Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

The Etymology of Spanish villancico ‘Carol’; Certain Literary Implications of this Etymology

1984; Liverpool University Press; Volume: 61; Issue: 2 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1080/1475382842000361137

1469-3550

Yakov Malkiel, Charlotte Stern,

Lexicography and Language Studies

Click to increase image sizeClick to decrease image sizeBSS Subject Index: ENCINA, JUAN DEL (1468?–1529/30?)SPAIN — LANGUAGES — SPANISH LANGUAGE & ITS HISTORY — GOLDEN AGE/16th–17th CENTURIESSPAIN — LANGUAGES — SPANISH LANGUAGE & ITS HISTORY — MEDIEVAL PERIODSPAIN — LITERATURE — MEDIEVAL PERIOD — DRAMA/THEATRE & PERFORMANCE-HISTORYSPAIN — LITERATURE — MEDIEVAL PERIOD — GENERALVILLANCICOSMUSIC/SONGS/DANCESSPAIN — LANGUAGES — SPANISH LANGUAGE & ITS HISTORY — GENERAL Notes 1. Tesoro de la lengua castellana o española (Madrid: Luis Sánchez, 1611); here quoted after M. de Riquer's edn. (Barcelona: Horta, 1943), 1009a, whose Index assures the reader that the pioneer lexicographer discussed the word at issue nowhere else in his Tesoro and that Benito Remigio Noyden's Additions of the year 1674 contained no further elaboration, either. 2. Neither have I found any enlightenment in the earlier Etymologisches Wörterbuch der romaniscben Sprachen by F. Diez (Bonn: A. Marcus, 1853). Yet Diez's admirably concise and flawless presentation of villano (Section A, s.v. villá; 5th edn. [Bonn: A. Marcus, 1887], 341) deserves to be quoted: ‘Dem abgel [eiteten] it. villano, sp. villano, pr[ov.] vilá, altfr. vilain “Bauer” legte der Standesgeist des Mittelalters auch die moral[ischen] Nebenbedeutungen “niedrig, schurkisch, häßlich” bei, welche im Prov. die Hauptbedeutungen ("Bauer" heißt hier pagés), im Neufranz. die einzig verbliebenen sind, die auch, in Rücksicht auf vil (lat. vīlis), die alte Schreibung mit einfachem / fortzuführen Anlaß gaben’. Note the tendency, in older British English, to differentiate between villein ‘feudal serf, peasant cultivator in subjection to a lord’ (fifteenth-century, revived by modern historians) and villain ‘base fellow’ > ‘depraved scoundrel’; see C. T. Onions et al, The Oxford Dictionary of English Etymology (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1966), 980b, 981a. Only in the 20th century was the long-prevalent spelling villany replaced by villainy. 3. This line of action was adopted by, e.g., R. Cabrera, Diccionario de etimologías de la lengua castellana, ed. Juan Pedro Ayegui, Il (Madrid: Marcelino Calero, 1837). 4. A few examples must suffice. P. F. Monlau, Diccionario etimológico de la lengua castellana (Buenos Aires: El Ateneo, 1941), 1133b (based on posthumous 2nd edn., 1881, revised by the author's son José): the analysis of the family is here further confused through direct hierarchical subordination of villanchón (which is yet to claim our attention) to villa, with complete by-passing of villano; various versions of the Academy Dictionary, including the latest available, namely the 19th (1970), 134bc; S. Gili Gaya, comp. VOX: Diccionario general ilustrado de la lengua española, rev. 2nd edn. (Barcelona: SPES, 1953), 1728b. 5. The existence of such ‘suffix chains’ has been known for many years; see, e.g., F. Hanssen, Gramática histórica de la lengua castellana (Halle: Niemeyer, 1913), on -ancón, -anchón, and -anón (§§382, 383, 378); J. Alemany Bolufer, Tratado de la formación de palabras en la lengua castellana; la derivación y la composición … (Madrid 1920; reprinted, from the BRAE), p. 108, who groups vill-anchón with porc-achón, corp-a(n)chón; R. Menéndez Pidal, Manual de gramática histórica española, rev. 6th edn. (Madrid: Espasa-Calpe, 1941), §83; precisely from these suffix chains the ‘interfixes’, as H. Lausberg was the first to dub them, were carved out (see my own paper, ‘Los interfijos hispánicos; problema de lingüística histórica y estructural’, in Estructuralismo e história; miscelánea-homenaje a André Martinet, ed. D. Catalán (La Laguna: Biblioteca Filológica de la Universidad de las Canarias), 3 vols.; II, 107–99. On -arrón there also exists a separate note by G. Rohlfs. What remains to be examined in detail is the issue of overlaps, with -ar- (usually a dissimilated variant of -āle) becoming -arr-, in appropriate semantic contexts, under pressure from the indigenous -arr-, -irr-/-err-, -orr-/-urr-derivational morpheme. 6. On this suffix there has of late come into existence a whole raft of studies, starting—unless I am mistaken—with my own piece, ‘The Pan-European Suffix -esco, -esque in Stratigraphic Projection’, Papers on Linguistics and Phonetics in Memory of Pierre Delattre, ed. A. Valdman (The Hague: Mouton, 1972), 357–87. Thomas J. Walsh's note, ‘Two Contrastable Approaches to Suffixal Variation: The Case of Romance -esco/-esque’, RPh, XXXIII:4 (1980), 489–96, weighs the 1972 piece against a differently slanted article by W. Zwanenburg, ‘Le suffix -esque en français’, in Mélanges de linguistique et de littérature offerts à Lein Geschiere (Amsterdam: Rodopi, 1975), 209–37, with clear implications for Spanish. The latest newcomer, we believe, is G. J. Steenbergen, ‘A Contribution to Etymology, with Special Reference to the Suffixes -esque and -ish in the Germanic Languages’, Antwerp Papers in Linguistics, No. 29 (1982). 7. On the Gallo–Romance suffix underlying -aje, as in villanaje, see the excellent monograph by Suzanne Fleischman, Cultural and Linguistic Factors in Word Formation: An Integrated Approach to the Development of the Suffix ‘-age-’, Univ. of California Publications in Linguistics, 86 (Berkeley, Los Angeles, & London: Univ. of California Press, 1977) and C. Blaylock's substantial review in RPh, XXX1V:1 (1980), 100–04. On -ada see, in addition to earlier studies, some of them of high distinction, this latest crop: Annegret Alsdorf-Bollée, Die lateinischen Verbalabstrakta der ‘U’-Deklination und ihre Umbildungen im Romanischen, Romanistische Versuche und Vorarbeiten, XXXIV (Bonn: Romanisches Seminar, 1970), and Emanuel S. Georges, Studies in Romance Nouns Extracted from Past Participles, Univ. of California Publications in Linguistics, 63:2 (1970), as well as their joint contrastive appraisal by Anita Katz Levy in RPh, XXVI (1972), 412–19. 8. There exists an immense volume of writings, from the pens of historical linguists and, among historians proper, students of Late Antiquity and Early Middle Ages, on villa and its tendential transmutation into a label for ‘village’ or ‘town’ (orig. ‘residential quarters of workers on a seignorial estate’). The standard-setting studies at present are those by Georges Duby, L’Économie rurale et la vie des campagnes dans l’Occident médiéval; France, Angleterre, Empire, IX e –XV e siècles. Essai de synthèse et perspectives de recherches, 2 vols. (Paris: Aubier, 1962); id., Guerriers et paysans, VIV–XIV siècles; premier essor de l’économie européenne (Paris: Gallimard, 1973). Viewed in the perspective of a Latinist, uīlla, which A. Ernout and A. Meillet define as, primarily, ‘ferme, maison de campagne’ and as, secondarily, ‘village’, is a derivative of ulcus ‘pâté de maisons, quartiers dans une ville, rue’; see their Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue latine, rev. 4th edn. (Paris: Klincksieck, 1959–60), 732b–733a. Interestingly, the word (‘de village’, ‘villageois’) which *vīllãnus replaced was vícānus, which the above-mentioned authors likened to pãgãnus (in its pre-Christian meaning), citing also campānus and silvānus as close derivational parallels. Vīllāticus, the prototype of Fr. E. village, (rare) Sp. villaje, etc. is, incidentally, well attested in the parent language (Varro, Columella, Pliny) and parallels silvāticus, the distant source of Sp. salvaje and the immediate source of Fr. sauvage (>E. savage). 9. Although this is hardly the place to develop any conjectures on the provenience of the suffix -orrio, I am convinced that it is traceable to -orio, the semi-learned, frequently jocose (hence also, upon occasion, derogatory) product of ancestral -ōrium—the very same suffix that in folk parlance yielded, at first, -uero (e.g., in Gonzalo de Berceo), later -ero, thus eventually coinciding, in that layer, with the outgrowth of -ãrium. To put it formulaically, -orrio is -orio contaminated by indigenous -orr-l-urr-. This analysis carries with it the advantage of explaining the absence of any such parallel formant as *-arrio: Even though -arr- was already available, the Latin suffix -āriu had not been transmitted into Spanish at the semi-learned level (as against the emergence of -airo in Old Portuguese), even in purely semantic terms. 10. Particularly eloquent is the testimony of the toponym and, secondarily, anthroponym Sp. Vasconc-i(e)llos, Ptg. Vasconc-el(l)os, which beautifully parallels villanc-ico in that the starting point was Vascon(i)cu. The contrast to Romanillos, from Rōmānu, could not have been stronger. The syncopated -(i)cu hidden in place-names must be distinguished from '-ega, '-aga, as in Alpóblega, Alpuébraga, Alpuébrega, lit. ‘castle of Alpón’, which contain a reflex of Celt, briga ‘elevation, fortified hillock’; see R. Menéndez Pidal, Toponimia prerrománica hispana (Madrid: Gredos, 1952), 219–20. 11. Corominas' derivational technique, and the methodology behind it, have left me sceptical. I do not, e.g., recall a single parallel to the postulated sequence of events: Latin abstracts (secondarily, also mass nouns: ‘collapse’ > ‘pile of rubble’) in -īna cast off no such adjectives in -ino, -ina as vanish, without leaving a trace, only to be replaced by other adjectives in -ín (m.f.), an assumed apocopated variant. In my opinion, numerous abstracts, including those in -īna, easily generate verbs in -ar, sometimes preceded by a-, en-, or some other suitable prefix. Even though ruīna ‘downfall, catastrophe’ was accompanied by one lone derivative in Antiquity, namely ruīnōsus ‘tumbling down, going to ruin’, ‘ruined, in ruins’, Romanists reckon with an early date for the crystallization of an -āre verb on the strength of Fr. ruiner (→E. ruin), It. rovinare, Sp. arruinar, etc. (Meyer-Lübke's entry [REW, §7432] is lop-sided, offering note-worthy parallels from Northern Italy [Cremona, Milan] and from Waadtland [=Vaud] but, inexplicably, omitting the French and the Hispanic evidence.) Now, experience teaches us that semantic expansion and diversification normally proceed more quickly and radically in a verb than in the correlated noun; with arruinar having, before long, acquired a gamut of secondary connotations and even denotations (‘to ruin, destroy, demolish’; [refl.] ‘to go to ruin, be destroyed’)—which also spread to a short string of secondary derivatives in -ador and -amiento—, it is small wonder that, in any deverbal adjective that arruinar could have cast off, these extensions of the original semantic ambit should easily have prevailed; hence ruin ‘mean, vile, puny, stingy, vicious’ (=Fr. méchant). Such deverbal (or postverbal) adjectives were apt to be so generated as to end in -o/-a, less frequently in -e, or (rarely) in zero, e.g. prieto (from apretar), podre (beside podrecer), afín. (At present podre ‘pus, corruption’ competes with podre-dumbre, -dura alongside podri-ción, -miento as well as offshoots of pudrir, the modern substitute for older podr-ir, -ecer. Originally, pu-ter, ‘-tris, -e was an adjective [Ernout-Meillet: ‘pourri, qui se décompose ou se désagrège’], which stood in apophonic variation with pūt-eō, -ēre ‘to rot’.) Where the primary noun ended in -ín (e.g. fin < fîne), the secondary adjective, for the sake of differentiation, would tend to end in -ino (hence fin-o, -a), and vice versa: Precisely the existence of ruina blocked the way to the extraction of adj. *ruin-o, -a, pushing speakers in the direction of ambigeneric ruin. Apocope has nothing to do with this process. 12. On genuine apocope see, in addition to the routine treatment in standard handbooks of historical grammar (F. Hanssen, GHLC, §§66–72; R. Menéndez Pidal, MGHE 6 , 27–29), a major article by R. Lapesa in the EDMP, II (1951), 185–226, and a sort of belated postscript to it by the same author in the NRFH. 13. My two major contributions to this fascinating field, whose importance was clearly foreseen by C. Michaëlis de Vasconcelos in her—subsequently publisbed—Coimbra lectures, c. 1910 (Lições de Filologia Portuguesa [Lisboa: Edição da ‘Revista de Portugal’, n.d. (c. 1945)]) are the monograph Patterns of Derivational Affixation in the Cabraniego Dialect of East-Central Asturian (UCPL, LXIV [1970]) which, fortunately, elicited a number of substantial reviews; and the long-delayed and typographically mismanaged article, ‘Infinitive Endings, Conjugational Classes, Nominal Derivational Classes, and Vocalic Gamuts in Romance’, Acta Linguistica Hafniensia, XII (1982), 15–48. 14. See my recent note, cited here with apologies for its unfortunate typographic garb: ‘The Decline of Spanish luengo “long”; the Disappearance of Old Spanish lueñ(e) “far”’, Études de Philologie Romane et d’Histoire littéraire, edd. Jean-Marie D'Heur et Nicoletta Cherubini (Liège: GEDIT, 1980), 267–73. 15. In addition there exists another adverbial model less exclusively tilted in the direction of speech (and general verbal behaviour), namely (Hellēnikōs) ‘in Greek fashion’. 16. In pursuing further the possibility here sketched out one can fall back on various bold syntheses of recent vintage from the pens of Henry and Renée Kahane, including the monograph (originally conceived as an encyclopaedia article) Abendland und Byzanz: Sprache, written for Peter Wirth's ill-fated Reallexikon der Byzantinistik, I: 4–6 (Amsterdam: Adolf M. Hakkert, 1970–76), 345–640; the miscellany article, ‘Paideia, a Linguistic Subcode’, contributed to WegezurUniversalienforschung … (Tübingen: Narr, 1978–80), 509–20; and, above all, a generous selection from their writings: ‘Graeca et Románica’: Scripta Selecta, 2 vols. (Amsterdam: Adolf M. Hakkert, 1979–81), passim. 17. Few if any safe chronological conclusions may be drawn from the use of the medial consonant cluster -nç-in lieu of expected -nz-, because the combined effects of the agency of syncope and consonant-voicing often have been secondarily blurred by the more or less free interchange of similar-sounding consonant groups. 18. I refer the reader to J. R. Craddock's substantial review article, in RPh, XIX:2 (1965), 286–325, at 314 and 322, especially to the extent that it bears on B. Hasselrot, Etudes sur la formation diminutive dans les langues romanes (Uppsala: Universitets Årsskrift, 1957), and on F. González Ollé, Los sufijos diminutivos en castellano medieval (Madrid: Suppl. 75 to RFE, 1962). 19. Recent years have witnessed a growing fascination with popular song, encouraged in Spain by the discovery of the Old Andalusian jar as. The most extensive study of villancico, here often referred to, is by Antonio Sánchez Romeralo, El villancico; estudios sobre la lírica popular en los siglos XV y XVI (Madrid: Gredos, 1969). This volume boasts a comprehensive discussion of villancico, including origin, form, and content as well as its ‘popular’ character. The volume's ‘Antología popular’ comprises 589 villancicos, its ‘Antología popularizante I y II’ an additional 76. The volume also offers an exhaustive Bibliography (pp. 567–78). It remains to this day the definitive treatise on the villancico. His concerns, however, are different from ours. He concentrates on those villancicos that may appropriately be called popular and subjects them to penetrating structural and stylistic analysis. He also considers their significance for the origin and development of the European lyric. For an excellent summary and critique of Sánchez Romeralo's volume see Philip O. Gericke's review in RPh, XXVI:2 (1972), 490–97.—In this article, we are interested in the origin of the word villancico; in certain features of those villancicos composed by professional Renaissance poets and musicians; finally, in the shifts in the meaning of the word as the song with refrain fell into desuetude among the same literary and artistic groups that had earlier embraced it so enthusiastically. Other recent monographs, though not concerned exclusively with the villancico, include Margit Frenk Alatorre, La lírica popular en los Siglos de Oro (tesis de la Universidad Nacional Autónoma, Mexico City, 1946); ead., Lírica hispánica de tipo popular: Edad Media y Renacimiento (Mexico City: Universidad Nac. Autón., 1966); ead., Estudios sobre lírica antigua (Madrid 1978); Eduardo Martínez Torner, Lírica hispánica; relaciones entre lo popular y lo culto (Madrid: Castalia, 1966). 20. See R. O. Jones and Carolyn R. Lee, Juan del Encina: poesía lírica y cancionero musical (Madrid: Castalia, 1975), 33. 21. Some time after 1445 villancico was associated with a poem attributed to the Marqués de Santillana. The song, entitled ‘Villancico que hizo el marqués de Santillana a unas tres hijas suyas’, appears in the Espejo de enamorados, an early-sixteenth-century miscellany of popular songs. Scholars, however, consider doubtful the attribution of the name villancico (and of the song itself) to the Marqués. Certainly he fails to use villancico in his Proemio addressed to the Condestable of Portugal, nor does he call any of his songs by that name. See Sánchez Romeralo, 34ff.; also, Rafael Lapesa, La obra literaria del marqués de Santillana (Madrid: Insula, 1957), 65ff. 22. While we are ignorant at present of the original contour of the word, it seems likely that it was villancete, since -ete was the preferred diminutive for literary designations; and that it spread throughout the Peninsula. The Grenville Library of the British Library houses an unpublished seventeenth-century collection of poems, mostly Portuguese but including some Spanish pieces, entitled Cantigas e villancetes. We do well to recall also Ptg. villancete, Cat. villancet, beside Cast, villancico. Were villanc-illo, -ico the aberrant forms, minted by chauvinistic Castilians? 23. Francisco Asenjo Barbieri's edn. of the Cancionero musical de Palacio, entitled Cancionero musical de los siglos XV y XVI (Madrid: RAE, 1890), must yield to those by (a) Higinio Anglés, La música en la corte de los Reyes Católicos, II–III: Polifonía profana. Cancionero musical de Palacio (siglos XV y XVI), Vols. I–II (Barcelona: CSIC, 1947, 1951) and (b) José Romeu Figueras, La música en la corte de los Reyes Católicos, IV: Cancionero musical de Palacio (siglos XV–XVI), Vol. III-A, B (Barcelona: CSIC, 1965). Vol. III-A includes an extensive study of the music and poetry at the court of the Catholic Monarchs. Romeu Figueras provides a Bibliography of MSS, many still unedited, and of early printings of repertories of popular songs (pp. 217–34); on p. 218 is the reference to the Grenville Library MS cited in n. 22, above. 24. Encina's poems are available in the facsimile edn. of his 1496 Cancionero (Madrid: RAE, 1928); in various edns. of the Cancionero musical de Palacio; and now in the edns. by Jones and Lee and by Ana María Rambaldo, Obras completas (Madrid: Espasa-Calpe, 1978), 3 vols.; Vol. IV, containing Encina's dramatic eclogues, has not yet appeared. Dorothy Clotelle Clark's ‘On Juan del Encina's “Un arte de poesía castellana” ‘, RPh, VI (1952–53), 254–59, represents one of the pioneering analyses of Encina's Arte. The text itself has been edited by Juan Carlos Temprano in BRAE, LIII (1973), 321–50. 25. Prior to Sánchez Romeralo's assertion that villancico refers specifically to the refrain, the idea was advanced and cogently argued by Margit Frenk (following in the footsteps of Dámaso Alonso) in her essay, ‘Glosas de tipo popular en la antigua lírica’, NRFH, XII (1958), 301–34; reprinted in Estudios sobre lírica antigua, 267– 308. 26. A comparable practice is recorded with mote and canción which, like villancico, originally designated the refrains. Poem I in the Jones-Lee collection is labelled ‘Glosa de una canción que dize “Al dolor de mi cuidado, etc.” aplicada a los siete pecados mortales’ (69–71). No. 3, the mote ‘Quien no aventura no gana’ is followed by its glosa (74). In a section entitled romances y canciones con sus deshechas there appear two villancicos without their glosas. One, 30bis, ‘Levanta, Pascual, levanta,/aballemos a Granada’ functions as a deshecha for the preceding romance; likewise, villancico 3lbis: ‘¿Quién te traxo, cavallero, por esta montaña escura?’ (see Jones-Lee, 90–93). The same villancicos reappear as the opening refrains for songs 81 and 86 of the Jones-Lee edn. 27. Villano, a dance popular among villagers, was probably so named by non-peasants to distinguish it from other dances, like the morisca. Like other aspects of folk culture, it infiltrated urban and courtly circles during the Renaissance. Its antiquity is confirmed by Hernán López de Yanguas in his Farsa nuevamente compuesta sobre la felice nueva de la concordia y paz, where Tiempo, disguised as a shepherd, tells Placer: ‘No nos tañas la morisca/ sino el villano de antaño’ (ll. 1099ff.). Tiempo is alluding to a dance tune, associated with villagers and with bygone days. Although it may have ranked as old-fashioned by 1520, it nonetheless survived into the seventeenth century. Characterized by vigorous leaping steps, villano, described by Bruce W. Wardropper as ‘el baile profano por excelencia’, originally fulfilled a ritual function. See Historia de la poesía lírica a lo divino en la cristiandad occidental (Madrid: Revista de Occidente, 1958), 210–18; also Emilio Cotarelo y Mori, Colección de entremeses, loas, bailes, jácaras y mojigangas desde fines del siglo XVI a mediados del XVII (NBAE, XVII–XVIII: Madrid 1911), I, cclxiii–vi. Does Oudin's definition of villancico ‘petit berger’ involve a late meaning? I find no confirmation for it in contemporary dictionaries. It is not, e.g., in Covarrubias. Jean Pallet records villancico ‘chanson, vilanelle’, also villancillo ‘lourdault, rustique’ (Diccionario muy copioso de la lengua española y francesa [Paris: M. Guillemot, 1604]); John Minsheu follows Covarrubias: villanescas ‘canciones quas canunt rustici; a Carol or countrie Song’, villancico idem, villancillo, dim. de villano (Vocabularium Hispanico-Latinum et Anglicum [London: John Brown 1617?]); Lorenzo Franciosini has villan-cico ‘una sorte di canzonetta allegra che si canta in feste d'allegrezza come per Natale, Corpus Dñi’, also -cilio ‘villanello, contadinello’ and -escas ‘canzone che soglion cantare i contadini’ (Vocabolario italiano e spagnolo [Roma 1620], 774); Richard Percyvall records only villancico ‘a song’ (Dictionary in Spanish and English [London 1623], 243). I have no recollection of villancico ‘villano pequeño’ in the early Spanish drama, although these plays are replete with diminutive forms; cf. pastorcillo, -cico in Encina and his followers. 28. Jones notes that songs whose initial refrain is a villancico are more flexible, less symmetric than the canciones. The initial refrain leads to stanzas comprising two mudanzas of two lines each that form a rhymed unit. The vuelta then repeats some or all of the rhymes of the initial refrain (Jones-Lee, 22f.). Lee notes that the musical base for the villancico is that of the virelai: each song has two musical themes, one for the refrain, the other for the stanzas, while the vuelta returns to the music of the refrain (see ex., p. 35). Lee further observes: ‘los villancicos de Encina se diferencian de otros tipos de virelais polifónicos en un detalle importante, que es que algunas veces la segunda sección musical (B) no deriva directamente de la primera (A)’ (36). 29. Cancionero general recopilado por Hernando del Castillo (Valencia 1511); facsimile reproduction by the Royal Spanish Academy (Madrid 1958). 30. Several well-known names are in the group, which includes Juan de Estúñiga (1), Cartagena (2), Tapia (l), the Vizconde de Altamira (3), Alonso de Cardona (1), Juan Manuel (1), Nicolás Núñez (2), Juan Fernández de Heredia (5), the bishop of Tarraçona (1), Quirós (5), Soria (8), the Comendador de Estúñiga (1), the Comendador Escrivá (1), Garci Sánchez de Badajoz (2), Lope de Sosa (1), Pedro de Acuña (1), Badajoz el músico (3), Rull (1), Serrano (1), Mossén Crespí de Valdaura (1), Pardo (1), while the musician Graviel composed the music for two by Quirós. Six remain anonymous. 31. Suplemento al Cancionero general de Hernando del Castillo, ed. A. Rodríguez-Moñino (Valencia: Castalia, 1959). 32. The themes of the villancico have been discussed at length by Frenk, Sánchez Romeralo, Romeu Figueras, as well as Jones and Lee. For the villancico pastoril see C.S., ‘The Genesis of the Spanish Pastoral: From Lyric to Drama’, KRQ, XXV (1978), 413–34. 33. A convincing argument that this canción de cuna may be a villancico is made by Harry Sieber, ‘Dramatic Symmetry in Gómez Manrique's La representación del nacimiento de Nuestro Señor’, HR XXXIII (1965), 118–35, esp. 128–35. The problem is that the second line of the two-line estribillo is de pie quebrado. 34. See Romeu Figueras, III-A, n. 23, 138ff. 35. See Y.M., ‘Spanish estribillo “Refrain”: Its Proximal and Distal Etymologies’, Florilegium Hispanicum; Medieval and Golden Age Studies Presented to Dorothy Clotelle Clarke (Madison: Hispanic Seminary of Medieval Studies, 1983), 29–43.