 | |  |
II. Encina's Professional Troubles. Eclogue IX and the Egloga interlocutoria
No doubt whatever exists concerning the date of Encina's so-called Egloga de las grandes lluvias, assigned by López-Morales the number IX. The nickname was conferred on it by the nineteenth-century German hispanist, J. N. Böhl von Faber, and refers to the storms that hit western Castile in the Christmas season of 1498. Encina himself records the fact in a passage where the shepherd Juan talks of ". . . el año noventa y ocho, / entrando en noventa y nueve" (ll. 83-84). In those days, Spaniards still reckoned the New Year from December 25 onward. This eclogue makes the first mention of a crucial incident in Encina's career: the bitter battle for the cantorship of the Cathedral of Salamanca, a vacancy created by the death of Encina's old music teacher, Fernando de Torrijos, late in 1498. In the middle of this Christmas eclogue there occurs a twenty-five line digression on Encina's musical career and his ambitions for the post. In December he still aspired to succeed Torrijos but feared the post would not fall to himself since the appointment was by election and the majority of votes were against him.
Encina's main rival for the cantorship was his fellow Salamancan, Lucas Fernández, a man of similar talents. Both he and his uncle, Alonso González de Cantalapiedra, are obliquely referred to in the First Eclogue. Lucas Fernández could count on the support of his uncle, who held the influential post of Archpriest of Alba, as well as on one Francisco de Salamanca, another member of the chapter. Encina enjoyed the backing of the Archdeacon of Camases, Bernadino López de Logroño, who on October 24, 1498, had formulated an opinion urging Encina's candidacy should no external candidate be found to take charge of the contested vacancy. In view of this split vote, the chapter compromised by nominating a committee which, in 1499, gave the position not to one person but to three, one of whom was Lucas Fernández. Incensed at the outcome of the matter, Encina decided to quit the Salamanca region and left for Rome, probably later in 1499, to plot his revenge.[22]
Now further light is shed on this incident in the disputed Egloga interlocutoria, to which we have conveniently assigned the arabic numeral 11. This eclogue was first recorded by Salvá in his Catálogo, where he stated that it was bound with four other eclogues of Encina, though unfortunately he did not mention which.[23] Salvá was convinced that the work came from the pen of Encina; and Urban Cronan, who published the text in 1916,
Despite the current climate of opinion, it is difficult to imagine anyone other than Encina as the play's author. The rubric of the prose preface strongly resembles the wording and style of Encina's other prologues, though in this case its preface does contain inaccuracies of plot summary. The shepherd names Gil, Benito and Pascuala had already been used before; only Pascual (representing the author) is new. We find the Duke and Duchess of Alba sitting in their hall as in previous eclogues and they are the subject of a long eulogy at the end. We also find similarities of phrasing and language with earlier plays. Ralph E. House, commenting on these various parallels, concluded: "The structure of the play, its inclusion of heterogeneous themes, and the development of each theme are identical with Encina's earlier style. Reference has . . . been made to the structural similarity of the first part with Eglogas I and II. In its entirety it may be compared also to Egloga IX. This play shows likewise a distinct tripartite division. The first part is made up largely of references to the personal affairs of Juan, the second is the game of pares y nones, while the concluding scenes treat of the birth of Christ. These are substantially the themes of Egloga IX taken in reverse order."[28]
As far as Morley's arguments go concerning the atypical strophic practices in the play, these seem insufficient to us to warrant denying Encina's paternity. Since Encina used a considerable variety of octosyllabic arrangements, including some five-line patterns, there is nothing intrinsically extraordinary in his employing quintillas in most of the Egloga interlocutoria. As far as arte mayor is concerned, Encina employed it throughout the Egloga de los tres pastores in three different rhyme-schemes. As regards changes of meter within one play, contrary to the impression
The most important consequences of ascribing 11 to Encina concern his biography and the problem of dating. It is really a deposition in dramatic form that deals another blow in the wrangle over the Salamanca cantorship. Pascual clearly stands for Encina and Benito is Lucas Fernández. Pascual's harsh words to Benito in the opening lines and the references to his uncle (ll. 33-40) leave little doubt about the matter. Pascual's remarks may also furnish us with material on which to base a date for the play's composition. Since the shepherd expressly states that it is "now in the summer" and the winter season is still several months away, this might suggest that Christmas was the pretext for writing the work rather than the occasion. Now since the Fernández affair blew up in the Fall of 1498 and the Salamanca chapter decided to divided the controversial post three ways on January 11, 1499, giving Encina's rival one third, it seems reasonable to suppose that Encina composed the play in the summer of 1499. He would still be seething from the humiliation of his abortive candidacy, hoping desperately for Alba to make more supportive gestures toward him and tempted already perhaps by the prospect of greener pastures in Italy. Kohler, in his discussion of the play's possible date (Sieben Eklogen, p. 34), noted that Encina probably abandoned Spain shortly after 1498.
Further evidence of the polemical nature of this eclogue is furnished by the title, for which no critic has offered any explanation. The term 'interlocutory' is a legal one and still in use in modern times. In law one may still refer to an interlocutory decree, for example. An obvious reflection of Encina's student training as an attorney, the term denotes rulings in cases still in contention which are not definitive, merely intermediate or temporary. The meaning of the title becomes clear if Encina did not regard the cantorship battle as having been definitively decided. And indeed the matter was not settled, since in 1502 Encina succeeded in getting himself nominated to the self-same post through the papal intervention of Alexander VI. This eclogue, then, should be viewed as a dramaticolegal maneuver, an 'interlocutory' statement pending a final ruling. Though Francisco de Madrid had used his primitive Egloga around 1495 to attack the political ambitions of Charles VIII of France, it took the irrepressible Encina to angle the eclogue format to further his own political ends.
According to Georges Cirot, there might be a curious postscript to Encina's Salamancan career. He noted in 1941: 'Il n'est pas hors de propos de rappeler ici ce que le duc de Berwick y Alba faisait connaître dans son discours de réception à l'Academia de la Historia: de juin 1498 à juillet 1500, Encina fut pensionné par le duc d'Albe (3,000 maravedis) pour
| | |