The Prologue of the Cauallero Çifar : An Example of Medieval Creativity
1985; Liverpool University Press; Volume: 62; Issue: 1 Linguagem: Inglês
10.1080/1475382852000362015
ISSN1469-3550
Autores Tópico(s)Medieval and Early Modern Iberia
ResumoClick to increase image sizeClick to decrease image sizeBSS Subject Index: LIBRO DEL CABALLERO CIFAR [F. MARTÍNEZ?]MARTÍNEZ, FERRÁN (fl. late 13th cent./early 14th cent.)SPAIN — LITERATURE — MEDIEVAL PERIOD — PROSE Notes 1. The Çifar is preserved in three extant versions : MS M, MS P, and S, a 1512 Seville edition. The first folio of M, both recto and verso, has been lost and the text of all three is different. However, it is not yet possible to define these differences for M and S have not been transcribed separately. The content of the Prologue of M and P is essentially the same although some key words are different; S has been totally altered. The Seville edition does indicate the end of the Prologue, a point which coincides with Wagner's limits for his edition. All references are based on my edition: M. A. Olsen, Libro del Cauallero Çifar (Madison: Hispanic Seminary of Medieval Studies, 1984), an edition based totally on MS P. The first modern edition of the Çifar contained a mixture of P and S and was published in 1872 by Heinrich Michelant. The second modern edition, the 1929 version edited by Charles Philip Wagner, is based on M, but he mixes with M many portions of P and S: Charles Philip Wagner, ed., El Libro del Cauallero Zifar (El Libro del Cauallero de Dios), Part I, Text [no more published], University of Michigan Publications in Language and Literature, 5 (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, 1929; rpt. Millwood, N.Y.: Kraus, 1971). All other modern editions are primarily based on Wagner: Martín de Riquer, 1951; Felicidad Buendía, 1954; Joaquín González-Muela, 1982; and the very recent edition of Cristina González which I have not seen. The 1983 English translation of Charles L. Nelson is also based on Wagner. All references in this article to the Wagner edition are cited as Edition. 2. James F. Burke, History and Vision: The Figural Structure of the ‘Libro del cavallero Zifar’ (London: Tamesis, 1972); Marta Ana Diz, ‘La construcción del Zifar’, NRFH, XXVIII (1979), 105–17, at 115–16. Roger M. Walker, Tradition and Technique in ‘El Libro del cavallero Zifar’ (London: Tamesis, 1974), 118, hereafter cited as Tradition and Technique. The article of Fernando Gómez Redondo, ‘El prólogo de Çifar: Realidad, ficción y poética’, RFE, LXI (1981), 85–112, does not clarify the question of the Prologue's cohesion and its relationship to the romance. 3. Erasmo Buceta, ‘Algunas notas históricas al prólogo del Cauallero Zifar’, RFE, XVII (1930), 18–36; ‘Nuevas notas históricas al prólogo del Cauallero Zifar’, RFE, XVII (1930), 419–22; Francisco J. Hernández, ‘Ferrán Martínez, “Escrivano del rey”, Canónigo de Toledo, y autor del Libro del Cavallero Zifar’, Revista de Archivos, Bibliotecas y Museos, LXXXI (1978), 289–325; ‘Noticias sobre Jofré de Loaisa y Ferrán Martínez’, Revista Canadiense de Estudios Hispánicos, IV (1979–80), 281–309; Ezio Levi, ‘Il giubileo del MCCC nel più antico romanzo spagnuolo’, Archivo della R. Società Romana di Storia Patria, LVI-LVII (1933–34), 133–56. 4. As explained in the Espasa-Calpe Enciclopedia, a Jubilee was an appointed year or period, normally held every hundred years, in which indulgence was granted to people who repented and performed certain religious acts. In order to receive the Pope's blessing, large numbers of Christians undertook pilgrimages and travelled from sanctuary to sanctuary in Rome. 5. There is some confusion about who actually makes the final request. Since Ferrand Martines is in charge of transferring the body, some Hispanists have assumed that ‘el por la su mesura’, refers to the Archdeacon, but, grammatically ‘el obispo’ is the man who succeeded. 6. See for example, Charles T. Wood, ‘Celestine V, Boniface VIII and the Authority of Parliament’, Journal of Medieval History, VIII (1982), 45–62, an article which contains a lengthy bibliography on Boniface; Peter Linehan, The Spanish Church and the Papacy in the Thirteenth Century (Cambridge: C.U.P., 1971); Joseph McSorley, An Outline History of the Church by Centuries (St Louis, Mo. and London: B. Herder Book Co., 1983); La Divina Commedia, ed. C. H. Grandgent, rev. by Charles S. Singleton (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard U.P., 1975). 7. Tradition and Technique, 118, 123. 8. Although Wagner (Edition, XV) believed that the eulogy of Queen María is a marginal gloss, he does not explain the basis for this conclusion and my own examination of the manuscripts does not support his thesis. This does not mean that he may not be correct, but we should not accept this theory without further investigation. 9. P. A. Bly and A. D. Deyermond, ‘The Use of figura in the Libro de Alexandre’, The Journal of Medieval and Renaissance Studies, II (1982), 151–81, at 161. 10. The following material is a synthesis of ideas contained in the following works: Ernst Robert Curtius, European Literature and the Latin Middle Ages, trans. Williard R. Trask (N.Y.: Harper and Row, 1953); James J. Murphy, Rhetoric in the Middle Ages (Berkeley: Univ. of California Press, 1974); Frances A. Yates, The Art of Memory (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1966). See also the old but excellent Lateinisch-Deutsches Schul- Wörterbuch, ed. C. F. Ingerslev, 9th ed. (Brunswick: Friedrich Vieweg und Sohn, 1881); A Latin Dictionary, ed. Charlton T. Lewis and Charles Short, rev. ed. of Freund’s Latin Dictionary (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1975). As far as I know, only two studies analyse Memory in Spain: Dorothy Sherman Severin, Memory in ‘La Celestina’ (London: Tamesis, 1970); also, John K. Walsh, ‘Memoria, voluntad y entendimiento’, Revista de Archivos, Bibliotecas y Museos, in press. For a more general study see: A. R. D. Pagden, ‘The Diffusion of Aristotle's Moral Philosophy in Spain, ca.1400-ca.1600’, Traditio, XXXI (1975), 287–313. I am indebted to E. Michael Gerli for sending me his unpublished typescript ‘El castillo interior y el arte de la memoria’, and for bringing to my attention a number of important studies: Pedro Mejía, Silva de Varia Leción [sic], Vol. II (Madrid: Sociedad de Bibliófilos Españoles, 1934); Joseph F. Chorpenning, ‘The Literary and Theological Method of the Castillo Interior’, JHP, III (1979), 121–33; Colbert Nepaulsingh, ‘The Concept “Book” and Early Spanish Literature’, Mediaevalia, The Early Renaissance, Acta, Vol. V, 1978, 133–55; René Taylor, ‘Hermetism and Mystical Architecture in the Society of Jesus’, in Baroque Art: The Jesuit Contribution, 63–91, ed. Rudolf Wittkower and Irma B. Jaffe (New York: Fordham U.P., 1979). See also Heiner Gillmeister, ‘An Intriguing Fourteenth-century Document: Thomas Bradwardine's De arte memorativa’, Archiv für das Studium der neueren Sprachen und Literaturen, CXXXV (1983), 111–14. 11. By Vulgar Latin I am referring to the spoken language which includes both popular speech (sermo plebeius) and the colloquial language spoken by educated Romans (sermo cotidianus). 12. Tradition and Technique, Chapter IV. 13. Tradition and Technique, 132. It should be taken into consideration that Walker's conclusions are derived from the Wagner edition whereas my study is based totally on MS P as transcribed in my edition. 14. The Seville edition states: ‘Este libro que es dicho del Cauallero Cifar tiene tres partes. La primera es de la vida y aduersidades y prosperidades deste cauallero Cifar. La segunda es de los castigos que dio a sus hijos Garfin y Roboan. La tercera es de los [sic] cauallerías y prosperidades del infante Roboan su hijo’ (fol. 2r). I have transcribed this paragraph from the copyflow of S, and have modernized the capitalization and punctuation. For a discussion supporting the tripartite structure of the romance see R. G. Keightley, ‘The Story of Zifar and the Structure of the Libro del Caballero Zifar’, MLR, LXXIII (1978), 308–27. 15. This article is a reworking of a chapter in my doctoral dissertation at the University of Wisconsin, under the direction of Lloyd A. Kasten: ‘The Manuscripts, the Wagner edition and the Prologue of the Cauallero Zifar’, 1975. At the 1976 MLA in New York I presented a revised version of the topic at the Seminar on Romances of Chivalry. I wish to thank Thomas Bestul, Steven Kirby, Paul Schach, Joseph T. Snow and Richard Tyler for their suggestions on an early version of this typescript. I am most grateful to Roger M. Walker for his comments on the final text.
Referência(s)