Page:EB1911 - Volume 27.djvu/994

Rh much more. His epics, his pastorals, his odes, his sonnets, now forgotten, all placed him m the front rank of authorship. Such was his prestige that he dealt with his noble patrons almost on a footing of equality. The duke of Sessa in particular, his Maecenas from 1605 onwards, was also his personal friend, and the tone of Lope’s letters to him is one of frank familiarity, modified only by some forms of deference. Lope’s fame, too, had travelled abroad: foreigners of distinction passing through Madrid made a point of visiting him; papal legates brought him the compliments of their master; in 1627 Urban VIII., a Barberini, sent him the diploma of doctor of theology in the Collegium Sapientiae and the cross of the order of St John df Jerusalem (whence the poet’s titles of “Doctor” and “Frey”). His last days were full of sadness; the death of his son Lope, the elopement of his daughter; Antonia Clara, wounded him to the soul. Montalbán tells us that every Friday the poet scourged himself so severely that the walls of his room Were sprinkled with his blood. His death, on the 27th of August 1635, was followed by national mourning.

Leaving out of account certain theories which in the long run greatly influenced his manner of writing, Lape belonged in literature to what may be called the school of good sense ; he boasted that he was a Spaniard pur sang, and steadfastly maintained that a writer’s business is to write so as to make himself understood. When brought face to face with the coterie of the précieux and quintessenciés, Lope takes the position of a defender of the language of ordinary life, the good old Castilian tongue. In the dispute which arose between the partisans of the two schools of cuitos and llanos, he ranged himself on the side of the latter. In the matter of versification he refuses to admit that the long Italian verse has the advantage of the Castilian octosyllabic. Unfortunately the books that he read, his literary connexions, his fear of Italian criticism, all exercised an influence upon his naturally robust spirit, and, like so many others, he caught the prevalent contagion of mannerism and of pompous phraseology. His literary culture was chiefly Latin-Italian; and, if he defends the tradition of the nation and the pure simplicity of the old Castilian against “los de la nueva poesia,” that is to say, the innovators of the school of Góngora and against the jargon of the cultos, still he does not wish to be taken for an uninformed person, a writer devoid of classical training: he especially emphasizes the fact that he has passed through the university, and is continually accentuating the difference between the ingenios cientifícos (those who know Latin) and legos ignorantes (ignorant laymen). With what a sense of superiority, for example, does he mention that Cervantes was not to his mind sufficiently cientifíco (preface to Las Fortunas de Diana), the fact being that Cervantes had been neither at Alcala nor at Salamanca!

For a rapid survey of the works of Lope, it is convenient to begin with those which the Spaniards include under the name of Obras Sueltas, the title of the large collection of the poet’s non-dramatic works (Madrid, 21 vols. 4to, 1776–79). We shall enumerate the most important of these, as far as possible in the order of publication; The Arcadia (1598), a pastoral romance, inspired by Sannazaro, is one of the poet’s most wearisome productions. La Dragontea (1598) is a fantastic history in verse of Sir Francis Drake’s last expedition and death. Isidro (1599), a narrative of the life of Isidore, patron of Madrid, is called a Castilian poem on account of the rhythm in which it is composed—quintillas of octosyllabic verse. The Hermosura de Angélica (1602), in three books, is a sort of continuation of the Orlando Furioso, in octaves after the fashion of the original poem. Finally, the Rimas are a miscellany of short pieces. In 1604 was published the Peregrino en su Patria, a romance similar in kind to the Aelhiopica of Heliodorus. Haying imitated Ariosto, he proceeded to imitate Tasso; but his Jerusalem Conquistada (1609) has preserved nothing of the art shown in. its model, and is an insipid performance. Next follows the Pastores de Belen (1612), a pious pastoral, dedicated to his son Carlos, which forms a pendant to his secular Arcadia; and incidental pieces published in connexion with the solemnities of the beatification and canonization of St Isidore in 1620 and 1622. It is enough to mention La Filomena (1621), La Circe (1624) and other poems published about the same date, as also the four prose novels, Las Fortunas de Diana, El Desdichado por la Honra, La Más Prudente Venganza and Guzmán el Bravo. The great success of the Novelas Exemplares of Cervantes (1613) had stimulated Lope, but in this instance at least the científico was completely defeated by the lego: Lope’s novels have none of the grace, naturalness or interest which characterize those of his rival. The last important work which has. to be mentioned before we leave the narrative poetry of Lope is the Laurel de Apolo (1630). This piece describes the coronation of the poets of Spain on Helicon by Apollo, and it is more meritorious as a bibliographical manual of Spanish poetry at that time than as genuine poetry. One other obra suelta, closely akin to Lope’s dramatic works, though not, properly speaking, a drama, is La Dorotea (1632). Lope describes it as an “action in prose,” but it is rather a “romance in dialogue”; for, although divided into acts, the narrative Js dramatic in form only. Of all Lope’s productions Dorotea shows most observation and study; the style also is unusually simple and easy. Of all this mass of obras sueltas, filling more than twenty volumes, very little (leaving Dorotea out of account) holds its own in the judgment of posterity. The lyrical element alone retains some vitality. From the Rimas and other collections of detached pieces one could compile' a pleasing anthology of sonnets, epistles, elegies and romances; to which it would be proper to add the Gatomaquia, a burlesque poem published along with other metrical pieces in 1634 by Lope. under the pseudonym of Tomé de Burguillos. But here the list would end.

It is, however, to his dramatic writings that Lope owes his eminent place in literary history. It is very curious to notice how he himself always treats the art of comedy-writing as one of the humblest of trades (de pane lucrando), and protests against the supposition that in writing for the stage his aim is glory and not money. The reason is not far to seek. The Spanish drama, which, if riot literally the creation of Lope, at least owes to him its definitive form—the three-act comedy—was. totally regardless of the precepts of the school, the pseudo-Aristotelianism of the doctors. of the period. Lope accordingly, who stood in awe of the criticism of the cientificos, felt bound to prove that, from the point; of view of literary art, he attached 'no Value to the “rustic fruits of his humble vega.” In his Arte Nuevo de hacer comedias en este tiempo (1609), Lope begins by showing that he knows as well as any one the established rules of poetry, and then excuses himself for his inability to follow them on the ground that the “vulgar” Spaniard cares nothing about them. “Let us then speak to hint in the language of fools, since it is he who pays us.” Another reason which made it necessary for him to, speak deprecatingly of his dramatic works, is the circumstance that the vast majority of them were written in haste and to order. The poet does not hesitate to confess that “more than a hundred of my comedies have taken only twenty-four hours to pass from my brain to the boards of the theatre.” Perez de Montalbán, who has a great admiration for this kind of cleverness, tells how, sit Toledo, on a certain occasion,. Lope composed fifteen acts in fifteen days—that is to say, five entire comedies, which he read to his friends step by step with the process of their composition. On another occasion, When pressed by a manager who wanted something for the carnival, Lope took Montalbán as a collaborator; the two friends parcelled out the comedy between them, Lope undertaking the first act, Montalbán the second, and the third, to save time, was divided between them. In two days they had finished the first two acts, and on the third Montalbán rose at two in the morning and at eleven he had finished. Then he went in search of Lope, who, when questioned as to his progress, replied: “I got up at five, finished the act, breakfasted, wrote an epistle of fifty tercets, arid have now finished watering the garden, and a rather tough business it has been.” Nevertheless, Lope did write dramas in which the plan is more fully matured and the execution more carefully carried out; still, hurried composition, and reckless production are after all among the distinctive marks of his theatrical works. Towards the close of his career Lope somewhat modified the severe and disdainful judgments he had formerly passed upon his dramatic performances; he seems to have had a presentiment that posterity, in spite of the grave defects of his, work in that department, would nevertheless place it much higher than La Dragontea, the Jerusalem Conquistada and other works of which he himself thought so much. We may certainly credit Lope with creative power, with the instinct Which enabled him to reproduce the facts of history or those supplied by the imagination in a multitude of dramatic situations with an astonishing cleverness and flexibility of expression; but unfortunately, instead of concentrating his talent upon the production of a limited number of works which he might have brought to perfection, he dissipated it, so to say, and scattered it to the winds.

The catalogue of Lope’s comedies has been drawn up by himself; and, in spite of some discrepancies in his figures, it is established that up to 1664 he had composed, in round numbers, as many, as 230. In 1609 the figure had risen to 483, in 1618 to 800, in 1620 to 900, in 1625 to 1070, and in 1632 to 1500. Ultimately Montalbán in the Fama Postuma (1636) set down the total of Lope’s dramatic productions at 1800 plays and more than 400 autos sacramentales. Of this number there are 637 plays which are known to us by their titles (from the lists of the Peregrino); but the printed or MS. text of only 458 is actually accessible, besides some 50 autos and a few entremeses. Very many of these pieces were printed during Lope’s lifetime, either in collections of varios autores or as separate issues by booksellers who surreptitiously bought from the actors the manuscripts of their rô1es or else caused the unpublished comedy to be written down from memory by persons whom they sent to attend the first representation. Such pieces therefore as do not figure in the collection published under Lope’s own direction or, under that of his friends cannot be regarded as perfectly authentic, and it would be unfair to hold their author responsible for all the faults and defects they exhibit. On the other hand, there exist comedies in Lope’s own handwriting which have not yet been printed.

The classification of this enormous mass of dramatic literature is