Transcriber’s Note: There is a good deal of inconsistency with regard
to spelling, accents etc in the Spanish passages of this text. These
have been preserved as printed rather than attempting to correct or
standardise.
MODERN POETS
AND
POETRY OF SPAIN.
BY JAMES KENNEDY, ESQ.,
HER BRITANNIC MAJESTY’S JUDGE IN THE MIXED COURT
OF JUSTICE AT THE HAVANA.
WILLIAMS AND NORGATE,
14, HENRIETTA STREET, COVENT GARDEN, LONDON;
AND
20, SOUTH FREDERICK STREET, EDINBURGH.
1860.
TO THE RIGHT HONOURABLE GEORGE, EARL OF CARLISLE, _&c. &c._
MY LORD,
I have sought permission to inscribe your Lordship’s name on this page,
as a favour appropriate to my work, under the considerations in which
it originated.
I began these translations, partly as a means of acquiring an accurate
knowledge of the Spanish language, and partly as a relaxation from
other studies and pursuits, about the time when your Lordship, in
the course of your statesmanlike visit to America, made, in 1842, a
lengthened stay in Cuba, studying the circumstances of those countries,
which are soon, perhaps, to take a yet more prominent place, than they
do at present, in the history of the world.
The discussions I heard respecting that visit--for it was then
considered an extraordinary one--raised in my mind many suggestions, as
to the benefits that must accrue to the public from the observations of
individual travellers. Accordingly as each one might have his special
object in view, his sphere of action or opportunities of learning,
so the knowledge he acquired might be proportionately imparted. The
community at large had always evinced the greatest interest in the
accounts given by travellers of their visits to foreign countries,
as was shown by the favourable reception uniformly given to their
works. Of these many that were published were well deserving of the
popularity they obtained, especially as with regard to Spain there were
several that left little for any future writer to supply of ordinary
information. In one respect, however, all such works appeared to me to
be deficient, though their failure was almost unavoidable, in the case
of transient visitors, in their being unable to convey any adequate
idea of the state of mental culture among the people they visited.
Yet this, to a philosophic reader, would be undoubtedly the truest test
of the state of civilization to which any nation had attained. Such a
reader would not be contented with merely a recital of the every-day
occurrences of travelling, nor yet with general or statistical
information respecting any people, obtained from ordinary sources.
He would rather seek to follow them into the occupations of private
life and into their favourite courses of thought and feeling, judging
of these by the studies of their better classes of society, in their
hours of relaxation or for domestic enjoyment. As the sagest of the
Roman emperors, M. Antoninus, observed, To know any people’s minds
and inclinations, we should examine their studies and pursuits,--τὰ
ἡγεμονικὰ αὐτῶν διάβλεπε, καὶ τοὺς Φρόνιμους, διὰ μέν Φεύγουσιν, διὰ δὲ
διώκουσιν.
Few persons going abroad for a short period, or for a specific
purpose, could be expected to acquire such an intimate knowledge of
the literature of any country as to be able to render a satisfactory
account of it. Where, however, any one had the means and the leisure to
do so, that seemed to me the task most worthy for him to undertake.
As a servant of the public, I considered this more peculiarly a duty;
and I therefore ventured, by extending my studies, to attempt giving
a comprehensive view of Modern Spanish Poetry, and so complete the
representations of Spanish society and manners given by other writers.
This I thought best to be done, first, by compiling some critical
and biographical notices of the principal modern poets; and, next,
by endeavouring to transfuse into English verse the most favourable
specimens of their productions, by which the English reader might in
some degree be enabled to judge of their merits.
Such was the task I then set before me, the results of which I now
offer to the public as my contribution to the store of general
knowledge. For such a work there can be little merit claimed, except
that for patient industry. But as a naturalist or collector of works
of art patriotically endeavours to bring home the most valuable
productions or treasures of other countries, so I trust that this work
may also be favourably accepted, as a praiseworthy attempt to enrich
our English literature with what was most interesting in the Spanish.
I have relied on your Lordship’s approval of the design, from your
well-known anxiety and constant efforts to improve the moral and social
condition of the people, by literary as well as by legislative means.
Sharing in the public respect for those efforts on their behalf, and
with much thankfulness for the sanction afforded me, I have the honour
to subscribe myself,
Your Lordship’s
Most obedient,
Humble Servant,
J. KENNEDY.
London,
May 6, 1852.
INTRODUCTION.
Those writers are very much mistaken who suppose, that, consequent upon
the long domination of the Moors in Spain, there are to be found in
Spanish literature any of the exuberances of style which are considered
the principal characteristics of Eastern poetry. In all the Moorish
ballads that have been handed down to us, those characteristics, both
in thought and expression, abound as much as in the poems of more
Eastern nations. But in even the earliest Spanish ballads, contemporary
with the Moorish, a very decided difference is to be observed, as
they show, on the contrary, a simplicity of expression and propriety
of thought, which present an extraordinary contrast, not only to the
Moorish, but also to the early poetry of other European countries. This
favourable distinction has continued to the present day. The poetry
of the Northern nations of Europe has been marked by extravagances
throughout, as contrary to common sense as to good taste and nature.
That of the French school has been distinguished by an affectation,
a sentimentality and straining after effect, to say nothing of its
peculiar ribaldry and licentiousness, all equally removed from the
true feeling of poetry. Even the Italians, in their poetical works,
have indulged in strange absurdities, the more remarkable from the
good taste that has pervaded their other works of genius. It is only
in English literature that we can find writers imbued with the same
vigour of thought and depth of poetic feeling as the Spanish, and it is
therefore only with them that the latter can be classed in considering
the relative merits of the poetry of different modern nations.
If the character of the poetry may be taken as the criterion by which
to judge of the degree of civilization to which any people had attained
in the earlier period of their history, Spain has a good right to
claim the first place among the nations of Europe, when emerging
from that period denominated the Dark Ages. While the popular poetry
of other nations at that period was almost entirely occupied with
childish stories of giants and supernatural beings, or in magnifying
the outrages of their heroes, and even of their outlaws, as if they
were honourable exploits, instead of merely murder and rapine, the
Spanish bards were engaged in celebrating the patriotism and prowess
of their Christian warriors in strains not unworthy of the deeds they
commemorated. Those strains have been made sufficiently well-known to
the English reader by the labours of Southey and Lockhart, for which
the student of Spanish literature must feel the utmost respect and
gratitude, as well as by those of Rodd, Bowring and others. From their
translations the character of those warriors will be found to have
been distinguished, differently from those of other nations in that
age, for the milder virtues combined with pure chivalrous enterprise.
If, as apparently was the case, the great champion, known as the
Cid, especially was deserving of the eminently honourable character
depicted for him by the poets, the popular feeling must have attained
something of the same tone when he was adopted as the first object
of national regard. Coming of a chivalrous race, engaged in a sacred
warfare, the Cid combined in his character all that was most noble in
human conduct, and gave to his countrymen a fame which they knew full
well how to appreciate. Thus the spirit which the ballads breathed in
recounting his exploits was one in unison with that of the people. Each
Spaniard of after-times, in listening to those recitals, felt he had no
need to connect himself with fabulous narratives. He could say, like
Diomede,--“Of this race and blood do I boast myself to be”--
Ταύτης τοι γενεῆς τε καὶ αἴματος εὕχομαι εἶναι,
and so feeling could identify himself truly with his heroes.
Formed originally of very different races, Celts and Goths, mixed
with the descendants of Romans and Phœnicians or Carthaginians,
the Spaniards had against the Moors become amalgamated into one
people, whose great bond of union was their religion more even than
their country. This holy cause ennobled their conduct, and gave
them higher aims and motives than any ordinary warfare could do;
so that acting constantly under the sense of such feelings, their
national character assumed the staid bearing, which has always since
so favourably distinguished it. Hence also the national literature,
even in its lightest productions, assumed the tone of high moral and
practical tendency which it has generally borne, far removed from the
comparatively trifling topics which formed the staple subjects of the
literature of neighbouring countries.
There is another mistake into which some writers have fallen, in
supposing that Spain owed her civilization entirely to the Moors. The
Arab conquest undoubtedly entailed on her for many ages a succession
of enlightened as well as warlike rulers, who are justly to be
classed among the greatest patrons of literature and art; but they
fostered rather than founded the sciences that afterwards flourished
under their rule, and which they found preparing to burst forth in
the country they conquered. Though their forefathers might have come
from the seats of learning in the East, such as they then were, the
immediate conquerors of Spain were natives of the neighbouring parts
of Africa, where the sciences had not flourished in any remarkable
degree before the conquest, and where they did not rise subsequently
to any eminence. The learned Lampillas, who has given us a very able
Vindication of Spanish Literature, in answer to the attacks of some
Italian critics, might justly have gone further than he has done as
to its merits under the Moorish domination. Rather than as owing
her advances in learning and civilization to the Moors, it is more
probable that these were the remains of former civilization, existing
among the Roman colonies on the dissolution of the empire. At that
time Spain was essentially inhabited by descendants of Romans, as it
still continues to be, mainly, to the present day. Latin had become
the language of the country, and the best of the later Latin authors,
Seneca, Lucan, Martial, Quinctilian and others, were natives of the
Peninsula. The Romans had planted sixty-seven colonies there, and in
the time of Vespasian could enumerate 360 cities inhabited by them.
These would undoubtedly retain their municipal institutions, and were
perhaps more retentive of Roman manners than were even the towns of
Italy. The original inhabitants had been driven into the mountains
of Catalonia, Cantabria and Lusitania. They were of Celtic origin,
and their descendants in those provinces still show that origin by a
different pronunciation of the language imposed on the country by the
Romans; while the Castillians, being of purer descent from them, speak
even now a language little different from that in common colloquial use
under the Emperors. The lower orders, in fact, speak an idiom nearer
to it than do the educated classes, showing that the main race of the
people, in Madrid for instance, remains essentially Roman. In Betica or
Andalusia and the South of Spain, the descendants of Romans had become
incorporated with those of Phœnician or Carthaginian and a few Greek
colonists, forming together a race perhaps still more civilized than
the new-comers. Thus the Moors found the people they had conquered in a
high state of civilization, scarcely affected by former conquests, and
they had only the merit of accepting and continuing the mental culture
which they found there, and which they had not possessed in their
native deserts.
The Goths and Vandals had swept like a hurricane over Spain; but
they passed over it without leaving any considerable traces of their
conquest. This is clear from the circumstance of so few Northern words
remaining in the language of the country. At the entrance of the Moors
into Spain, the dominant party there was certainly of Gothic descent;
but they had already lost their Northern idioms, and were immerged
in the mass of the people they had conquered, in the usual course of
such events, as the Scandinavians soon did in Normandy and the Normans
in England. When the races had begun to amalgamate in Spain, the
distinctive lines might have been longer discernible in the South, if
it had not been for the Moorish invasion. This soon repeated the events
of former conquests, in the extermination of the fighting men and the
enslaving of the other classes, who became feudatories or worse. Those
who escaped to the mountains of the North constituted a nucleus of
resistance, which was no doubt much strengthened in their subsequent
contests by the aid of the Christian population left of necessity
among the Moors, who thus became dangerous as internal enemies, though
they had been tolerated at first as valuable dependents. The war that
then arose in Spain, and continued for upwards of 600 years, was
imbued, on the part of the Christians, with all those ingredients of
religious as well as patriotic feeling that render wars remarkable
for desperate conflict. On the part of the Moors, it is but justice
toward them to say, that for chivalrous honour and bravery they proved
themselves in no respect inferior to their opponents, who, thus engaged
in generous rivalry, became distinguishable for the same virtues.
The circumstances of the wars between the Christians and the Moors
were too near to the every-day experience of the people to allow of
any imaginary addition to the legends of the times, and they were too
engrossing in importance and interest to require any heightening. The
ballads founded upon them, therefore, assumed almost the matter-of-fact
air of history, and this seemed hence to become the characteristic
of all the subsequent literature of Spain. It is true that romances
abounded in which giants and other absurdities of knight-errantry
might be found, but they were principally of foreign origin, and did
not become incorporated in the national poetry. This national poetry
was always true to its mission, for it may be observed that the poets
of Spain have seldom or never gone beyond their own history for their
heroes; they have rather instinctively followed the maxim of the great
lyrist of old, not to select objects of admiration from strangers, but
to seek them at home,--
Οὐδ’ ἀλλοτρίων ἔρωτες
Ἀνδρὶ Φέρειν κρέσσονες,
Οἰκόθεν μάτευε.
Thus also they were secure of the sympathy of their audience, and found
patriotism the best inspirer of poetry.
None of the Spanish poets, of either former or present times, can be
said to have attained the highest rank; yet as they have always shown a
predilection for subjects of real incident and passion or feeling, they
have gained, in perhaps a greater degree than those of any other modern
nation, that hold upon the popular affections which arises from all
earnest participation in kindred sentiments. This might arise partly
from the national character developed, as before intimated, in the
Moorish wars, and partly from the personal tendencies of the respective
individuals. Whilst in other countries the poets were generally to
be found among the classes dependent upon the rich and powerful, in
Spain they were persons generally of the highest classes. Some were of
royal rank, others were eminent as statesmen, and others, if not of
the same high station, were yet equally engaged in military service
or the active business of life. Three of the most favourite poets,
Garcilasso de la Vega, Manrique, and Cadahalso, died the death of
soldiers from wounds received in warfare. Ercilla, author of the chief
poem in the Spanish language, which may be considered an Epic, was a
participant in the wars he so graphically describes. Cervantes received
three wounds at the battle of Lepanto, by one of which he lost an arm.
Calderon de la Barca passed many years of his life in the campaigns
in the Low Countries, where he gained great military reputation; and
Lope de Vega was one of the few adventurers in the “Invincible Armada”
who were fortunate enough to return to their native country. Such men
were not likely to indulge in dreamy idealities, or idle reveries,
and fantastic imaginations, the offspring of morbid temperaments and
sedentary habits. On the contrary, they were only calculated to adopt
that peculiar manliness of style and sentiment, which their successors,
from example, from national character, and from being placed in similar
circumstances of life, have continued. How far those circumstances
have affected the modern literature of Spain may be best seen from
the memoirs hereafter detailed of the principal poets individually.
Our present purpose in this Introduction is only to make general
observations to lead to the conclusions that may be deduced from them.
Spain, as it has been already observed, cannot boast of having ever
produced a poet of the highest class, meaning by that term, one of
such high creative genius as to stamp his character, not only on
the literature of his own age and country, but also on that of all
successive ages within his possible influence. Of such poets the world
has only seen four or five at the utmost, with the exception of the
inspired writers, referring to Homer, Dante, Shakespeare, Milton, and
perhaps we may add, Byron. With these, Virgil and other imitators must
not be classed, however great the talents they may have displayed,
nor yet other writers of greater originality and even genius, who
have, however, confined themselves to minor works or those on less
important subjects. Of such writers of great original genius, who did
not aim at works of the highest order, Spanish literature may claim as
many as that of any other country. With them the English reader has
been made acquainted more fully than with the writers of most other
modern countries, by the works of Bouterwek and Sismondi, translated
respectively by Mrs. Ross and William Roscoe, and now by the more
comprehensive work of Mr. Ticknor (New York, 1849; London, 1850),
who has supplied the deficiencies the others had left in the course
of their inquiries. Of these works Sismondi’s is little more than a
repetition of Bouterwek’s, without the acknowledgement made which was
in justice due to his original. That however was in reality so jejune
in treating of the materials at the command of the writer, as almost to
warrant the use of his materials for a livelier production. Another
work has been lately published on Spanish literature by Mr. A. F.
Foster (Edinburgh, 1851), compiled in like manner from former writers,
which, for succinct and able treatment of the subject, may perhaps
be recommended as the one best suited to the general reader. But Mr.
Ticknor’s book must remain the great work of reference to the older
Spanish authors, as he has left little for future writers to supply
respecting them. Yet neither has he gone scarcely any further than
Bouterwek, who wrote at the beginning of this century, and since whose
time so many writers have arisen in Spain superior to any perhaps that
have preceded them. In such works we have more cause to congratulate
ourselves on having any one to undertake the labour of going over
so wide a field, than to complain of his stopping short at a point
where less was known of Spanish literature, and where it became so
much more interesting as connected with our own times. But as all the
compilers now mentioned have so confined their labours to works written
previously to the present century, it may be considered acceptable,
in continuation of them, that the present essay should be offered to
the public. This is, however, also undertaken on a more extended and
somewhat different plan; not merely giving short notices of the several
authors and their works, as in the nature of a catalogue or dictionary,
but taking only the principal poets for a particular account of their
history, and giving translations from their works most characteristic
of their genius or best suited for translation, for the purpose of
enabling the critical notices respecting them to be better understood.
In treating of the literature of any country historically, it may
perhaps be considered necessary to give a catalogue of every person
who has published a book of any pretensions to notice, whatever the
different gradations of talent between the authors; but for the
general reader, the better course seems rather to be to pass by those
works which the nation had not accepted as to be incorporated in
the national literature, and to dwell extendedly on those which, by
repeated editions, were entitled to be considered of that character.
Bouterwek’s work on Spanish literature, which appears to have been
his own performance, and which certainly does great credit to his
industry, is an exemplification of the former course. The volume
on Portuguese literature, under his name, which he acknowledges to
have been the contribution of a friend, is not so liable to the same
objection, and may be considered written according to the other. It
is so difficult a task, and so enviable a lot for any one to attain
to excellence above his fellows, that beyond its being due to his
own merits, it is an advantage to others to show them by his example
the way to attain to the same eminence. Johnson, in his Lives of the
English Poets, has given us a work admirable for its criticisms as well
as for the other lessons it conveys for general conduct in life; but
those criticisms would have lost much of their effect, if they had not
had appended to them the works to which they referred. Biography, to
be worthy of study, should be something more than a mere enumeration
of those particulars of a man’s life which are of the common class of
every-day events, so as to be the reflex of every one’s in his station.
If any man’s life be at all more memorable than that of ordinary
mortals, the means by which he obtained his reputation alone merit a
lengthened consideration for an example for others. With authors those
claims must rest on their writings, which will speak for themselves;
but this cannot be the case with foreign authors, as few readers of
other nations can ever be expected to have acquired their language
so perfectly as to understand the essential beauty of their poetry.
To enable such readers therefore to understand their works, or even
the criticisms upon them, a translation is necessary, on which again
much depends, not only in respect of faithfulness but also of felicity
of transcript, to render the beauties of the original sufficiently
perceptible.
Many rules have been given by critics for the benefit of translators
from the earliest times till now, to which it is not necessary here
to refer further than to state the plan upon which these translations
have been made. In a didactic or historical work, the more precisely
the translation is made according to the letter of the original,
the greater merit may it be considered to possess. But in works of
imagination, especially of poetry, it may be more important to attend
to the spirit of the original than to the literal construction. The
main thoughts contained in each passage should be as faithfully given
in the one case as in the other, though it may not be necessary, and
sometimes not even becoming, to have the same regard to details. With
poetry, the translator should make it his great aim to consider how his
author would have expressed the same thoughts if he had been writing
in English verse, and thus mould the original ideas into synonymous
poetical expressions, as far as the idioms of the two languages and
the requirements of metre will allow. It would be a poor vanity in a
translator to think of improving on his original, so far as to make any
alteration or addition merely for that purpose. But where any words
admit of synonyms with different shades of meaning, it is certainly
his right, if not his duty, to adopt the one he thinks most suitable.
Sometimes it may seem to him accordant with good taste to make a more
decided alteration, and in every language there are many expressions
sufficiently poetical and appropriate, which if construed literally
into another would appear otherwise. These the author, it may be
supposed, would have altered himself, under the same circumstances,
and the other, therefore, in so doing, would be only acting on his
presumed wishes. In all cases much must be left of necessity to the
translator’s judgement, and he, with every care he can take, must still
be content to share, with Pope and Dryden and the greatest masters of
rhyme, the consciousness of scarcely ever being able fully to convey
the conceptions of a foreign author. The shackles of rhyme also require
something to be sacrificed to them, so as of themselves alone to
prevent any exact copy being given in verse. Yet still acting on the
above considerations, and by rejecting expletives in some cases and
adding a few in others, in following up the train of ideas suggested
by the original, we may hope to succeed perhaps not only in giving the
meaning, but something also of the spirit even of foreign authors.
It is fortunate for any writer to have his works sent forth to the
world in any language of more than usual ascendency, such as the Latin
or English, whereby to obtain for himself, if he can claim it, the
most extended reputation. But it is more fortunate for a translator
under similar circumstances, because languages of such a character
are almost of necessity mixed languages, acquiring from that cause
an extraordinary nerve and richness, which render translations into
them to be made more easily and satisfactorily than from them into a
poorer. The English is essentially suited for such a purpose, as, being
compounded of the French and German languages, it becomes a double
one, combining the nerve of the one with the facility of expression
of the other, and the copiousness arising from the union of both. The
Latin is still more a mixed language, the roots of which are yet to
be developed, notwithstanding all the labours of philologists, who
have erred in wandering after imaginary extinct languages for its
derivations, instead of looking into those yet existing. Considering
the Spanish to be the direct descendant of the Latin, it may be a
matter of surprise that, though a very sonorous language, it cannot
be termed a rich one. Abounding in long words (sesquipedalia verba),
it loses in precision and strength what is gained in sound, and
thus the ideas are encumbered when simplification was required. The
comparatively monosyllabic character of the English language has in
this respect an immense advantage for the translator, as it enables him
to give the sentiments of the original more concisely than one from
it into another. Having also more synonyms with different shades of
meaning, a greater precision may be lost or gained, according to the
circumstances and the judgement applied to them. Thus a translation
may sometimes be even superior to the original, from its giving the
ideas more distinctly, and as it is the test of good writing to find
how it reads in another language, so with really superior authors it
may be a matter of little importance in what version their thoughts are
expressed. “Words are the daughters of earth, but thoughts are the sons
of heaven.” It is not presumed hereby that the following translations
all come under this consideration, but with the advantages above
expressed, it may be hoped that, as exotics in a greenhouse, these
flowers of Spanish poetry may be found pleasing representations of what
they were in their native soil, even if they cannot be made entirely
denizens of our own.
Differing entirely from those writers who suppose that the best days
of Spanish literature have gone by, and believing, on the contrary,
that it never has been more truly original and flourishing than
during the present and preceding ages, it might be justly considered
presumptuous in any new author to present such opinions to the world
without showing the grounds on which they were founded. Bouterwek and
his copyist, Sismondi, together with their criticisms on the several
Spanish poets, contented themselves with giving merely a few lines
from the more favoured ones in their original language, without any
translation whereby to enable those ignorant of it to judge even of the
thoughts they contained. They thus resemble the wiseacre in Hierocles
(the Σχολαστικὸς, which word Johnson has strangely translated ‘pedant,’
taking the primary for the intended meaning), who brought a stone as
a description of a building. In so doing, they have seldom given even
favourable specimens; but if they had, there are few authors who can be
rightly estimated by isolated passages, or even by any one short poem.
Almost all authors are unequal in their productions, and many seem, by
an accidental felicity, to have produced some one effusion to which
none of their other efforts could ever approach. As instances of this,
we may note Heber’s ‘Palestine;’ Pringle’s lines, ‘Afar in the Desert,’
and Leyden’s ‘Ode to an Indian Gold Coin,’ which Colton has pronounced,
in his opinion, “to come as near to perfection as the sublunary Muse
can arrive at.”
It is only by several well-sustained efforts that any author has a
right to be placed among poets, and it would not be just, therefore, to
judge of any without such a consideration of their productions. In all
the translations here given, the most characteristic specimens of the
style of each writer have been sought, particularly those containing
what seemed to be his favourite course of thought, while selecting
entire, though generally short, poems for that purpose. With the
exception of the Duke de Rivas, the poets enumerated in this work have
not published poems of any great length, and therefore the plan adopted
may be considered altogether appropriate to the object in view.
With regard to the metres chosen, no rule has been attempted of taking
the original strictly for a guide, where the style of verse, in a
different language, would not admit of it easily. Perhaps the truest
definition of Poetry may be given in the words of our great poet--
“Thoughts that voluntary move
Harmonious numbers--”
for it may be observed, that the finest passages are generally the
easiest for translation and for rhyme. Thus keeping the original
constantly in view as the guide, the verse has been adopted as the
thoughts seemed to indicate the metre most appropriate.
With the disadvantage of rhyme, in a foreign language, no apology is
requisite for the ruggedness of any lines which the critic may point
out. I differ totally from those writers, Coleridge and others, who
affect a contempt for finished versification, and rely entirely on
the brilliancy of their ideas. Whatever is worth doing at all is
worth doing well, according to the writer’s best capability, and the
reader’s ear ought surely to be as much consulted as his mind is
sought to be engaged. Those who have had to write “nonsense verses” at
school or college, have no right to excuse themselves from labouring
to make their lines run smoothly. If, therefore, any of the following
translations are not so rendered, it will occasion the writer much
regret that his best efforts for that purpose have been unsuccessful.
Another complaint may be anticipated, that this work does not
comprehend authors either in prose or the drama. The fault, if it be
one, must be admitted, with the observation, that the task undertaken
was felt sufficient of itself to require the best exertions of the
writer. According to the plan laid down of giving only entire pieces,
in the case of including either prose or dramatic writers, the work
would have been increased to an inordinate extent, or the plan must
have been adopted of giving extracts, which would be contrary to the
opinion expressed of the best course to be pursued. If this attempt
should meet with public approbation, some one else may be induced to
continue the further service. If it should not, the labour expended on
a larger work would be so much more given in vain. In the one case, the
failure might be ascribed to having attempted too much; in the other,
the approbation might not have been gained but for the efforts having
been directed undividedly to what was thus only within the reach of
accomplishment.
In sequence of the remark before made, of the manly style of thought,
feeling and expression which had characterized the older Spanish
writers, from their having been persons generally who had engaged in
the active affairs of life, the reader may perhaps feel interested
in tracing how the same causes have produced the same effects with
their successors. From the memoirs hereafter detailed, it may be seen
that no fewer than six out of the twelve had to suffer the evils of
exile for public or private opinions, of whom three so died unhappily
in foreign countries. Three others, though not actually exiled, were
subjected to long and cruel imprisonment for the same causes, while
two out of the remaining three had to take their share of burdens in
the public service during the troubled state of the country. Such men
could have no mawkish sentiments to develope, and no fantastic feelings
to indulge. What they felt, they felt deeply; what they observed, they
observed distinctly, and thus were enabled to give their thoughts and
feelings clearly and strongly.
But in addition to the causes assigned for the superior character
of modern Spanish poetry in particular, there is one other to be
suggested, the association of which may perhaps occasion some surprise,
though it may not be for that the less indubitable. This is the
fact of the later Spanish writers having, perhaps unconsciously,
but unmistakenly, taken better models than their predecessors by
preferring the study of English literature to that of the French.
This fact, though without the full inference that might have been
drawn from it, has been observed by a German author, F. J. Wolf, of
the Imperial Library at Vienna, who has published a collection of
modern Spanish poetry, with biographical notices, Paris, 1837, in two
volumes--‘Floresta de Rimas Modernas Castellanas.’ It is an interesting
collection, but being all given in the Spanish language, is only
available to those who are acquainted with it. In the introduction to
this work, Wolf treats of the “efforts of Melendez and the Salamanca
school to give a new splendour to Spanish poetry, partly by the study
and imitation of the ancient and good Spanish writers, taking advantage
of the national forms, and partly by making it more profound and
substantial, imitating not only and exclusively the French, but also
and especially the English.” (Page 15.)
During the early part of the last century, consequent upon the
accession of the Bourbons to the throne, the writers of verse in Spain,
who obtained most favour among their contemporaries, formed their style
avowedly upon the model of what was called the French school, and thus
taking examples unworthy of imitation, became still more wretched as
copyists. Towards the end of the century, however, a feeling arose, on
the other side, in favour of the study of English literature, which has
led to the happiest results. Of the twelve poets whose lives and poems
it is the purpose of this work to delineate, no fewer than ten may be
observed acquainted in no inconsiderable degree with the best English
authors and proficient in the English language. Two only, Breton de los
Herreros and Zorrilla, seem not to have extended their studies so far.
With the peculiar humorous vein of the former, perhaps the deficiency
may not be considered as leaving any merit to be supplied. But it does
seem a matter of regret that a person of Zorrilla’s exalted genius
should have confined his studies so much to French writers, and so have
deprived himself of the expansion necessary for the highest flights
of poetry. France has never produced a great painter or a great poet.
The very language, so monotonous and unmusical, in having the accent
almost invariably on the last syllable of the words, seems opposed to
rhythmical cadence, and not to admit of the highest excellence either
in oratory or poetry. Whatever may be the cause, it is evident that
such excellence has not been attained in the language, and therefore
the best works in it cannot be models for imitation when they are only
themselves of an inferior value.
Beyond the writers enumerated hereafter, whose memoirs and writings are
to be considered worthy of fuller notice, there are several others who,
as especially coming under the consideration above suggested, may here
be noticed in further corroboration of the statements we have made.
1. Juan de Escoiquiz, tutor to Ferdinand VII., one of the most upright,
if not most successful, public men of his time, published, in 1798,
an epic poem ‘On the Conquest of Mexico,’ which showed considerable
poetical ability, though it did not obtain much popular favour. In
1797 he published a translation of Young’s ‘Night Thoughts,’ from the
English into Spanish verse, and in 1814 a translation of Milton’s
‘Paradise Lost.’ Of the former, a translation in prose had been
previously published by Cristoval Caldera. Escoiquiz died in 1814.
2. Josè de Cadalso or Cadahalso, born 1741, was a person of rank and
fortune, who had travelled much in his youth, and become proficient
in various foreign languages and literatures, especially the English.
He wrote several works, both in prose and verse, which were received
with great favour at the time, and have been republished frequently
since his death. The last edition was in 1818, in three volumes, under
the editorship of the late learned Navarrete, who appended to them an
interesting biography of the author. Among the miscellanies are several
translations from the English, which language, we are informed, Cadalso
not only studied himself assiduously, but induced Melendez Valdes to
adopt for peculiar study also. This eminent poet was in early life
so assisted by Cadalso as to have been pronounced his “best work,”
and he, as may be seen hereafter, seems sedulously to have followed
the good counsels and example given him by his friend. Cadalso,
like so many other of the principal poets of Spain, had embraced a
military career, in which, having been ordered with his regiment to
the siege of Gibraltar, he there received a wound of which he died a
few days after, the 27th February, 1782. His death was a great loss to
Spanish literature, and it was equally lamented by the English in the
besieged fortress, by whom he was much esteemed from previous friendly
communications.
3. The Conde de Noronia, born 1760, died 1816, another poetical writer
of considerable reputation, was also engaged in military service, in
which he attained high rank, and with the division of the Spanish army
under his command, gained the victory at the battle of San Payo over
the French. He was appointed ambassador successively at Berne and St.
Petersburgh, and was celebrated as a diplomatist for his knowledge of
English and other languages. Notwithstanding an active life in the
public service, he found leisure for literary pursuits, and in 1800
published a collection of poems in two volumes. Among these are to
be observed several translations from the English, of which one of
Dryden’s celebrated ‘Ode for St. Cecilia’s Day,’ rendered into Spanish
verse with much spirit, deserves particular mention. The best of his
poems seems an ‘Ode on the Death of Cadalso,’ by whose side he was
present when he received his wound. The Conde further attempted an
epic, in twelve cantos, entitled ‘Ommiada,’ detailing the events in the
reign of Abderaman, the last of the Ommiades, which poem was published
in two volumes in 1816. For the purpose of assisting him in this work,
he had translated several pieces from the Arabic and other eastern
languages into Spanish verse, published since at Paris in 1833.
4. Juan Maria Maury, who died in 1846, was another writer of
considerable talent. He was sent early in life to France, and completed
his education in England, becoming thereby well acquainted with the
language and literature of both countries. His principal work is a poem
entitled, ‘Esvero y Almedora,’ in twelve cantos, published at Paris
in 1840. It is founded on the adventures of a passage-at-arms, held
against all comers, in 1434, at the bridge of Orbiza, near Leon, and
contains several interesting scenes spiritedly described. His earliest
work was a poem he called ‘British Aggression,’ published in 1806, the
sentiments of which he seems afterwards to have considerably modified.
Maury appears to have been a person of very amiable character, and
much esteemed by all who knew him, judging by the manner in which Del
Rio and others write respecting him. In his latter years he resided
almost entirely at Paris, and gained for himself the extraordinary
merit of being esteemed also a correct writer of French verse, by his
translations of the principal Spanish poets into that language. This
work, published in two volumes at Paris in 1826, entitled, ‘Espagne
Poétique, Choix de Poésies Castellanes depuis Charles Quint jusqu’à nos
jours,’ is, as the name imports, a selection of Spanish poetry with
critical and biographical notices, made with much taste and judgement,
and forming altogether a very interesting work for the French student
of Spanish literature. It is dedicated to his friends Arriaza and
Quintana, in a poetical epistle, from which the following extract may
be considered acceptable in corroboration of the previous remarks:--
“Sans doute, Emmanuel, aux champs de Tamise
Triomphe une vertu qu’ailleurs tu crus permise,
Et qui là fier génie a ravi le trident.
Jeune j’y respirai l’orgueil indépendant;
Là, j’admirai l’accord, merveille alors unique,
Qui règle et garantit, sur le sol britannique
Au trône ses splendeurs, aux grands l’autorité,
Aux citoyens leurs droits, qu’on nomma liberté,
Et le temps destructeur y consacre, y conserve
Le plus beau monument élevé par Minerve.”
5. Josè Joaquin Mora, born at Cadiz, 1783, and yet happily surviving,
is another modern poet of great merit. When the French invaded Spain,
he entered a regiment of dragoons in the national cause, and was made
prisoner in 1809, in consequence of which he was detained in France six
years. He took advantage of this residence in that country to pursue
his studies, and on the return of peace he undertook the editorship
of the ‘Scientific and Literary Chronicle of Madrid,’ which, in 1820,
he converted into ‘The Constitutional.’ In 1823 he had to emigrate
to London, where he wrote and published several periodical and other
works, under the auspices of Messrs. Ackerman, besides various
translations. He afterwards went to Buenos Ayres, Chili and Bolivia,
from which last republic he returned to London as Consul-General, and
published, in 1840, his principal work, entitled ‘Spanish Legends.’
This work, which is highly praised by Ochoa, gives, as the title
imports, descriptive accounts of various events in the history of
Spain, according to what seems to be the favourite formula of modern
Spanish poetry. Another work he published, in 1826, entitled ‘Poetical
Meditations,’ is founded principally on Blair’s celebrated poem, ‘The
Grave.’ Wolf pronounces him excelling in his satirical essays, which,
he says, are full of grace and ease.
In addition to the writers mentioned above, and those whose works form
the main purpose of this work hereafter in detail, many others have
appeared, both during the latter part of the last century and during
the present, who have shown much talent, and have been deservedly
received with much favour by their countrymen. It will be sufficient
for us here to give the names of Cienfuegos, Tapia, Lista, Gallego, S.
Bermudez de Castro, Garcia Gutierrez and Pastor Diaz among them; and
to meet any observation that may be suggested on account of no fuller
notice being taken of them, it may be allowed me to state, that I have
notwithstanding read and examined carefully all their works, and those
of many others whose names it is needless to recapitulate. I would
further add, that in so doing, although there was certainly much in
them to admire, yet there was nothing in them, in my judgement, suited
for translation to interest English readers, whose tastes it was my
duty principally to consult. Some of those just mentioned and others
omitted, I have personally known and appreciated in private life, but
in all the selections and criticisms made or repeated, I have allowed
no consideration to weigh with me, except the respect due to superior
merit alone. So much of this superior merit seemed to me to exist in
modern Spanish literature, that I ventured to think the English public
would receive favourably this attempt to make them acquainted with it.
If it should fail, the blame must attach to the translator; if it be
received favourably, there is yet a rich mine of intellectual wealth in
store to reward the labours of those who choose to undertake it.
The student who wishes to follow in the same course, will find the
way much prepared for him in the various collections of ancient and
modern poetry lately published. Those by Maury and Wolf have been
already mentioned. Quintana has, in the late edition of his great
work, brought down the series of national poets to the beginning of
this century; and Ochoa has, lastly, given a very valuable addition to
his other labours of criticisms and compilation, in his Notices for a
Library of contemporary Spanish writers;--‘Apuntes para una Biblioteca
de Escritores Españoles contemporaneos,’ in two volumes, Paris, 1847.
Ferrer del Rio has also conferred a great service on the national
literature, by giving a series of biographical sketches, ably written,
of the principal Spanish writers of the present day, ‘Galeria de la
Literatura Española,’ published by Mellado, at Madrid, 1846. From these
works, when no other authority is mentioned as of distinct character,
the notices in this work have been compiled, except in a few instances,
which will be found also generally stated when they have been obtained
from private information. The facts, of necessity, could not but be
learned from such sources, and the translator is only answerable for
the selection of those he thought worthy of being repeated, and the
arrangement, in addition to the criticisms that coincided with his own
judgement, for his adoption.
In conclusion of these introductory remarks, it now only remains
necessary further to observe, that the rules of Spanish versification
are very similar to the English, being dependent upon accents,
according to the rhythm adopted on certain syllables of each line,
whether alternately or further removed. The rule as to rhyme is also
the same, admitting of single or double rhymes, used in one case or
the other, according as the accent is on the last syllable of the
final word or the penultimate. The latter, however, is more common in
Spanish than in English, where it seems only suited for the livelier
strains of verse.
But in addition to the usual method of using rhymes, dependent
in English and most other languages upon the consonants rather
than the vowels, the Spaniards have a form of verse of which the
rhyme is dependent on the vowel only, and the consonants may be
entirely dissimilar. This form of verse they call Asonantes, in
contradistinction to the other, which they call Consonantes, or
full and perfect rhyme. Thus in the first stanza of the ‘Alcazar of
Seville,’ the words _prolijas_ and _cornisas_ are Consonantes or
full rhymes, but in the following verses _miran_ and _distintas_ are
Asonantes, as also _risa_ and _evitan_. The Spaniards conceive the
Asonantes to be a form peculiar to themselves, but it is one common
to many other nations, in the earlier stages of poetical composition.
In the earliest Spanish poems, asonants and consonants were used
together promiscuously, as may be observed particularly in the early
poems in the Galician dialect; and it is curious to trace in this
respect, as well as in many of their words, vestiges of their Celtic
descent, this same form being also one of the prominent features of
Celtic versification. In their modern asonante verse, the Spanish
poets usually exclude consonantes, and that form continues in much
favour, probably on account of the words in their language, as in the
Latin, having generally so much the same sound as to make a variation
pleasing to the ear, to break the monotonous effect of a too frequent
recurrence of similar terminations. For this reason, no doubt, it was
that the Latin poets did not adopt the system of rhymes, and for the
same also it is common now in Spanish poems to have lines occasionally
to which no other line presents a rhyme, giving thereby a pleasing
effect to the whole. In our language, on the contrary, where, from the
ruggedness of its character, the terminations vary so exceedingly as to
make them often even difficult to be found for the purposes of rhyme,
the recurrence of rhyme gives a more pleasing sound to the ear from
the degree of surprise that is thus occasioned. In Spanish they might
easily be made of one vowel termination for a long poem, so that the
difficulty in it is to avoid the too frequent recurrence of the same
sound.
Martinez de la Rosa has boasted of the variety of rhymes in Spanish;
but he refers to double as well as single rhymes, and in this and
in other respects is carried away by his ardour, in admiration of
his country’s language, much further than the facts will be found to
support him. Thus he also praises the number and variety of metres used
in it as extraordinary, when in fact they are no more, so than any
other neighbouring language could present. It may be justly conceded,
that poetry has been cultivated lately in Spain with much assiduity
and success; but there is no peculiarity in the language to give it
an advantage over others in respect to metres. The strict censorship
which has weighed down the energies of the country, with regard to most
subjects of public discussion, has had the effect of directing talent
to the cultivation of poetry, as almost the only road to literary
reputation. This it is, combined with the sensitive character of the
nation, that has made their poets attain the eminence we are bound in
justice to award them; and it is fortunate for them that they have in
their language so admirable an exponent of their genius, as it must in
fairness be allowed, though the merit still remains peculiarly their
own.
The following is a summary list of the principal Modern Spanish
Poets whose memoirs and writings it is the object of this work more
particularly to make known to the English public, given with a
statement of dates respecting their lives, for the purpose of enabling
the reader to compare more easily the periods in which they flourished.
They are, it will be observed, twelve in number, and the list has been
divided into two parts, as marking an evidently distinctive character
of the poetry in the former and latter part of the epoch which they
have rendered memorable.
PART I.
I. Jovellanos Born 1744. Died 1811. Age 67.
II. Iriarte Born 1750. Died 1791. Age 41.
III. Melendez Valdes Born 1754. Died 1817. Age 63.
IV. Leandro Moratin Born 1760. Died 1828. Age 68.
V. Arriaza Born 1770. Died 1837. Age 67.
VI. Quintana Born 1772. Living 1851. Age 79.