtado, y imitado no sea; y no pienso por ello ser digno de reprehension, pues lo mesmo de los Griegos hizieron."

[50] The whole history, bibliographical and literary, of the pastoral movement in Spain may be studied in the searching and learned monograph of Professor Hugo Albert Rennert, _The Spanish Pastoral Romances_ (Baltimore, 1892). A minute examination of Texeda's plagiary, which escaped detection by Ticknor, will be found on pp. 39-42 of Professor Rennert's work.

[51] The reference is, no doubt, to the passage in the fifth book of Montemôr's _Diana_: "Y tomando el vaso que tenía en la mano izquierda le puso en la suya á Sireno, y mando que lo bebiese, y Sireno lo hizo luego; y Selvagia y Silvano bebieron ambos el otro, y en este punto cayeron todos tres en el suelo adormidos, de que no poco se espantó Felismena y la hermosa Belisa que allí estaba...." Cp. Sannazaro's _Arcadia_ (_Prosa nona_, Scherillo's edition, p. 171): "Al quale subgiunse una lodula, dicendo, in una terra di Grecia (dela quale yo ora non so il nome) essere il fonte di Cupidine, del quale chiunche beve, depone subitamente ognie suo amore."