Читать книгу The Study of Spanish and Portuguese Literature - Friedrich Bouterwek - Страница 27

Table of Contents

All that now remains to be stated respecting the poetic literature of the Spaniards during the fifteenth century, must be comprehended in a notice of their first essays in dramatic poetry.

In lieu of those poetic works which are styled dramatic in the true sense of the word, and which afterwards formed the most brilliant portion of Spanish poetry, the Spaniards of the fifteenth century possessed merely spiritual or temporal farces, written in the style which prevailed in the middle ages, and which can scarcely be said to belong to literature. At Saragossa, the residence of the Court of Arragon, attempts towards the improvement of dramatic amusements were earlier made than in the Castilian court. There, as has already been observed, the Marquis de Villena devoted his learning and inventive talents to the drama. Allegorical dramas, indeed, do not seem to have been in favour at the court of Castile, notwithstanding the taste for allegory which distinguished the poets of the reign of John II. A singular union of pastoral and satirical poetry first gave birth to a species of dramatic poem in the Castilian language.

In the reign of John II. an anonymous poet amused himself by describing the court of that monarch in satirical coplas. It is impossible to account for the whim which induced him to throw his rhymes into the form of a dialogue, and to select shepherds for his interlocutors. The work extends to thirty-two coplas, and critics have sometimes classed it among the eclogues, and sometimes among the first satirical productions of the Spanish poets. Some make Rodrigo de Cota the author of these coplas; and others, who ascribe them to Juan de Mena, seem to forget that the latter was zealously devoted to the court party. This singular composition is usually mentioned under the title of Mingo Rebulgo, from the names of the two shepherds who carry on the dialogue. Supposing pastoral poetry to have been in vogue at that period in Spain, and particularly at the court of John II. it would be easy to explain how a witty author might conceive the bold idea of converting a pastoral dialogue into a satire; but in that case the ideas of a poetic pastoral existence must have been diffused through Spain, as they were through Italy. It is probable, however, that in both countries the revived study of classical literature, and particularly of Virgil’s eclogues, gave rise to the practice of clothing modern ideas in a garb imitated from the ancient bucolic poetry; and it seems the effect of mere accident that a Spaniard should have been the first to devote a work of this kind to the purposes of satire.126

Doubtless neither the eclogue of Mingo Rebulgo, nor the colloquial stanzas in the Cancionero can properly be regarded as the commencement of dramatic poetry in Spain. But all these preliminary essays in dialogue, are in a literary point of view connected together; and about the close of the fifteenth century, pastoral dialogues were converted into real dramas, by a musical composer, named Juan de la Enzina, or del Enzina, as he is styled in the old collections of his works. This ingenious man who was born in Salamanca during the reign of Queen Isabella, though in what year is not precisely known, was equally celebrated as a poet and musician. He travelled to Jerusalem in company with the Marquis de Tarifa, and this journey could not fail to store his mind with many new ideas. He lived for some time at Rome in the quality of chapel-master, or musical director to Pope Leo; who, it is well known, afforded great encouragement to dramatic amusements. But at Rome, as well as in Palestine, Juan de la Enzina still remained a Spaniard. His poetry imbibed no tincture of the Italian taste, and he continued to write songs and lyric romances in the old Castilian style. He also exercised his fancy in making jests, consisting of ridiculous combinations or heterogeneous conceits, called disparates, which he wrote in the form of romances. For instance, he talks with an absurd but harmless humour of a “cloud which at night, at day break in the afternoon arrived from a pilgrimage, having in its train a domestic utensil which appeared in pontificalibus,” &c.127 These oddities rendered his name a proverb in Spain. He converted Virgil’s eclogues into romances, in which he displayed singular simplicity, and applied to his patrons, Ferdinand and Isabella, the duke and duchess of Alba, and others, the compliments which Virgil addressed to the emperor Augustus. Accident had introduced into Spain a mixture of pastoral poetry with the drama, and Juan de la Enzina wrote sacred and profane eclogues, in the form of dialogues, which were represented before distinguished audiences on Christmas eve, during the carnival, and on other festivals. They are, however, entirely lost to literature.128

The dramatic romance of Callistus and Melibœa is, however, more celebrated than Juan de la Enzina’s eclogues. It was probably commenced in the reign of Ferdinand and Isabella; though some authors assign this singular production of popular descriptive talent and well meant plainness to the age of John II. The author is supposed to be Rodrigo de Cota, to whom the pastoral dialogue of Mingo Rebulgo is also attributed. This dramatic romance was continued and completed at the commencement of the fifteenth century by Fernando de Roxas, who has recorded his own name in the initials of the introductory stanzas.129 Fernando de Roxas did not possess the forcible descriptive powers of the unknown author, though he appears to have fully entered into the plan traced out by the latter. Either he or his precursor entitled the work a tragi-comedy. It consists of twenty-one acts, and consequently its vast length renders it unfit for theatrical representation. This production may be regarded as original in a certain sense, for there existed no work of the same kind which the author could have chosen as his model. But in a higher and truly critical point of view, it possesses as little originality as real poetic merit. Natural description and moral precept seem to have formed the great object of both authors. They both aimed at exhibiting a series of dramatic lessons to warn youth against the seductive arts of base agents employed to promote intrigues. In order to attain this moral end, the authors deemed it necessary to paint in glowing colours the disgusting picture of a brothel, and through a series of scenes unconnected by the unities of time or place, to exhibit in the most striking point of view, the tragical end of an intrigue conducted by a woman of infamous character. Owing to its moral object, the book has found admirers in all ages, though many have not unreasonably conceived it more advisable to withdraw such scenes of vice from the eye of youth, than to paint them with the minuteness and vivid colouring of truth. But, even allowing that an inconsiderate young person may have occasionally been deterred from an intrigue by the sad history of Callistus and Melibœa, yet the whole dramatic tale, both in the subject and execution, is nevertheless revolting to good taste. The story is as follows:—Callistus, a young man of noble family, entertains a romantic passion for Melibœa. The young lady is also attached to him; but her own prudence, as well as the strict observation to which she is subject in the house of her parents, prevents all communication between the lovers. In this difficulty, Callistus applies to an artful and abandoned woman, to whom the author has given the elegant name of Celestina. She easily devises a pretence for insinuating herself into the house of Melibœa’s parents, where she succeeds in bribing the servants. The intrigue then proceeds in the most common manner, though the author thinks it necessary to call in the aid of witchcraft and magic. Callistus at length attains his object, and Melibœa’s parents discover the mischief when it is too late. Murder is committed among the servants of Melibœa; Celestina’s house likewise becomes the scene of bloodshed; the profligate woman is herself murdered in the most horrible manner imaginable; Callistus is assassinated, and Melibœa closes the tragedy by throwing herself from the top of a lofty tower. Such is the ground-work of the twenty-one acts of this tragi-comedy. It must be admitted, that the authors appear to have wished to paint the scenes in the house of Celestina in as decorous a manner as the nature of the subject would permit. The profligate personages, particularly Celestina, are drawn with great truth; and in the list of the characters their description is unreservedly added to their names. The first act, which is by the unknown author, is distinguished above the rest for the easy flow of the dialogue.130 Considered in this point of view alone, the work is extremely interesting. It affords a fair proof that the fluent and natural style of conversation which the dramatic poets of the north did not attain, until after much labour and repeated failures, arose spontaneously in Spain, on the first attempt made by a writer of talent to make dramatic characters speak in prose.131 This tragi-comedy, as it is styled, has, however, but little relation to poetry.132