[Footnote 249: Blanco García, _Fr. Luis de León: estudio biográfico_,

pp. 242-244.]

[Footnote 250: The whole episode is clearly set forth by Blanco

García, _Fr. Luis de León: estudio biográfico_, pp. 246-250.]

[Footnote 251: Blanco García, _Fr. Luis de León: estudio biográfico_,

pp. 248-249; Alonso Getino, _op. cit._, pp. 349-351.]

[Footnote 252: A passage in Alonso Getino (_op. cit._, p. 349)

describes Santa Maria as 'contemporáneo de los sucesos'. This, though

literally true, is somewhat misleading. Santa Maria was twenty-four

the year that Luis de Leon died. See Gallardo, _op. cit._, vol. IV,

col. 489.]

[Footnote 253: '...al principal de ellos [los que habían procurado el

Breve] y pretensor de mitra, le costó la vida el sentimiento que tuvo

de ver tan indignado al Rey Católico'. I have not been able to consult

Jesús y Maria's work. My quotation, like Alonso Getino's (_op. cit._,

p. 354), is taken at second-hand from Vicente de la Fuente's edition

of Saint Theresa's works.]

[Footnote 254: January 26, 1591, is the latest date attached to the

_Documentos_ published by Cristóbal Pérez Pastor, _Bibliografía

madrileña_ (Madrid, 1907), Parte III, pp. 404-409. On January 25,

1591, Luis de Leon signed a document undertaking to accept 1,000

_reales_ in lieu of 2,800 due to him by the estate of Cornelio Bonard,

formerly a bookseller at Salamanca; see Cristóbal Pérez Pastor,

_Bibliografía madrileña_ (Madrid, 1906), Parte II, pp. 454-455.]

[Footnote 255: F. Blanco García, _Segundo proceso_, p. 53. The

Salamancan Inquisitors reported to the Supreme Inquisition:

'...havemos entendido que los de su orden se xatan y alaban de que en

este sto offiº se a declarado ser verdad lo que el dho frai luis

sustentó...']

[Footnote 256: F. Blanco García, _Segundo proceso_, p. 49.]

[Footnote 257: C. Muiños Sáenz, _Sobre el 'Decíamos ayer'... y otros

excesos_ in _La Ciudad de Dios_ (1909), vol. LXXIX, p. 540.]

[Footnote 258: Alonso Getino, _op. cit._, p. 355.]

[Footnote 259: C. Muiños Sáenz, _Sobre el 'Decíamos ayer'... y otros

excesos_ in _La Ciudad de Dios_ (1909), vol. LXXIX, p. 540, _n._ 1.]

[Footnote 260: Alonso Getino writes (_op. cit._, p. 355): 'al ser

elegido Provincial, nueve dias antes de morir, no puede suponerse que

estuviera enfermo de consideración'. This is a guess very wide of the

mark. F. de Méndez, in the _Revista Agustiniana_ (1881), quoted (p.

351) Juan Quijano, a contemporary whose chronicle is now lost, as

saying that when Luis de Leon was elected Provincial he was already

confined to his bed with the illness of which he died.]

[Footnote 261: The portrait and character-sketch will be found in the

photo-chromotype reproduction of Francisco Pacheco, _Libro de

descripcion de verdaderos retratos de illustres y memorables

varones_. The original is dated Sevilla, 1599. The reproduction, due

to José María Asensio y Toledo, was photo-chromotyped between 1881 and

1884. Owing to the rarity of the reproduction, it has been thought

desirable to reprint in an appendix the passage in which Pacheco deals

with Luis de Leon.]

[Footnote 262: The reference is given by C. Muiños Sáenz, _Sobre el

'Decíamos ayer'... y otros excesos_ in _La Ciudad de Dios_ (1909),

vol. LXXX, p. 119.]

V

By his contemporaries Luis de Leon was perhaps more esteemed as a

theologian or a scholar than as a man of letters. This judgement has

been reversed by posterity mainly on the strength of the Spanish poems

which were little known during the author's lifetime beyond a small

circle of his personal friends.[263] Experts tell us that as a

theologian he ranks below his master Melchor Cano; and in the annals

of scholarship Luis de Leon is less conspicuous than Benito Arias

Montano and than Francisco Sanchez (_el Brocense_). Few now read for

pleasure the treatises which Luis de Leon composed in a dead language:

in any case these treatises can add nothing to his reputation as a

writer of Spanish, and it is solely as a Spanish author that he

concerns us here and now. He was by no means the earliest of devout

writers to use Spanish as a literary medium. There is a long and

illustrious bead-roll of authors from Bernardino de Laredo to Saint

Theresa to prove the contrary. Much less was Luis de Leon the first

post-Renaissance scholar to recognize that Spanish had a great future

before it. Yet, if we take leave to assume that Luis de Granada was an

ascetic rather than an extatic, we may account Luis de Leon as perhaps

the first professional scholar to perceive that Spanish was adequate

to convey the subtleties of theology and the ravishments of mysticism.

His chief prose works in Castilian include the _Exposicion del libro

de Job_, a commentary dedicated to Madre Ana de Jesús, but not

published till near the end of the eighteenth century (1779). The

_provenance_ of this work calls for no explanation. Apart from the

quotation of a passage in Jorge Manrique's _Coplas_, the _Exposicion

del libro de Job_ offers few indications of Spanish origin and fewer

personal touches. Equally Biblical in origin are a rendering of the

_Song of Songs_ and a corresponding commentary; the existence of both

has a personal interest inasmuch as they prove that Luis de Leon was

enabled to carry out a long cherished design by means of which he

hoped, as he declared at Valladolid, to counterbalance the indiscreet

prying of Fray Diego de Leon. _La Perfecta Casada_ (1583) and _De los

nombres de Cristo_ (1583-1585) likewise have their roots in Scripture.

_La Perfecta Casada_ is avowedly based on the thirty-first chapter of

_Proverbs_, and _De los nombres de Cristo_, the first part of which

appeared simultaneously with _La Perfecta Casada_,[264] discusses the

various symbolic names applied to the Saviour in the Bible.

_La Perfecta Casada_ is dedicated to Maria Varela Osorio, a recently

wedded bride, who may have been a distant kinswoman of the

author's.[265] Nowhere more clearly than in this treatise does Luis de

Leon justify the statement that he had a Hebrew soul. He takes for

granted the Oriental point of view, and illustrates his imperious

thesis with ample quotations from writers of all types--pagans,

Christians, saints, and laymen. There are references to Simonides, to

Sophocles, to Euripides, to Plutarch, to Saint Clement of Alexandria,

to Saint Cyprian, to Saint Ambrose, to Garcilasso de la Vega. It seems

likely that _La Perfecta Casada_ was written after _De los nombres de

Cristo_, which was almost certainly begun in prison. But there is

perhaps nothing in the internal evidence of the style which would

point to that conclusion. The style of _La Perfecta Casada_ is

vigorous and clear; but it is marred by gusts of rhetoric and by an

excess of copulative conjunctions. These peculiarities produce the

effect of relative inexperience, and might easily mislead a too

confident critic.

_De los nombres de Cristo_ is cast in the Platonic form of dialogue,

and, in the section entitled _Pastor_, Plato is quoted by name. But

the Hellenic influence, though present, is not dominant. Already

Alonso de Orozco had anticipated Luis de Leon with _De los nueve

nombres de Cristo_,[266] and there are points of contact in the

handling as is inevitable from the similarity of the subject. But it

cannot be denied that Luis de Leon's work is suffused with a warmer,

more human interest than Orozco's brief sketch. These more intimate

personal elements are present on almost every page of _De los nombres

de Cristo_. Nobody can read far without perceiving that Marcello,

hindered by his _poca salud y muchas occupaciones_, is manifestly a

double of Luis de Leon; there are passages which gloss themes

developed metrically elsewhere; there are retrospicient glances at the

Valladolid trial; the scene of the dialogue is laid within view of La

Flecha, and the details of the landscape are reproduced with exact

fidelity; Luis de Leon has a freer hand in _De los nombres de Cristo_

than in his other prose works, but here again in his paraphrases of

the Biblical passages relating to Christ his interpretation is at one

with the interpretation of the prophets. And this identity of

sentiment has in it nothing dramatic. Those who have alleged that Luis

de Leon came of Jewish stock may have been--apparently were--mistaken;

but their mistake is comprehensible, for more than any contemporary

Spanish poet--more even than Herrera in his odes--is he saturated with

the Jewish spirit. In all his work Luis de Leon adheres closely to the

Bible. In the _De los nombres de Cristo_ he is also a Platonist within

limits: not so much as regards the manner (which tends to an

oratorical pomp more reminiscent of Cicero) as in his conciliatory

method. With the Jewish and Hellenic blend of influence we must rate

the Latin influence--that of Horace and of Virgil. The influence of

Horace on Luis de Leon has been often noted. It exists no doubt, but

has perhaps been exaggerated: why should we suppose that his love of

moderation was learnt from Horace and was not partly, at least,

temperamental? May not the references to Horace be a characteristic of

humanism? An opinion backed by the weight of classical authority must

reach us with irresistible force, must it not? However this may be,

the predominant influence in _De los nombres de Cristo_, as in all

Luis de Leon's prose, is Scriptural and Christian. In maturity of

development, in intellectual force, in beauty of expression, and in

general adequateness, _De los nombres de Cristo_ exhibits Luis de

Leon's prose at its culmination. The book is dedicated to Pedro

Portocarrero,[267] Bishop of Calahorra, who had previously twice been

rector of Salamanca University. It seems probable that Luis de Leon's

friendship with him dates back to 1566-1567, when Portocarrero held

the office of rector for the second time. Besides _De los nombres de

Cristo_ Luis de Leon dedicated to Portocarrero _In Abdiam prophetam

Explanatio_ (1589) and the manuscript collection of his poems. For

some reason not very obvious this collection of verses was not

published till 1631 when it was issued by Quevedo, who hoped that it

would help to stem the current of Gongorism in Spain. The poems,

printed forty years after the author's death, appeared too late to

affect the public taste. Góngora himself had died in 1627, but his

influence was undiminished. Quevedo, who had obtained his copies of

Luis de Leon's verses from Manuel Sarmiento de Mendoza, a canon of

Seville cathedral, did his share as editor by writing two prefaces,

one addressed to Sarmiento de Mendoza, and the other to Olivares who

was manifestly expected to pronounce against Gongorism. Olivares,

however, had no reason to love Quevedo, and was resolved to take no

active part in what he doubtless regarded as a scribblers' quarrel.

Gongorism pursued its way unchecked. Quevedo's edition, though

incomplete and disfigured by certain errors, was reprinted at Milan

during the same year (1631), and then all interest in Luis de Leon

flickered out for a while.

In the prefatory note of the 1631 Madrid edition--entitled _Obras

propias, y traduciones latinas, griegas y italianas_--Luis de Leon

speaks of his poems slightingly as mere playthings of his youth, now

brought together at the request of an anonymous friend--perhaps Benito

Arias Montano--to whom they had been ascribed. Luis de Leon arranges

the material in three books, containing respectively his original

compositions, his translations from authors profane, and his versions

of certain psalms, a hymn, and chapters from the Book of Job. But,

beyond the general statement as to the early date of composition, Luis

de Leon gives no precise information as to when individual poems were

written. The assertion that the poems date back almost to the author's

childhood is contradicted by concrete facts. Take, for instance, the

celebrated _Noche serena_ dedicated to Oloarte. If, as I conjecture,

the dedicatee of the _Noche serena_ is identical with the Diego de

Loarte, archdeacon of Ledesma, who gave evidence at Salamanca on

January 27, 1573, and who on that date had known Luis de Leon for

fourteen years, the _Noche serena_ cannot have been composed earlier

than 1559 when Luis de Leon was thirty-one--youthful, indeed, but long

past his _niñez_. On January 17, 1573, Francisco Salinas testified at

Salamanca to having known Luis de Leon for six years: whence it

follows that _El aire se serena_ cannot have been written before 1567,

when Luis de Leon was bordering on his fortieth year. As Don Carlos

died on July 24, 1568, the _Cancion a la muerte de don Carlos_ and the

_Epitafio al túmulo del príncipe don Carlos_ must necessarily have

been composed after that date; that is, when Luis de Leon was just

forty and had left his _niñez_ far behind him. Besides a general

dedication to Portocarrero, the collection includes three individual

poems which are dedicated to that personage: (1) _Virtud, hija del

Cielo_; (2) _No siempre es poderosa_; (3) _La cana y alta cumbre_. In

_La cana y alta cumbre_ there is a reference to

la cruda guerra

que agora el Marte airado

despierta en la alta sierra.

These verses can scarcely allude to anything but the Alpujarras rising

of 1568-1571, and the conjecture hardens into certainty in view of the

mention of Alonso and Poqueira: this is clearly the Alonso

Portocarrero who, as Hurtado de Mendoza records, perished at Poqueira,

'trabado del veneno usado dende los tiempos antiguos entre cazadores'.

This poem must have been written when Luis de Leon was at least

forty-one. _Virtud, hija del cielo_, in mentioning the _Miño_, refers

to Portocarrero's appointment in Galicia; and as Portocarrero's term

of office appears to have lasted from 1571 to 1580, the poem cannot be

dated earlier than 1571 when Luis de Leon was over forty-three. If the

mention of _la morisca armada_ in the lines _A Santiago_ glances at

the battle of Lepanto which was fought on October 7, 1571, then the

poem must have been written after that date, when the author was close

on forty-four. The verses dedicated to Juan de Grial, with their

closing reference to the writer's trials:

Que yo, de un torbellino

traidor acometido, y derrocado

del medio del camino

al hondo, el plectro amado

y del vuelo las alas he quebrado;

the fervent entreaty _A todos los santos_ and its unreserved lament:

No niego, dulce amparo

del alma, que mis males son mayores

que aqueste desamparo;

mas cuanto son peores,

tanto resonaran mas tus loores;

the very beautiful and justly renowned _Virgen que el sol mas pura_,

with its heart-rending supplication:

los ojos vuelve al suelo

y mira un miserable en cárcel dura

cercado de tinieblas y tristeza:

possibly[268] the song _Del conocimiento de si mismo_, with its

significant simile:

el gusanillo de la gente hollado

un rey era, conmigo comparado;

and assuredly the famous _quintillas_ beginning _Aqui la envidia y

mentira_: these compositions were probably composed during, or after,

the writer's imprisonment at Valladolid, that is to say between the

spring of 1572 and the winter of 1576, when Luis de Leon was from

forty-four or forty-five to forty-eight or forty-nine. _Del mundo y su

vanidad_ glances at

la grave desventura

del lusitano, por su mal valiente,

la soberbia bravura

de su animosa gente

desbaratada miserablemente.

This passage obviously recalls the disastrous defeat of Sebastian I,

King of Portugal, at Al-Kaor al-Kebir in August 1578, when Luis de

Leon was more than fifty years of age. If these inferences are valid,

it would follow that many of his original poems were not composed till

he was nearly forty or more. It is difficult to reconcile these

conclusions with the author's categorical assertion that the poems

were produced during his early years. As Luis de Leon was the least

vain, as well as the most truthful of men, an explanation must be

found, and it is perhaps permissible to suggest that Luis de Leon

wrote a prefatory note to Portocarrero intending it to be placed at

the beginning of the Second Book which contains his poems translated

from Roman and other authors. By some mischance the poet's intention

was frustrated; perhaps a leaf was out of place in Sarmiento de

Mendoza's copy; perhaps Quevedo is directly responsible for what

occurred. At any rate, the letter dedicatory was bisected, the greater

part of it being transferred to the beginning of the First Book, while

a mere morsel came to be printed at the beginning of the Third Book.

This surmise may serve till a better explanation is forthcoming.

It is not to be inferred from the foregoing summary that all Luis de

Leon's original and graver compositions were written during his

maturity, but there is some reason to think that his earlier efforts

in verse took the form of translations. Though it is undoubtedly true

that his poems as a whole were not published till 1631, four isolated

pieces of his strayed into print as early as 1574 when they were

included by Francisco Sanchez, _el Brocense_, in the notes to his

edition of the _Obras del excelente poeta Garci-Lasso de la

Vega_.[269] At that date Luis de Leon was in the secret prison-cells

of the Inquisition at Valladolid. Sanchez had been a colleague of his

at Salamanca for some six years, was on friendly terms with him, knew

the exact turn things were taking, felt that no good, and possibly

some harm, might be done by mentioning the prisoner's name, and

accordingly gave a version of an Horatian ode with the comment: 'vn

docto destos reynos la traduxo bi[~e]'[270]. This needs

interpretation. There can be no doubt that Luis de Leon was a very

competent Latin scholar; neither is there any doubt that he had a

profound admiration for Horace. At his best, his Horatian versions,

if somewhat lacking in polish, are remarkably faithful and vigorous.

But when we find him in his translation of the eighteenth ode of the

Second Book rendering _salis avarus_ by _de sal avariento_--the second

person singular of the present indicative of the verb _salire_ being

mistaken for the genitive of the substantive _sal_[271]--we may

perhaps conclude that a boyish exercise has somehow escaped

destruction.

It is sometimes alleged against Luis de Leon that he is restricted in

his choice of themes, and it is impossible to deny that his sacred

profession acted as something of a limitation to him. Still, when the

mood was on him, he rent his chains asunder as readily as Samson broke

the seven green withs at Gaza: 'as a thread of tow is broken when it

toucheth the fire.' Perhaps nobody would guess off-hand that the

_Profecia del Tajo_ was the handiwork of a sixteenth-century monk, a

dweller in the rarefied atmosphere of mysticism. It only remained for

a friar in the opposition camp to discover nearly three hundred years

later a tendency in Luis de Leon to treat sensual themes in a sensual

fashion.[272] To deal seriously with a belated judgement based on

malignant ignorance would be a waste of time. It is the very irony of

fate that the poem which has been the subject of severe censure should

prove to be a translation from Cardinal Bembo.[273] The standard of

the twentieth century is not the standard of the sixteenth, and it is

certain that Luis de Leon has not the unfettered liberty of a godless

layman. He is restrained by his austere temperament, by his monk's

habit, by Christian doctrine. Nevertheless he moves with easy grace

and dignity on planes so far apart as those of patriotism, of

devotion, of human sympathy, of introspection. His patriotism finds

powerful expression, as already noted, in the _Profecia del Tajo_,

besprinkled with sonorous place-names, these growing fewer as the

movement is accelerated, and Father Tagus describes with a mixture of

picturesque mediaeval sentiment and martial music the onset of the

Arabs and the clangour of arms as they meet the doomed Gothic host. In

the sphere of devotional poetry Luis de Leon nowhere displays more

unction, more ecstatic piety than in the verses on the Ascension

beginning with the line:

Y dexas, Pastor santo.

It will be observed that the conjunction _y_, so superabundant in _La

Perfecta Casada_, is the first word of this poem, of which Churton has

supplied a well-known rendering:

And dost Thou, holy Shepherd, leave

Thy flock in this dark vale alone,

In cheerless solitude to grieve,

Whilst Thou to endless rest art gone?

The sheep, in Thy protection blest,

Untended wilt Thou leave to mourn?

The lambs, once cherished at Thy breast,

Forlorn,--oh! whither shall they turn?

Where shall those eyes now find repose,

That pine Thy gracious glance to see?

What can they hear but sounds of woes,

Sad exiles from discourse with Thee?

And who shall curb this troubled deep,

When Thou no more amidst the gloom

Shalt chide the wrathful winds to sleep,

And guide the labouring vessel home?

For Thou art gone! that cloud so bright

That bears Thee from our gaze away,

Springs upward into dazzling light,

And leaves us here to weep and pray.

Four additional stanzas, accepted as authentic by perhaps the most

painstaking of Luis de Leon's editors, are thus Englished by Churton:

Our life has lost its richest store,

The balm for sorrow's inward thorn,

The hope, that, gladd'ning more and more,

Out-brighten'd all the springs of morn.

Ah me! my soul, what hateful chain

Holds back thy freeborn spirit's flight?

Oh break it, disenthrall'd from pain,

And mount those azure depths of light.

Why should'st thou fear? What earth-born spell

Is on thee, with thy choice at strife

The soul no dying pang can quell,

But loss of Christ is death in life.

Dear Lord, and Friend, more dear to me

Than all the names Earth's love hath found,

Through darkest gloom I'll follow Thee,

Or cheer'd with beaming glory round.

Fray Luis de León: A Biographical Fragment · 第 9 / 11 段