THE GOLDEN AGE: LITERATURE AND ART, 1516-1700
[Sidenote: Victory of Castilian over foreign tongues in polite
literature and remarkable outburst of productivity.]
The general conditions affecting literature and art in the _siglo de
oro_ have already been alluded to in the preceding chapter. The
influence of Humanism and the impulse of the Renaissance were more
directly felt in polite literature than in didactic and scientific
works. Furthermore, this type of literature was more easily understood
by people at large than the more special studies, and it is not
surprising that Spain’s intellectual greatness should have been
appreciated by the majority of the educated classes in terms of poetry,
the novel, and the drama, together with the manifestations of the age in
the fine arts. The very men who contributed works of a scientific
character could not resist the appeal of _belles lettres_, and wrote
books which not infrequently demonstrated their double right to homage.
Knowledge of Latin, Greek, and various modern languages, especially
Italian and French, was more or less general among the educated classes,
giving an opportunity for the satisfaction of one’s wishes to delve into
a varied literature, and opening the way to foreign influences upon
Castilian work. The day of French influence seemed for a time to have
passed, however (although it returned with the decline in the later
seventeenth century); rather, a current against it had set in. The
effect of the other three languages was so great, however, that
Castilian temporarily lost some of its prestige, which passed over
especially to Latin and Italian. Most works of an erudite character now
appeared in Latin, and that language was the official tongue of most of
the courses in the universities. The church, too, lent its weight to
Latin. Nevertheless, Castilian was at no time in real danger. Anything
intended for popular consumption found its way into Castilian, and not a
few notable scientific works employed that language. Save for a few
inefficacious attempts of the Humanists to use Latin, the field of
polite literature was captured wholly by the native tongue. This victory
for national sentiment carried with it an exuberant outburst of
productivity which affected all classes. Prior to this time the clergy
had provided almost the only representatives to win fame in _belles
lettres_; now, they were joined and rivalled, even outdone, by laymen,
both soldiers and civilians. The noble families caught the enthusiasm
and made their houses centres for gatherings, and the kings themselves
were carried along in the current. Charles I was exceptionally fond of
the novels of chivalry, which he used to have read aloud to him; Philip
II, himself little affected, tolerated the tastes of his daughters which
led them to make poetry form a part of the palace distractions; but it
was under Philip IV that the royal love and patronage of literature
attained to its highest point. Philip IV himself wrote comedies, and
filled the palace with poets, dramatists, and writers of prose.
Meanwhile, the general public got its first real opportunity to attend
the theatre, and bought meritorious books (which printing now rendered
available), while men discussed their favorite authors with the same
ardor that they might their favorite bull-fighters.
[Sidenote: Spanish contributions to philology.]
One of the principal studies of the Humanists was that of grammar, Latin
and Greek chiefly. The classical authors and the patristic writings of
the medieval period occupied their attention, together with allied works
in other languages, such as ancient Hebrew or modern Italian. The
Spanish Humanists held a noteworthy place in the development of this
movement in Europe. While many individuals might be named, Arias Montano
was perhaps the greatest of Spain’s representatives. Interest in
language study carried Spaniards far afield among contemporary tongues,
and in one respect led to a remarkable contribution to knowledge. As
conquerors and as missionaries Spaniards came in contact with a variety
of peoples hitherto unknown, or little known, to the world, from the
numerous tribes of the Indians in the Americas to the Chinese and
Japanese of the Far East. Many valuable data were accumulated in Spanish
about these peoples and their customs, and their languages were studied
and in many cases written down by Spaniards, who systematized them for
the first time. Much of this material has only recently become
available, but it ranks as an achievement of the _siglo de oro_; perhaps
the more valuable parts were prepared in the sixteenth century.
Meanwhile, the process of purifying Castilian grammar was constantly
going on, and it is interesting to note the strong nationalistic
tendency in favor of a phonetic spelling as opposed to the expression of
the etymological form. Rhetoric was regarded as a part of grammar, and
it is easy to understand that in an age of Humanism the question of
style should be a favorite topic.
[Sidenote: Lope de Rueda and the development of the national theatre.]
It was in this period that the national theatre developed, and Spaniards
displayed such originality and forcefulness as to make a profound
impression on the dramatic literature of the world. At the outset of the
reign of Charles I, Gil Vicente and Torres Naharro were continuing the
tradition of Juan del Enzina with crude farces and allegorical religious
plays. Despite the fact that these were generally acted in convents,
they were so frequently of a licentious character that in 1548 their
publication was forbidden. Meanwhile, classical plays and compositions
written in imitation of the Latin and Greek masters were proving
difficult competitors to the weakly groping Spanish stage. The
regeneration of the national theatre was due to Lope de Rueda of
Seville, whose name first appears in 1554. The greatness of Rueda was
due primarily to his own acting, which gave him an opportunity to
re-introduce Spanish plays and make a success of them. While staging
translations of Latin and Italian works, Rueda wrote and played short
acts of a dramatic and episodical character. Others carried on the task
begun by Rueda until the machinery for the Spanish theatre was fairly
well prepared for the works of the great masters,--for example, the
three-act comedy had developed, first employed by Francisco de Avendaño.
Cervantes wrote a number of plays, between 1583 and 1587, but while
they were not without merit they were completely overshadowed by those
of the great writers of dramatic literature.
[Sidenote: The great masters of the Spanish theatre.]
First of the great masters, chronologically, was Lope de Vega
(1562-1635), who was also one of the most prolific writers of all time.
It is said that he wrote 1800 comedies and 400 religious, allegorical
plays (one of the leading types of the era), besides many shorter
dialogues, of which number 470 of the comedies and 50 of the plays have
survived. His writings were not less admirable than numerous, and marked
a complete break with the past. An inventive exuberance, well-sustained
agreeability and charm, skill in the management of fable and in the
depiction of character, the elevation of women to a leading place in the
dramatical plot (a feature without precedent), an instinct for
theatrical effects, intensity of emotional expression, wit, naturalness
and nobility of dialogue, and realism were the most noteworthy traits of
his compositions, together with a variety in subject-matter which
ventured into every phase of the history and contemporary customs of
Spain. His defects were traceable mainly to his facility in production,
such as a lack of plan and organization as a whole, wherefore it has
been said that he wrote scenes and not complete plays, although his best
works are not open to this charge. In the meantime, the paraphernalia of
theatrical presentation had been perfected. In 1579 the first permanent
theatre was built in Madrid, followed quickly by the erection of others
there and in the other large cities. Travelling companies staged plays
in all parts of Spain, until the theatre became popular. If Lope de Vega
profited from this situation, so also did the stage from him, for he
provided it with a vehicle which fixed it in public favor at a time when
the balance might have swung either way. The fame of Lope de Vega
eclipsed that of his contemporaries, many of whom were deserving of high
rank. In recent years one name has emerged from the crowd, that of Friar
Gabriel Téllez, better known by his pseudonym, Tirso de Molina
(1571-1658). In realism, depiction of character, profundity of ideas,
emotion, and a sense of the dramatic he was the equal and at times the
superior of Lope de Vega. The successor in fame and popularity of Lope
de Vega, however, was Pedro Calderón de la Barca (1600-1681), whose
compositions faithfully represented the devout Catholicism and chivalric
ideals (exaggerating the fact) of his contemporaries. Calderón was above
all a writer of religious, allegorical plays. In the domain of the
profane his plays were too grave and rigid to adapt themselves to the
comic, and they were characterized by a certain monotony and artifice, a
substitution of allegory for realism, and an excess of brilliance and
lyrical qualities, often tinged with rhetoric and obscure classical
allusions. Not only were these three masters and a number of others
great in Spain, but also they clearly influenced the dramatic literature
of the world; it would be necessary to include most of the famous
European playwrights of the seventeenth century and some of later times
if a list were to be made of those who drew inspiration from the Spanish
theatre of the _siglo de oro_.
[Sidenote: The three types of the sixteenth century novel.]
The history of the Spanish novel in this era reduces itself to a
discussion of three leading types, those of chivalry, love, and social
customs, the last-named an outgrowth from the picaresque novel, and more
often so-called. The novel of chivalry, descendant of _Amadís de Gaula_,
was by far the most popular in the sixteenth century, having almost a
monopoly of the field. Like the reprehensible “dime novel” of recent
American life its popularity became almost a disease, resulting
occasionally in a derangement of the mental faculties of some of its
more assiduous readers. The extravagant achievements of the wandering
knights ended by proving a bore to Spanish taste, and the chivalric
novel was already dead when Cervantes attacked it in _Don Quixote_.
Meanwhile, the amatory novel had been affected by the introduction from
Italy of a pastoral basis for the story, which first appeared in the
middle of the sixteenth century and endured for about a hundred years.
This novel was based on an impossible situation, that of country
shepherds and shepherdesses who talked like people of education and
refinement. Only the high qualities of the writers were able to give it
life, which was achieved by the excellence of the descriptions, the
lyrical quality of the verse, and the beauty of the prose style. The
true Spanish novel was to develop out of the picaresque type, which
looked back to the popular _La Celestina_ of 1499. About the middle of
the sixteenth century and again just at its close there appeared two
other works, frankly picaresque, for they dealt with the life of rogues
(_pícaros_) and vagabonds. The name “picaresque” was henceforth employed
for works which did not come within the exact field of these earlier
volumes, except that they were realistic portrayals of contemporary
life. Such was the state of affairs when Cervantes appeared.
[Sidenote: Cervantes and _Don Quixote_.]
[Sidenote: The _Novelas exemplares_.]
Miguel de Cervantes y Saavedra (1547-1616) had a long and varied career
before his publication of the book which was to place him at a bound in
the front rank of the literary men of all time. He was a pupil of the
Humanist Hoyos in 1568; a chamberlain of Cardinal Acquaviva at Rome in
1569; a soldier from 1570 to 1575, taking part in the battle of Lepanto;
and a captive in Algiers from 1575 to 1580. A devotee of _belles
lettres_ from youth, he produced many works between 1583 and 1602 in
poetry, the drama, and the pastoral novel, in none of which did he
attain to real eminence, though a writer of note. In 1603 he wrote the
first part of the _Quixote_, and published it in 1605. The book leaped
into immediate favor, ran through a number of editions, and was almost
at once translated, at least in part, into all the languages of western
Europe. It is easy to point out the relationship of _Don Quixote_ to the
many types of literature which had preceded it. There was the influence
of Lucian in its audacious criticism, piquancy, and jovial and
independent humor, in its satire, in fine; of Rojas’ _La Celestina_ or
of Rueda in dialogue; of Boccaccio in style, variety, freedom, and
artistic devices; of the Italian story-writers and poets of the era;
even of Homer’s _Odyssey_; and especially of the novels of chivalry.
Nevertheless, Cervantes took all this and moulded it in his own way into
something new. The case of the novel of chivalry may be taken for
purposes of illustration. While pretending to annihilate that type of
work, which was already dead, Cervantes in fact caught the epic spirit
of idealism which the novelists had wished to represent but had drowned
in a flood of extravagances and impossible happenings, raising it in
the _Quixote_ to a point of sublimity which revealed the eternal
significance in human psychology of the knightly ideal,--and all in the
genial reflection of chimerical undertakings amid the real problems of
life. On this account some have said that the _Quixote_ was the last and
the best, the perfected novel of chivalry. Withal, it was set forth in
prose of inexpressible beauty, superior to any of its models in its
depth and spontaneity, its rich abundance, its irresistibly comic force,
and its handling of conversation. The surprise occasioned by this
totally unlooked for kind of book can in part be understood when one
recalls that in the domain of the real and human, the public had had
only the three picaresque novels already alluded to, before the
appearance of _Don Quixote_. In his few remaining years of life
Cervantes added yet other works in his inimitable style, of which the
two most notable were the second part of the _Quixote_ (1615), said by
many to be superior to the first, and the _Novelas exemplares_, or Model
tales (1612-1613), a series of short stories bearing a close
relationship to the picaresque novels in their dealings with the lives
of rogues, vagabonds, and profligates, but as demonstrably different
from them as the _Quixote_ was from the novels of chivalry, especially
in that Cervantes was not satirizing, or idealizing, or even drawing a
moral concerning the life he depicted, but merely telling his tale, as
an artist and a poet. Well might he say that he was the first to write
novels in Castilian. There were many writers of fiction after him in the
era, but since the novel had reached its culminating point in its first
issue, it is natural that the art did not progress,--for it could not!
[Sidenote: Lyric and epic poetry.]
While the Spanish theatre and the Spanish novel were of world-wide
significance, furnishing models which affected the literature of other
peoples, Spanish lyric poetry had only national importance, but it has a
special interest at this time in that it was the most noteworthy
representative of the vices which were to contribute to destroy Spain’s
literary preëminence. In the first place, lyric poetry was an
importation, for the Italian lyrics overwhelmed the native product and
even imposed their form in Castilian verse. Much excellent work was
done, however, notably by Garcilaso de la Vega (1503-1536). Eminent on
another account was Luis de Argote y Góngora (1561-1627), commonly
referred to by the name of his mother, Góngora. Góngora affected to
despise popularity, declaring that he wished to write only for the
cultivated classes. To attain this end he adopted the method of
complicating the expression of his ideas, making violent departures from
the usual order of employing words (hyperbaton), and indulging in
artificial symbolism. This practice, called euphuism in English, for it
was not peculiar to Spain but became general in Europe, won undying fame
of a doubtfully desirable character for Góngora, in that it has ever
since been termed _gongorismo_ in Spanish, although the word
_culteranismo_ has also been applied. Similar to it was conceptism,
which aimed to introduce subtleties, symbols, and obscurities into the
ideas themselves. It is natural that the lyric poetry of the later
seventeenth century should have reached a state of utter decline. Epic
poetry did not prosper in this era; its function was supplied by
romance.
[Sidenote: Achievements in satire, panegyrics, and periodical
literature.]
In addition to the various forms of prose writing already discussed,
there were many others, and great distinction was achieved in them by
the Spaniards of the _siglo de oro_. Among the many who might be
mentioned was Francisco de Quevedo, especially famous as a satirist and
humorist. One interesting type of literature was that of the panegyrics
of Spain in answer to the Hispanophobe works of foreigners, who based
their characterizations of Spaniards in no small degree, though not
wholly, on the exaggerated condemnation of Spain’s dealings with the
American Indians by Bartolomé de Las Casas, himself a Spanish Dominican.
The _Política indiana_ of Solórzano belongs in this class of literature,
as a refutation, though a reasoned one, of the indictment of Las Casas
and others. In addition to the already-mentioned “relations of events,”
forerunner of the modern newspaper, it is to be noted that the _Gaceta_
(Gazette), the official periodical, began to be published in the
seventeenth century. With regard to the non-Castilian parts of Spain it
need only be said that Castilian triumphed as the literary language,
although works in the vernacular continued to be published in Catalonia,
Valencia, and Majorca.
[Sidenote: Influence of Spanish intellectual achievements upon western
European thought.]
In dealing with the various phases of the _siglo de oro_ much has
already been said about the diffusion of Spanish thought in Europe and
its influence in foreign countries. Two factors tended to bring Spanish
intellectual achievements to the notice of the world. In the first
place, Spanish professors were to be found in many foreign universities,
while Jesuit teaching, very largely Spanish, profoundly affected
Catholic Europe. In the second place, Spanish works were widely read and
translated, although not equally at all times or equally in all places.
In general, Italy was the centre for the dissemination of Spanish
thought in the sixteenth century, though often by a double translation,
from Spanish to Italian and from Italian to a third tongue, and France
was the distributing point in the seventeenth century. In addition there
were the works in Latin, which were equally available to all. Spanish
philosophical writings were comparatively little read, abroad, but those
concerning theology and religion were seized upon by friend and foe,
while the offerings of the Spanish mystics were also widely translated.
An even greater diffusion fell to the lot of the works on jurisprudence,
politics, and international law, and the essential importance of Spanish
writings in geography, cosmography, natural science, and kindred
subjects has already been pointed out. The works of the historians
crossed the frontiers, though more particularly those dealing with the
Americas, together with the narratives of American travel. The power of
Spanish arms was sufficient to induce wide reading of military writings
emanating from the peninsula. Naturally, the greatest number of
translations was in the field of polite literature. Every type of the
Spanish novel found its way to other countries, and the novel of
chivalry was almost more admired, abroad, and certainly longer-lived,
than in Spain. Cervantes became a veritable cult in Germany and England,
and in this special case England became the centre for the diffusion of
Spanish genius. In like manner the great dramatists were famous in all
of Europe. While the mere knowledge by Europeans of Spanish works would
not be a sufficient basis to predicate a vital Spanish influence beyond
the peninsula, such information was a condition precedent to its
effectuation, and important modifications of western European thought
did in fact follow. It would be possible to trace this in every branch
of literature and study which has been discussed, but a number of
indications have been given already, and the task is one which does not
fall within the field of this volume. To those who actually produced an
effect should be added the names of those who deserved to do so, but who
were prevented by fortuitous circumstances from so doing; the
achievements of many of these men are only now being brought to light by
investigations in Spanish archives, and in some cases,--for example, in
that of the anthropological group of writers about the Americas,--their
works still represent contributions to universal knowledge. Toward the
close of the seventeenth century Spain’s hegemony in the world of
letters began to be supplanted by the rising power of France.
[Sidenote: Causes of the decline in Spanish intellectual productivity]
All peoples who have had their period of intellectual greatness have
sooner or later fallen from their high estate, and it was inevitable
that this should occur in the case of Spain. The decline in the
peninsula was so excessive in degree, however, that historians have
enquired whether there were not certain special causes to induce it. The
baleful effect of the Inquisition, exercising a kind of religious
censorship on all works, has usually been regarded as of the first
importance in this respect. Yet the Inquisition existed during the
period of greatness as well as in that of decadence, and to assert that
the prohibitions placed upon the expression of even such important ideas
as those having a religious bearing could dry up the native independence
and freedom of Spanish thought is to confess a lack of knowledge of
Spanish character. The Inquisition was one of a great many factors
having some influence to check production, but it was not responsible to
the degree that has been charged. The same thing is true of the
government censorship independent of the Inquisition. Another factor of
some importance was that the manifestations of the _siglo de oro_ had no
solid foundation in the education of the masses, who remained as
ignorant as in preceding centuries. If any set of causes can be singled
out from the rest, it is probable that those having to do with the
political and economic decline of the country as a whole affected, also,
the intellectual output of the country. A natural aptitude in the
Spanish people, together with the national expansion in resources and
power, had enabled them in the sixteenth century to develop an all-round
intellectual productivity, more especially of a scientific order, and
when this phase of the Golden Age was already dead, private wealth,
refinement, and tradition remained to encourage expression in the realm
of polite literature. Even this prop was removed by the end of the
seventeenth century, and the final decline became inevitable.
[Sidenote: Great era of the fine arts.]
The general conditions affecting the history of art were the same as
those already pointed out in dealing with literature. Spain produced
painters whose works were to serve as among the greatest models of all
time, and her attainments in other phases of art, if less inspiring,
were of a distinguished order. Spanish architecture, though rarely
approved by modern critics, was to become a force in the world through
its transmission to the Americas. The so-called “Mission style” of
California is nothing more than a reminiscence of the art forms of Spain
in this period and the next.
[Sidenote: Spanish Renaissance architecture.]
[Sidenote: The Herreran style.]
[Sidenote: Baroque architecture.]
A continuation of the evolution begun in the preceding era, from Gothic
to Renaissance architecture, resulted in the banishment of the former.
The Renaissance edifices were in three principal styles, which did not
succeed one another rigorously in turn, but which were mixed together,
or passed almost imperceptibly from one to another, although roughly
representing a certain chronological order. The first of these was
characterized by the predominance of Renaissance factors over those
which were more properly plateresque. The façades of San Marcos of León
and of the _ayuntamiento_ (city hall) of Seville are good examples. By
far the most noteworthy style was that of the second of this period,
called variously “Greco-Roman,” “second Renaissance,” and “Herreran”
(after Juan de Herrera, its principal exponent), and employed most
largely in the second half of the sixteenth and the first part of the
seventeenth century. The edifices of this group were noteworthy for the
attempt made in them to imitate the Roman architecture of the later
empire through the suppression of adornment and the multiplication of
flat surfaces and straight lines, achieving expression through great
size and massiveness of structure, together with the use of rich
materials. In the matter of embellishment the classical orders were
superimposed, Doric being used in the lower story, Ionic in the next,
and finally Corinthian. The pyramid capped with a ball was the favorite
style of finial, while gigantic statues were also placed in niches high
up in the façade. The whole effect was sombrely religious, often
depressingly so. The greatest example of this type of art is the
Escorial, the famous palace of Philip II, built by Juan de Herrera,
possibly the most noteworthy single edifice of Christian Spanish
architecture in existence, and certainly the most widely known. In the
reign of Philip IV there was a pronounced reaction against the sobriety
of the Herreran style, and the pendulum swung to the other extreme.
Adornment and movement of line returned, but were expressed in a most
extravagant way, as exemplified by the excessive employment of foliage
effects and by the use of broken or twisted lines which were not
structurally necessary and were not in harmony with the rest of the
edifice. Variety and richness of materials were also a leading
characteristic. This style, usually called “baroque,” also
“churrigueresque” (from Churriguera, its leading architect), has
numerous examples, of which the façade of the palace of San Telmo in
Seville may be taken as a type.
[Sidenote: Vigorous development of sculpture and the lesser arts.]
Sculpture developed into a vigorous art, though still employed mainly as
auxiliary to architecture or in religious statuary. Gothic sculpture in
both the pure and the plateresque form struggled against Italian
influences until the middle of the sixteenth century, when the latter
triumphed. Berruguete, Montañés, and Alonso Cano, the first-named
largely responsible for the just-mentioned Italian victory and the two
latter flourishing in the time of Philip IV, were the leading names of
the era. A peculiarity of the Spanish sculptors was that they worked in
wood, being especially noteworthy for the images (many crucifixions
among them) which they made. The realism of the image-makers saved
Spanish sculpture from the contamination of baroque art, which took root
in other countries. The decline came, however, with the introduction
later in the seventeenth century of the practice of dressing the images,
so that only the head, hands, and feet were in fact sculptured. From
this the sculptors went on to attach false hair and other false
features, going even to the extreme of affixing human skin and finger
nails. Other factors combined with this lack of taste to bring on the
decay of the art. The excellent work in this period of the
_artesonados_, or ceilings of carved woodwork, should not pass
unnoticed. Meanwhile, work in gold, silver, iron, and bronze was
cultivated assiduously, of which the principal manifestations of a
national character were the shrines and gratings. In general, the
Renaissance influences triumphed in these arts, as also in the various
allied arts, such as the making of tapestry. The gold workers enjoyed an
expansion of output springing naturally from the surplus wealth in
secular hands, and a similar lot fell to the workers in silks and
embroideries; both industries produced materials of a high artistic
quality. In ceramic art Arabic tradition had one noteworthy survival in
the azulejos, or varnished bricks painted by hand in blue and white and
used as tiles. Renaissance factors at length appeared to change the
geometric designs, reminiscent of the Moslem past, to the more prevalent
classic forms. Aside from azulejos proper other tiles of many colors,
often gilded, were employed.
[Sidenote: Appearance of an independent Spanish school in painting.]
In the early years of this period the Italian influence on Spanish
painting held full sway. The leading factors were the Florentine school,
headed by Raphael, and the Venetian school, of which Titian was the most
prominent representative. The latter, notable for its brilliant coloring
and effects of light, was by all odds the more important of the two.
Spaniards went to Italy to study, and not a few Italian painters came to
Spain, while many works of the Italian masters, especially those of
Titian, were procured by Charles I and Philip II. Nevertheless, the
signs of a truly Spanish school began to appear about the middle of the
sixteenth century, and before the close of Philip II’s reign the era of
Spanish independence in painting and the day of the great masters were
at hand, to endure for over a century. With characteristic
individuality, Spaniards did not separate into well-defined local
schools, but displayed a great variety, even within the same group.
Still, in a general way the Andalusians may be said to have accentuated
the use of light and a warm ambient, while the Castilians followed a
more severe style, employing darker tones. All devoted themselves to the
depiction of religious subject-matter, but with no attempt at idealism;
rather, the mundane sphere of realism, though in a religious cloak,
preoccupied them, with attention, too, to expression and coloring more
than to drawing and purity of form.
[Sidenote: El Greco, first of the great masters in painting.]
[Sidenote: Ribera.]
[Sidenote: Zurbarán.]
[Sidenote: Velázquez, greatest of the masters.]
[Sidenote: Murillo.]
[Sidenote: Coello.]
[Sidenote: Other notable painters.]
The era of splendor began with Domenico Theotocopuli (1545?-1625),
better known as “El Greco.” As indicated by his name this artist was not
Spanish in origin, but Greek. The character of his works, however, was
so original and its influences were so powerful in the formation of the
Spanish school that he may truly be claimed for Spain, where he lived
and worked. He established himself at Toledo in 1577, which city is
still the best repository of his paintings. His early style was marked
by a strong Venetian manner, with warm tones, great richness, firm
drawing, and an intense sentiment of life. Toward 1581 he began to
change to a use of cold, gray, shadowy tones, and the employment of a
kind of caricature in his drawing, with long and narrow heads and
bodies. By this method, however, he was able to attain wonderful results
in portraiture. Aside from his own merits no painter so profoundly
influenced the greatest of the masters, Velázquez. Chronologically next
of the great painters was Ribera (1588-1656), called “Espagnoletto” in
Italy, where he did most of his work in the Spanish kingdom of Naples.
Naturalism, perfect technique, and the remarkable bodily energy of the
figures he depicted were the leading qualities of his work. The
diffusion of his paintings in Spain tended to make him influential in
the Spanish school, to which his individuality, as well as his birth,
entitled him to belong. Zurbarán (1598-1663) was the most rigorous of
the realists, including all the accessories in his paintings, even to
the minute details of a person’s dress. Less vigorous than Ribera he was
best in his portrayal of monks, in which subject-matter his sombrely
passive, exceedingly religious atmosphere found a suitable vehicle. He
was nevertheless a brilliant colorist. Next in point of time came Diego
Velázquez de Silva (1599-1660), greatest of Spanish masters and possibly
the greatest of all painters. Velázquez had various periods and various
styles, in all of which he produced admirable works. Unlike his
predecessors and those who succeeded him as well, he was as diverse in
subject-matter as it was possible to be, within the law, and was far
less notable for his religious works than for his many others. He
depicted for all time the court life of Philip III and Philip IV,
including the portraits of those kings and the other leading figures of
the court. Some of his greatest work appeared in these portraits, which
he knew how to fit into a setting of landscape, making the central
figure stand out in a way that no other painter has surpassed or perhaps
equalled. He also painted common people (as in his _Los borrachos_, or
Intoxicated men) and queer people (as in his paintings of dwarfs), and
drew upon mythology (as in his composition entitled “the forge of
Vulcan”) and upon contemporary wars (as witness the famous “surrender of
Breda”). Once only, during a lapse of the prohibitory law, did he paint
a nude,--the celebrated Venus of the mirror, now in London, one of the
greatest works of its kind. In many of his paintings he revealed himself
as a wonderful landscape painter. His landscapes were characterized by
the use of a pale, yet rich, pervading blue, and by effects of distance
and atmosphere. No painter is more inadequately set forth by
photography. To know Velázquez, one must see his works.[58] After
Velázquez came Murillo (1618-1682), an Andalusian, who well represented
the traits of southern Spain. His leading characteristics were a
precise, energetic drawing, fresh, harmonious coloring, and a religious
sentiment which was a remarkable combination of imaginative idealism, or
even supernaturalism, of conception with realism of figures and scenes.
His biblical characters were represented by the common people of the
streets of Seville. Few painters have more indelibly stamped their works
with their own individuality. Last of the masters was Coello
(1623?-1694), who maintained the traditions of the Spanish school,
though under strong Venetian influence, amidst a flood of baroque
paintings which had already begun to corrupt public taste. Other names
might well be included in the list of great Spanish painters in this
era, such as Pacheco, Roelas, Herrera, and especially Valdés Leal and
Alonso Cano. Indeed, it would be difficult to overestimate the
importance of the Spanish school. It is not unthinkable that a list of
the ten greatest painters in the history of the world would include the
names of Velázquez, El Greco, and Murillo, with a place reserved for
Goya (of the eighteenth century), and with the claims of Ribera
deserving consideration.
[Sidenote: Noteworthy character of Spanish music.]
Spanish music, though not so important in the history of the world as
that of Italy or Germany, had a notable development in this period, and
displayed an individuality which distinguished it from that of other
lands. For the first time it came into a place of its own, apart from
recitation or the merely technical presentation of medieval church
ceremonial, and was characterized by a certain expressiveness,
approaching sentimentality and having a flavor which has led many to
assert that its roots were to be found in the song and dance of Spanish
Moslems. To be sure, the influence of Italy was greatest at this time.
The _siglo de oro_ in Spanish music was the sixteenth century, in the
time of the four great composers of the era, Morales, Guerrero, Cabezón,
and Victoria. The greatest works were in the field of religious music,
in which various parts were sung to the accompaniment of the organ.
Music of the court occupied a half-way post between church and popular
music, displaying a combination of both elements, with song to the
accompaniment of the viola, which filled the rôle of the modern piano.
At the close of the sixteenth century the viola was replaced by the
guitar, which became the national instrument of Spain. Popular music
found its fullest expression in the theatre. It got to be the fashion
for the entire company to sing as a preliminary to the play, to the
music of the viola, the harp, or the violin. This song had no necessary
connection with the play, but song in dialogue soon began to be employed
as an integral part of one-act pieces of what might be termed a
vaudeville type. In the seventeenth century, song invaded the legitimate
stage, and some operas were sung in which the dialogue was entirely in
music or else alternated with recitation. The last-named type, the
_zarzuela_, became particularly popular. Unfortunately, none of the
examples of this music which would have been most interesting, such as
that employed in the _zarzuelas_ of Lope de Vega and the other masters,
has survived. Its true character therefore remains unknown, although its
use in theatrical representation is an important fact in the history of
the art.