But without the Italian the result would probably have been the same. The very poems themselves in the construction of their sentences show the Latin background. In Grimald's verses, On the death of Zoroas, said by Steevens to be a translation from thirteenth century Latin,1 the subject is apt to follow the verb, and the adjective the governing noun. Now clattering arms, now ragyng broyls of warr Shrowded with shafts, the heuen: with clowd of darts As forceth kindled ire the Lions keen: Whose greedy gutts the gnawing hoonger pricks: So Macedoins against the Persians fare. This, in spite of Warton's epithet of "classical" and "elegant cannot be said to be great poetry! Surrey, for the very reason that he was so imbued with the Latin, is much better.2 And it may also be stated that owing to Grimald's ill-repute as well as to Surrey's romantic career, whatever may have been the actual priority, Surrey is really the father of blank verse. Yet, whoever may have been the hypothetical model for Surrey, without question it was the study of classical literature, as taught by Cheke at Cambridge, and by Grimald at Oxford, that prepared the educated reader to applaud his efforts. Thus, in the conflicting currents affecting sixteenth-century literature, that of humanism is seen to be not the least. In prose, it produced a spirit of rational criticism; in poetry a form of verse big with fu 1 From part of the Latin Alexandreis of Philip Gualtier de Chatillon, bishop of Megala, who flourished in the thirteenth century. Steevens Shaksp. vii, 377, ed. 1803. Note by Park in Warton, op. cit., 52. "Surrey's humanism is discussed in Chapter VI. ture triumphs. Fortunately for English literature the humanists did not succeed; in that case the Augustan Age would have replaced the Elizabethan and dramas like Cato would have been written instead of Macbeth and Hamlet. But equally fortunate is it that they attained the success that they did, because, otherwise, Elizabethan literature would not have been the glory that it is. CHAPTER V THE INFLUENCE OF CONTEMPORARY LITERATURES OF SPAIN, GERMANY, FRANCE, AND ITALY The influences affecting the English author of the Renaissance in his search for models was by no means limited to those of the English tradition, the Medieval Latin, or humanism. The influences exerted by the contemporary literatures on the Continent remain yet to be considered. For, however insular may have been the position of England, and however difficult may have been the passage of the Channel, the fact is nevertheless that the Channel was crossed repeatedly. In one aspect it may be argued that the long party wars of the fifteenth century tended to isolate the nation from the normal literary development of the sister nations. On the other hand, since at varying times a large number of the nobility was forced into exile on the Continent, many of them were brought into contact with foreign literature and foreign culture to a degree that would have been impossible if they had remained quietly at home. Thus the Yorkists found an asylum always open to them at the court of Mary of Burgundy, and the Lancastrians, more or less spasmodically at the court of France. Under Henry VII there were both the political and matrimonial alliances with Spain. And behind all, was Italy radiating culture from her many courts and typifying the Renaissance in her many princes. To ignore the possibility of the influence of any of these literatures upon English would be an obvious error. But since the influence of any contemporary literature depends to a large extent upon variable factors, such as political alliance, sentimental interest, and national sympathy, and even a literary clique responsive to the appeal of that particular type of literature, the exact literary epoch in England must be clearly distinguished; to estimate the amount of any such influence, to distinguish the influence emanating from one country from that emanating at the same time from others, and finally to analyze the reasons for such a con dition, is difficult. Yet an understanding of Tudor literature requires such an analysis. Of the four literatures, Spanish, German, French, and Italian, that might have affected England in the first half of the sixteenth century, at first sight one would expect to find Spanish strongly represented. At intervals during three centuries England and Spain had been united by having one common foe in France. This traditional friendship was given visible expression when in 1501 Katharine, the daughter of Ferdinand and Isabella, became the wife of Arthur, Prince of Wales, and in 1509 Queen of England as the wife of Henry. Naturally, as a result of this, Henry's ambassadors to Spain numbered such well known men as Lord Berners, Sir Thomas Boleyn, Dr. Sampson, Cuthbert Tunstall, Sir Richard Wingfield, Dr. Edward Lee, Sir Thomas Wyatt, and Edmund Bonner.1 Spain, on her side, sent not only the retinue of Katharine, but also the tutor of the Princess Mary, Juan Luis Vives. Still more, many of the men in Dorset's ill-fated expedition to aid Spain in 1512 remained there as a link between the two countries. With them there was constant communication. So with Spaniards in England and Englishmen in Spain, with the two countries in close political alliance, one would be justified in positing a strong Spanish influence on English literature, Actually such an influence is slight upon early Tudor literature. "With possibly a single exception, the Spanish books which were read in London in the days of Henry VIII and Edward VI were obtained through the French or the Latin." 2 Here again is illustrated the danger in the study of literature of deducing from a priori probability. Before 1550, certainly not more than a dozen books had been translated into English, or adapted for English readers, from the Spanish and Portuguese.3 Concerning these there are two generalizations to be made: first, that they are usually taken via the Italian or the French; and second, that they are 1 With pleasure I acknowledge my very great obligations in this portion of my work to Spanish Literature in the England of the Tudors, by John Garrett Underhill, 1899. As I had independently come to the same general conclusion as Dr. Underhill, I am joyously using his illustrations. For a more thorough treatment, I refer the reader to his work. 2 Underhill, op. cit., 342. This is, however, an extreme position. • Underhill, op. cit., 375, lists only seven, aside from occasional tracts. all in prose. The significance of the first statement is that it shows that the relation between the countries was political, rather than popular. Spain was separated from England on the water side by the Bay of Biscay, and on land by France and the Pyrenees Mountains. With the Spanish cities thus inaccessible, there was no paramount reason for visiting them. Even the pilgrimage to Saint James of Compostella, during the religious inertia preceding the Reformation, had fallen from favor; after the Reformation naturally it was rare. On closer scrutiny, this geographic inaccessibility was not overcome by the influence of any personality. The nexus between England and Spain was undoubtedly Katharine. Yet the history of Katharine in England consisted largely of humiliations. During the lifetime of Henry VII she was held as a hostage for the payment of her dower. Her letters during this period form a series of striking complaints. She was unable to pay her servants and even had to pawn her jewels to provide herself with the necessities. Under such conditions clearly she was not in a position to stimulate writers. Equally clearly from 1518 on, when the tragedy of her life begins to take form, she ceases to be a possible center for strong literary influence. Not even the language was domesticated in England. On Katharine's arrival, Henry VII communicated with her suite through the medium of Latin. Henry VIII, himself, is said, by the Venetian Ambassador, to know Spanish,1 but apparently it did not spread through his court. At least, words of Spanish origin are rarely encountered. In fact the whole tragedy of Katharine's life lay in the fact that she was an exile, in a foreign country, in which her customs and language were unknown. She felt, and gave free expression to her feelings, that she was in arms against a court hostile both to her and to her country. So, in regard to England, Katherine was a political rather than a literary force. The other personality, around which a literary group might gather, was Juan Luis Vives, the Tutor to the Princess Mary, and Professor of Philosophy at Oxford. That Vives exercised a distinct influence upon English thought cannot be denied.2 In Vives, however, the same problem recurs of national influence coming via humanism. To what extent in their literary output is Politian 1 P. 45. 2 Chapter IV. |